0
RESEARCH PAPERS

The Stolz and ASME-AGA Orifice Equations Compared to Laboratory Data

[+] Author and Article Information
R. W. Miller

The Foxboro Company, Foxboro, Mass. 02035

J. Fluids Eng 101(4), 483-490 (Dec 01, 1979) (8 pages) doi:10.1115/1.3449015 History: Received August 02, 1978; Online October 12, 2010

Abstract

Today, technical experts in Europe and the U.S. are debating the merits of conducting new orifice flowmeter tests, establishing the effects of upstream disturbance and conducting other programs to improve orifice flowmetering accuracy. ISO has adopted a new “Universal” orifice equation proposed by J. Stolz. With over 1,000,000 orifice flowmeters in use today, any change in the coefficient value is of major concern. There are now two equations for calculating flange tap coefficients, the ASME-AGA equation and the ISO equation. They differ in form, predict different coefficients, and have different overall uncertainties (tolerance value). This paper presents a comparison between actual laboratory data and these two equations. The data were obtained in two high accuracy laboratories on flange tap orifice flowmeters fabricated by different manufacturers to AGA or ASME recommendations. Data plate dimensions were used in all calculations, and conformity to ASME or AGA requirements was the responsibility of the manufacturer. For this reason it is believed that the analysis more nearly represents what the user can expect if the in-site installation approached that of the laboratory. Results indicate that over the same beta ratio range the ISO (or Stolz) equation form is significantly better than the present ASME-AGA form. The overall uncertainty (or tolerance), although smaller than the ASME-AGA, is still ± 1 percent because of a 0.4 percent systematic error. Results of work by Miller-Kneisel, using data from three different laboratories, are presented to indicate that ±0.5 percent remains achievable; for betas up to 0.7 using the ISO (Stolz) equation form with modified coefficients.

Copyright © 1979 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In