NOC-AE-14003161, Engineering Report 1060, Rev. 1, Meter Factor Calculation & Accuracy Assessment for South Texas Project Units 1 & 2.
| ML14260A439 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | South Texas  |
| Issue date: | 08/31/2014 |
| From: | Augenstein D Cameron Measurement Systems |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Shared Package | |
| ML14260A432 | List: |
| References | |
| NOC-AE-14003161 ER-1060, Rev 1 | |
| Download: ML14260A439 (30) | |
Text
NOC-AE- 14003161 ATTACHMENT 2 Cameron Measurement Systems/Caldon Ultrasonics Engineering Report No. 1060 Rev 1, "Meter Factor Calculation and Accuracy Assessment for South Texas Project Units 1 and 2." (Non-Proprietary)
CCAMERON Measurement Systems Caldon Ultrasonics ER-1060 REVISION 1 AUGUST 2014 Engineering Report No. 1060, Rev 1 Meter Factor Calculation and Accuracy Assessment for South Texas Project Units I and 2 Prepared By: Don Augenstein Reviewed By: David Markowski Reviewed for Proprietary Information By: Ernie HauserO,"-(ER- 1060 Rev 1
- rCAMERON Measurement Systems Engineering Report No. ER-1060, Rev 1 August 2014 ER-1060 Rev 1 Preparer:
DRA Reviewer:
OAPW Table of Contents
1.0 INTRODUCTION
................................................................................................
3 1.1 S C O P E ................................................................................................................
3....... 3
1.2 BACKGROUND
..................................................................................................
3 1.2.1 CALIBRATION METHOD ...................................................................................
3 1.3 REPORT
SUMMARY
.............................................................................................
4 2.0 DEFINITIONS
.................................................................................................
5 2.1 METER FACTOR DEFINITION
..........................................................................
5 2.2 FLATNESS RATIO DEFINITION
........................................................................
5 2.3 SWIRL RATE DEFINITION
.................................................................................
5 3.0 INSTALLATION SITE MODEL ......................................................................
7 3.1 LOOP A INFORMATION
......................................................................................
7 3.2 LOOP B INFORMATION......................................................................................
8 3.3 LOOP C INFORMATION
......................................................................................
8 3.4 LOOP D INFORMATION
.....................................................................................
9 Trade Secret 4.0 [ 1... 10 j & Confidentiz Commercial 4.1 CALIBRATION DATA USED FOR ANALYSIS ....................................................
10 Information 4.1.1 DATA SET SELECTION
......................................................................................
10 4.1.2 DATA SET EVALUATION
................................................................................
10 4.1.3 CALIBRATION DATA ........................................................................................
10 4.2 PARAMETRIC TESTING ...................................................................................
11 4.3 HYDRAULIC SENSITIVITY COMPUTED FROM CALIBRATION DATA ....... 14 4.4 USING METRICS TO CALIBRATION DATA POPULATION
.........................
15 4.4.1 POPULATION
...............................................................................
15 Trade Secret& ConfidentiE 4.4.2 POPULATION
[ ]......................................................................
16 Commercial 4.5 METER FACTOR RELATIONSHIP
[ ] ...... 17 Information 4.6 HYDRAULIC MODEL SENSITIVITY
...............................................................
19 Trade Secret 4.7 HYDRAULIC SENSITIVITY WHEN IN [ ]...................
19 & ConfidentiU 4.8 QUALITATIVE EXAMPLE [ Commercial I ............................................................................
20 Inform ation 5.0 METER FACTOR ACCURACY ASSESSMENT
........................................
23 5.1 FACILITY UNCERTAINTY
...............................................................................
24 5.2 MEASUREMENT UNCERTAINTY
...................................................................
25 5.3 EXTRAPOLATION ALLOWANCE
...................................................................
25 5.4 DATA SCATTER -MEAN METER FACTOR UNCERTAINTY
.....................
27
6.0 REFERENCES
..................................................................................................
28 Caldon Ultrasonics Page ii ER-1060 Rev I Caldon Ultrasonics Page ii ER-1060 Rev I Preparer:
DRA Reviewer:
A ER-1060 Rev 1, Meter Factor Calculation and Accuracy Assessment for South Texas Project Units 1 and 2
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Scope This report documents the meter factor bounding uncertainty analysis for South Texas Project (STP) Units 1 and 2. Once the actual flow elements STP are made and calibrated, the actual calibration data and parametric tests will be used to compute meter factor uncertainty for each unit.This report's approach is to use the body of calibration and parametric testing that Cameron has performed on 195 nuclear power plant flow meters.Cameron will use the most conservative approach to compute a bounding uncertainty in the meter factor as applied to STP. Further, additional conservatisms are used such that the uncertainty can be considered to be bounding.1.2 Background The LEFM flow meter uses measurements of the fluid velocity projected onto acoustic paths to determine the volumetric and mass flow. The LEFM makes the transit time measurements of ultrasonic energy pulses that travel between transducers and combines these with the distance separating the transducers to calculate the velocity.
The flow meter uses eight acoustic paths that are arranged as two crossing planes, each plane containing four chords (essentially two four path meters). The LEFM calculates volumetric flow by numerically integrating the fluid-velocity chord length product along the chords.Trade Secret &Confidential Commercial Information Trade Secret &Confidential Commercial Information 1.2.1 Calibration Method The calibration tests are performed at Alden Research Laboratories (Alden), an independent hydraulic laboratory.
Alden provides flow rates up to -4500 m 3/hr (-20,000 gpm). For most hydraulic models, the piping pressure losses and cavitation does limit the calibration flow rates to -3,400 m 3/hr (-15,000 gpm) -depending on the pipe size and flow model components (e.g., headers, nozzles etc.).Caldon Ultrasonics Page 3 ER- 1060 Rev I Preparer:
DRA Reviewer:
+/-During the calibration, reference flow rates are determined by Alden using a weigh tank, fill times, fluid temperature and barometric pressure measurements.
All elements of the lab measurements including weigh tank scale, time measurements, thermometers and pressure gages, are traceable to NIST standards.
In order to determine the meter factor, the flow meter outputs aire compared against the reference flow rates.Trade An actual calibration for South Texas Project uses [Secret &Confidential Commercial Information 1.3 Report Summary Table 1 provides the South Texas Project meter factor uncertainties.
Refer to Section 5 for a detailed summary.Trade Secret &Confidential Commercial Information 1- t Table 1: Uncertainty Summary[I Caldn Utraonic Pae 4ER-160 ev Trade Secret &Confidential Commercial Information Caldon Ultrasonics Page 4 ER- 1060 Rev I Preparer:
DRA Reviewer:
X"ik 2.0 DEFINITIONS 2.1 Meter Factor Definition The meter factor accounts for (typically small) biases in the numerical integration due to the hydraulics, dimension measurements and acoustics of the application.
The flow meter software multiplies the result of the multi-path numerical integration by the product of the meter factor to obtain the flow rate.The meter factor is calculated by the following equation: MF -QAlden Qmeter Where: Q meter = Volumetric flow rate from meter (with meter factor set to 1.000)QAIden = Volumetric flow rate based on Alden weigh tank 2.2 Flatness Ratio Definition Cameron uses the flatness ratio (FR) to quantify the flatness of the velocity profile. FR is defined as: FR= [V +V 4 + V+V8 V 2 + V 3 + V 6 + V7 Where: V 1 , V 4 , V 5 , V 8 = velocities measured along the outside chords (or short paths)V 2 , V 3 , V 6.V 7 = velocities measured along the inside chords (or long paths)When a velocity profile is perfectly flat, then FR equals 1.0. When a velocity profile is laminar, then the FR equals approximately 0.38. The limits of 0.38 and 1.0 represent extremes.
The FR is a function of Reynolds number but also is strongly influenced by the hydraulics upstream of the flow meter.Typical feedwater applications have FR in the range of 0.78 to 0.95. Downstream of flow conditioners or long pipe runs > 30 diameters, the velocity profile tends to be pointier and the FR value is lower, 0.78 to 0.80. Downstream of elbows and tees the velocity profile tends to be flatter and the FR value is higher, 0.85 to 0.95. The actual range at a given plant is dependent upon site upstream conditions (for example the hydraulic fittings such as tees, elbows, etc.).Swirl typically flattens (increases FR) the velocity profile.2.3 Swirl Rate Definition Swirl can be measured by the LEFM. Cameron quantifies swirl rate with a swirl rate calculation, as follows: Caldon Ultrasonics Page 5 ER- 1060 Rev I Preparer:
DRA Reviewer:
A~ftW Where: Swirl Rate = Average I-V 5 V V 4 V 2-V 6 V 7-V 3]Swirl Rat -Avrge s '.2"-ys 2. 2YL 2. 2"L= Normalized velocities measured along outside chords= Normalized velocities measured along inside chords= Normalized chord location for short and long paths V 1, V 4 , V 5 , V 8 V 2 , V 3 , V 6 , V 7 Ys, YL Swirl rates less than 3% are low and are typically observed in models with only planar connections.
Swirl rates greater than 3% are considered "swirling".
Swirl rates greater than 10% are considered to have strong swirl.Caldon Ultrasonics Page 6 ER-1060 Rev I Caldon Ultrasonics Page 6 ER- 1060 Rev I Preparer:
DRA Reviewer:
-A4 H 3.0 INSTALLATION SITE MODEL The STP installation sites will eventually be modelled during the calibration.
The information regarding location has been provided by STP engineers to Cameron.The piping arrangements are shown in Figures 1 through 4 (Loops A, B, C and D). In the following figures, the LEFM meter "section" is shown to be 12 feet long. Of that length, 72 inches is upstream pipe (upstream of the flow meter itself). The nominal ID of feedwater piping is 15.25 inches (OD is 18 inches).3.1 Figure 1: Loop A Installation Site -Total distance is approximately 31 feet 7 1/8 inches (24.9 diameters) downstream of the UVT section (includes 6 feet inlet to meter)Reference STP drawing 7G362PFW833 Sheet 7 Rev 0 Caldon Ultrasonics Page 7 ER-1060 Rev 1 Caldon Ultrasonics Page 7 ER- 1060 Rev I Preparer:
DRA Reviewer:
L,#1 ff 3.2 Loop B Information Figure 2: Loop B Installation Site -Total distance is approximately 12 feet (9.4 diameters) downstream of the UVT section (includes 6 feet inlet to meter)Reference drawing 7G369PFW833 Sheet 8 Rev 6 3.3 Loop C Information 12' LEFM 2C Window Figure 3: Loop C Installation Site -Total distance is approximately 9 feet (7.1 diameters) downstream Non-Planar Elbows (includes 6 feet inlet to meter)Reference drawing 7G369PFW833 Sheet 3 Rev 6 Caldon Ultrasonics Page 8 ER- 1060 Rev I Preparer:
DRA Reviewer:
421-It 3.4 Loop D Information Figure 4: Loop D Installation Site -Total distance is approximately 30 feet 7 1/8 inches (24.1 diameters) downstream of the UVT section (includes 6 feet inlet to meter)Reference drawing 7G362PFW833 Sheet 4 Rev I Caldon Ultrasonics Page 9 ER-1060 Rev 1 Caldon Ultrasonics Page 9 ER-1060 Rev I Preparer:
DRA Reviewer:
X5A1 4.0 Trade Secret &[ Confidential Commercial Information 4.1 Calibration Data Used for Analysis 4.1.1 Data Set Selection The data presented in this section include only ISO17025 traceable calibration data for 195 flow elements.
The calibration data in this report were obtained in full scale models of nuclear power plant feed water installations at Alden Research Laboratory.
Each meter factor is obtained by Trade comparing the Alden Labs flow to the LEFM measured flow. [ Secret &Confidential Commercial Information Trade Secret &Confidential Commercial Information 4.1.2 Data Set Evaluation
[4.1.3 Calibration Data Figure 5 summarizes the nuclear feedwater UFM calibrations.
The figure's vertical axis is the ratio of ARL laboratory flow/volume to the UFM flow/volume, commonly known as the meter factor. Note that the lab tested data is in the range of 0.99 to 1.01 or +/- 1%.These data in Figure 5 include not only the effects of hydraulic installation but also the effects of manufacturing and dimensional measurements (for example the path lengths and angle measurements).
Therefore Figure 5 is the combination of both measurement/manufacture variations and hydraulics.
Meters are typically installed downstream of elbows or other piping disturbances that distort the Trade velocity profile. [ Secret &Confidential Commercial Information Trade Secret &Confidential Commercial Information Caldon Ultrasonics Page 10 ER- 1060 Rev I Preparer:
DRA Reviewer:
AL I Trade Secret &ConfidentiE CommerciE Informatior I 1.025 1.020 1015 1.010 1.005 0 LL 1.000 0.995 0990 0.985 0.980 0.975 Model Calibration Number Figure 5- Population of Nuclear Meter Calibrations 4 Inside diameters range from 12 inches to 32 inches. Each meter's MF has contributions due to dimensional and angle measurement errors and machining differences.
4.2 Parametric Testing[]Trade Secret &Confidential Commercial Information Trade Secret &Confidentia Commercia Information I I Caldon Ultrasonics Page 11 ER-1060 Rev 1 Caldon Ultrasonics Page I11 ER- 1060 Rev I Preparer:
DRA Reviewer: Model Component Parametric Tests I Trade Secret &Confidential Commercial Information I Inlet Conditions Parametric Tests I Trade Secret &Confidential Commercial Information I Model Velocity Profile Parametric Tests I Trade Secret &Confidential Commercia Information
]Figures 6 shows a diagram of the typical parametric tests, and Figures 7, 8 and 9 shows photographs of some complex models of nuclear installations that have been built.fQ MF= 1.0074 MF= 1.0070 MF= 1.0072 MF= 1.0072 Figure 6 -Example of Different parametrics for an Installation (Clockwise starting at top left -Test 1: Baseline, Test 2: Mitsubishi plate downstream of Tee, Test 3: Mitsubishi plate at inlet downstream of incoming elbow, Test 4: Rotate meter body 90 degrees)Caldon Ultrasonics Page 12 ER-1060 Rev I Caldon Ultrasonics Page 12 ER-1060 Rev I Preparer:
DRA Reviewer:
0"1 Figure 7 -Example of Calibration with Multiple (Non-Planar)
Flow Inlets (Flow balance changed from the 3 inlets -over full flow range)Figure 8 -Example of Calibration with Non-Planar Model Components with Meter in Proximity to Upstream Elbow (Two meters shown)(Tests performed with model, flow conditioner between last two elbows and in straight pipe)Caldon Ultrasonics Page 13 ER-1060 Rev I Caldon Ultrasonics Page 13 ER- 1060 Rev I Preparer:
DRA Reviewer:
AiL Figure 9 -Example of Calibration with Meter in Proximity to Non-Planar Coupled Upstream Elbows 4.3 Hydraulic Sensitivity Computed from Calibration Data Trade Secret &Confidential Commercial Information Calon ltasoic Pae1 R 16 e Caldon Ultrasonics Page 14 ER- 1060 Rev I Preparer:
DRA Reviewer:
&W Summary of Nuclear Meter Calibrations 0.020 0.1 IL 0.010 11 0.005 0 0 0.000 9 -0.005*7oosi-0.010 T-0.015-0.020 L§ ~Figure 10 -Population of Net Meter Factor for all Calibrations 6 (Net Meter Factor = Difference between parametric MF and the flowmeter's average MF)4.4 Using Metrics with Calibration Data Population 4.4.1 Population
[I[6 Note: the x-axis represents the net meter factor for each meter/configurations performed.
[I]Trade Secret &Confidential Commercial I nformation Trade Secret &Confidential Commercial Information Caldon Ultrasonics Page 15 ER- 1060 Rev I Preparer:
DRA Reviewer:
60 f4 Trade Secret &Confidential Commercial Information 4.4.2[Population
[Figure 11 -Swirl Rates Observed in Model Testing 1 Figure 12 -FR Values Observed in Model Testing Trade Secret &Confidential Commercial Information Trade Secret &Confidential Commercial Information Caldon Ultrasonics Page 16 ER-1060 Rev 1 Caldon Ultrasonics Page 16 ER- 1060 Rev 1 Preparer:
DRA Reviewer:
A#iL 4.5 Meter Factor Relationship to [ I Figure 13 plots meter factor variation as a function of swirl.I Trade Secret &Confidential Commercial Information Trade Secret &Confidential Commercial Information I Figure 13 -Net Meter Factor vs. Swirl Figure 14 plots meter factor variation as a function of FR. [I Trade Secret &Confidential Commercial Information
[Trade Secret &Confidential Commercial Information Trade Secret &Confidential Commercial Information Trade Secret &Confidential Commercial Information I Caldon Ultrasonics Page 17 ER-1060 Rev 1 Caldon Ultrasonics Page 17 ER- 1060 Rev I Preparer:
DRA Reviewer: Trade Secret &Confidential Commercial Information Figure 14 -Net Meter Factor vs. FR Caldon Ultrasonics Page 18 ER-1060 Rev 1 Caldon Ultrasonics Page 18 ER- 1060 Rev I Preparer:
DRA Reviewer:
_nW 4.6 Hydraulic Model Sensitivity In Section 4.3, the variation in MF due to hydraulics (812 tests) had a standard deviation of[ A 95% confidence value for hydraulic sensitivity is computed to be [ ] It is noted that of the 812 configurations used in the population, many may not be relevant to the hydraulics at STP. The population can be broken down into subsets by "key" characteristics.
The following table shows different population breakdown with 95% confidence uncertainties
.Trade Secret &Confidential Commercial Information Trade Secret &Confidential Commercial Information Trade Secret &Confidential Commercial Information II I 0 0 C)COa)wE.0 4.7 Hydraulic Sensitivity when in [ I Normally, the LEFM CheckPlus operates with two planes of velocity measurements each with four acoustic paths. These two planes cross each other and provide natural cancellation of cross velocities and making the meter nearly insensitive to upstream hydraulics.
The efficacy of this method has been discussed in this report and more importantly in the Topical report and referenced papers (see Section 6).I Trade Secret &Confidential Commercial Information CIdnUtaoisPae1 R16 e Caldon Ultrasonics Page 19 ER- 1060 Rev I Preparer:
DRA Reviewer: .e!-II Trade Secret &Confidentia Commerci, Information I I Trade Secret &Confidential Commercia Information Trade Secret &4.8 Qualitative Example [Confidential Commercia The meter installation model shown in Figure 15 is a case that demonstrates the robustness of the Information 8 path UFM to extreme changes in the upstream hydraulics.
Clearly the hydraulics presented in this section are much more extreme that those of the STP application (Section 3) and fail to have the recommended 5 L/D between the meter and the upstream elbow.Figure 15 -Meter Installation Model (Flow Right to Left)(Arrow at Note 1 sight is where a Mitsubishi flow conditioner was installed)
Not only is it a complex installation, but it has the opportunity for both a planar flow and strong swirling flow, depending on the flow paths and fittings.
Figure 16 shows an analysis of different swirls generated through tests (absolute values of swirl).1o Clearly, individual planes can be calibrated to the two plane average -and this is done by procedure and software.But, if in maintenance mode, the LEFM cannot calibrate the individual planes when hydraulic changes occur.Caldon Ultrasonics Page 20 ER-1060 Rev 1 Caldon Ultrasonics Page 20 ER-1060 Rev I Preparer:
DRA Reviewer:
&!!!Trade Secret &Confidential Commercial Information Figure 16 -Analysis of the Swirl Conditions for Different Tests The profile with a long straight pipe is shown in Figure 17. It is marginally asymmetric.
Figure 17 -Velocity Profile with a Straight Pipe Upstream The profile, however, with a Mitsubishi conditioner immediately upstream of the final bend, Figure I9 shows an extreme profile, one plane of which shows clearly an inverse effect.CalonUlraonis ag 2 ER-06 Rvi Trade Secret &Confidential Commercial Information Caldon Ultrasonics Page 21 ER-1060 Rev I Preparer:
DRA Reviewer:
d Figure 18 Flow Profile with Mitsubishi Plate Upstream of Last Bend The effects of the different conditions on both MF and FR are shown in Figure 19. Withstanding all these effects, a +/-+0.15% bound covers all the data.Figure 19 MF and FR -Highly Distorted Flow Trade Secret &Confidential Commercial Information Trade Secret &Confidential Commercial Information Caldon Ultrasonics Page 22 ER- 1060 Rev I Preparer:
DRA Reviewer:
AAV!5to 5.0 METER FACTOR ACCURACY ASSESSMENT This section documents the methodology for calculating the uncertainty or accuracy of the meter factor. This report was produced using a process and quality assurance consistent with the requirements of ASME PTC 19.1 and ANSI/NCSL Z540-2-1997 (see References 11, 16 and 17).The approach to determination of the set points is to combine the random (Type A) and systematic (Type B) terms by the means of the RSS approach given that all the terms are independent, zero-centered and normally distributed.
First, the sensitivity of the calculated flow to each independent variable or input is determined.
Once the sensitivities to the independent variables have been calculated, then the independent variables' uncertainties are calculated and multiplied with their sensitivity coefficient, such as calibration facility, timing errors, etc. The 95% confidence level uncertainty bounds are calculated for each element (uncertainty coverage for each term is 95%).The evaluation of the sensitivity coefficients is performed by determining the independent variables in the mass flow (and volumetric flow) calculation.
For example, if volume flow is a function of independent variables X 1 , X 2 , ..., X,, as follows: Q = f(Xl,X2,..., Xn)The uncertainty effect of specific independent variables on the flow measurement is calculated by partial differentiation of the above equation.
Expressing the result as a per unit sensitivity:
dQ Axl)[AX 2 .......+)Q LQ3X,J6k1 x, ) LQ;R3X2J 2 ) x.)Where the terms in the brackets are the sensitivity coefficients for X 1 , X 2 , ..., X". The magnitudes and signs of each uncertainty for a given flow measurement are then bounded by 95% confidence intervals.
ASME PTC 19.1 demonstrates that by combining the independent uncertainty contributions as the root sum square, the overall uncertainty in volumetric flow is bounded by a 95% confidence level.The allocation of uncertainties for meter factor for the flow meter (consistent with the Cameron Topical report) is shown in Table 5 below. Using the data in Table 5 and the root mean square summation technique indicated for combining independent uncertainties of relatively the same magnitude, the total uncertainty due to MF is computed.Caldon Ultrasonics Page 23 ER-1060 Rev I Caldon Ultrasonics Page 23 ER- 1060 Rev I Preparer:
DRA Reviewer:
d9"4 Trade Secret &Confidential Commercial Information Table 2: Uncertainty Summary for Meter Factor RMS values rounded to closest 0.001 %(All terms are treated as normal distributions with k = 2, e.g., 95% coverage)5.1 Facility Uncertainty Trade A facility uncertainty of [ ] is typically budgeted based on the ISO 17025 traceable Secret &uncertainties of Alden Research Laboratories.
The figure is increased conservatively to of Confidentla Commercia in the table above. Information This uncertainty term is considered to be systematic over all pipes.See Reference 14.Caldon Ultrasonics Page 24 EER--1060 Rev I Preparer:
DRA Reviewer:
4M&+/-5.2 Measurement Uncertainty For each calibration, an analysis is done to compute the uncertainties in the volumetric flow measurement (excluding meter factor) of the flow meters used. The dominant calibration uncertainty is that due to the sensitivity of transducer installation
[ I.Trade Secret &Confidential Commercial Information Trade Secret &Confidential Commercia Information Table 3: Uncertainties in Volumetric Flow Measurements (All Figures rounded to three decimal points)(All terms are treated as normal distributions with k = 2, e.g., 95% coverage)In order to be conservative, a combined uncertainty in any of the STP meters is considered to be[ ] This uncertainty term is random between meters -since the meters construction (differences in assembly and manufacturer) will drive this uncertainty.
5.3 Extrapolation Allowance At the plant, it is likely that the hydraulic conditions will not equal those tested during the calibration.
In particular, the plant's Reynolds numbers are higher than that achievable at the laboratory (approximately 20 million vs. -2 million).
Further, the plant may have a lower wall roughness than the test pipes used at the laboratory.
[Trade Secret &Confidential Commercial Information I Trade Secret &Confidential Commercial Information Trade Secret &Confidential Commercial Information I I 12 For this report, a typical average flow of 8,600 gpm (1953 CMH) is use. This is an expected average flow for computing the delta T value.Caldon Ultrasonics Page 25 ER- 1060 Rev I Preparer:
DRA Reviewer:
5 Trade Secret &Confidential Commercial Information Where: u = axial velocity (ft/s)u = shear velocity (ft/s)y. = Dimensionless distance from the pipe wall The numerical calculation of meter factor is illustrated below.Trade Secret &Confidential Commercial Information Figure 20: MF vs. Reynolds Number (Reichardt Profile)Caldon Ultrasonics Page 26 ER-1060 Rev I Caldon Ultrasonics Page 26 ER- 1060 Rev I Preparer:
DRA Reviewer:
011 1V Trade Secret &Confidential Commercial Information Figure 21: FR vs. Reynolds Number (Reichardt Profile)Using this analysis, a meter factor extrapolation of [ ] is predicted from the average calibration Reynolds number (-2e6) to the plant application
(-20e6). The flatness ratio extrapolation is approximately
[ I for the same range.Nevertheless, in order to address potential uncertainties in using this methodology, the meter factor extrapolation uncertainty budget is conservatively increased to [ I (e.g., doubled).This uncertainty term is considered to be systematic over all pipes.5.4 Data Scatter -Mean Meter Factor Uncertainty Each meter factor is computed as the average (mean) of the meter factor measurements made for that flow element. The uncertainty in mean meter factor must address the 95% confidence limits on the uncertainty in that mean.A review of previous calibrations has shown that the typical uncertainty due to data scatter is[ ] In order to be conservative, an uncertainty of [ ] is used to allow for additional scatter in the data.This uncertainty term is random between meters.Trade Secret &Confidential Commercial Information Trade Secret &Confidential Commercial Information Trade Secret &Confidential Commercial Information Caldon Ultrasonics Page 27 ER- 1060 Rev I Preparer:
DRA Reviewer:
_12i
6.0 REFERENCES
- 1. 2006 South East Asia Flow Workshop Paper, "The Relative Merits of Ultrasonic Meters Employing Between Two and Eight Paths", Gregor Brown, Don Augenstein, Terry Cousins, Herb Estrada 2. Moody, L. F., "Friction Factors for Pipe Flow," ASME Transactions, V. 66, 1944, pp.671-694 3. National Bureau of Standards and Technology, "Experimental Statistics Handbook 1991" 4. Murakamni, M., Shimizu, Y., and Shiragami, H., "Studies on Fluid Flow in Three-Dimensional Bend Conduits," Japan Society of Mechanical Engineering (JSME), Bulletin V. 12, No. 54, Dec. 1969, pp. 1369-1379.
- 8. Cameron Topical Report ER-80P Rev 0, "Improving Thermal Power Accuracy and Plant Safety While Increasing Operating Power Level Using the LEFM Check System" 9. ER-55 1, Transducer Replacement Sensitivity
- 12. Cameron Engineering Report ER-160P Rev 0, "Supplement to Topical Report ER 80P: Basis for a Power Uprate with the LEFM System" 13. Cameron Engineering Report ER-157(P-A)
Rev. 8 and Rev. 8 Errata, "Supplement to Caldon Topical Report ER-80P: Basis for Power Uprates with an LEFM Check or an LEFM CheckPlus" 14. Cameron Engineering Report ER 262 Rev 0, "Effects of Velocity Profile Changes Measured In-Plant on LEFM Feedwater Flow Measurement Systems", January 2002 15. ANSIINCSL Z540.3-2006, "U.S. Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement" 16. ISO "Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement" 17. IGHEM Flow Paper 2008 Milan, Italy, "Accuracy Validation of Multiple Path Transit Time Flowmeters" 18. Westinghouse Research Laboratories Nov 3, 1972, "Integration Errors for Turbulent Profiles in Pipe Flow" Caldon Ultrasonics Page 28 ER-1060 Rev 1 Caldon Ultrasonics Page 28 ER- 1060 Rev I