A.

Abstract

Restriction flow meters, such as venturi meters and orifice meters, are equipment used to introduce a
sudden contraction in a pipe system to restrict the flow of fluid. The restriction introduces a pressure drop
in the system, and the fluid’s velocity increases as a result. In this experiment, the graphs of flow rate ()
vs. pressure drop (P) were obtained for both meters. The  vs △P graph for the venturi meter exhibited
theoretical behavior, with its flowrate increasing as the pressure drop decreased. However, the  vs △P
graph for the orifice meter showed a slight increase in flowrate as the pressure drop decreased. This error
is attributed to the inaccurate placement and reading of the pressure gauges. Aside from the graph, the
coefficient of discharge CD is obtained. The CD defines the loss in total pressure caused by the restriction
in a non-ideal pipe system. Theoretically, the CD of the venturi meter must be higher than that of the orifice
meter, since the pressure drop is increased gradually. Experimental data yields a higher C D for the orifice
meter than the venturi meter, which is once again attributed to the faulty pressure gauges. The researchers
recommend that the pressure gauges in the pipe system be repositioned and if possible, replaced in order to
produce accurate and precise data.
 B. Table of Contents

A. Abstract ................................................................................................................................................ 1
B. Table of Contents................................................................................................................................. 2
C. Introduction ......................................................................................................................................... 6
D. Equipment and Methods ..................................................................................................................... 8
E. Results .................................................................................................................................................. 9
F. Discussion and Conclusion ............................................................................................................... 11
G. Reference Citations ........................................................................................................................... 12
H. Appendices.......................................................................................................................................... 13
 Table of Equations

Equation 1 - Coefficient of discharge ........................................................................................................... 7

Equation 2 - Sample calculation for fluid velocity ..................................................................................... 13
Equation 3 - Sample calculation for CD ...................................................................................................... 13
 Table of Figures

Figure 1 - Orifice meter (Shashi, 2015) ........................................................................................................ 6

Figure 2 - Venturi meter (Shashi, 2015) ....................................................................................................... 6
Figure 3. Operating the pipe system ............................................................................................................. 8
Figure 4 – Venturi  vs △P graph ................................................................................................................ 9
Figure 5 - Orifice  vs △P graph ................................................................................................................ 10
 Table of Tables

Table 1 - Venturi meter ................................................................................................................................. 9

Table 2 – Venturi  vs △P ............................................................................................................................ 9
Table 3 - Orifice meter ................................................................................................................................ 10
Table 4 - Orifice  vs △P ........................................................................................................................... 10
 C. Introduction

Accurate measurement of flow rate of liquids and gases is an essential requirement for maintaining
the quality of industrial processes (NPTEL, 2019). In fact, most of the industrial control loops control the
flow rates of incoming liquids or gases in order to achieve the control objective. As a result, accurate
measurement of flow rate is very important.

Flow rate can be manipulated as desired. Restriction flow meters in particular are used to restrict
the flow of fluid as it passes through a narrow opening. As the fluid passes through the restriction, it
experiences a drop in pressure and consequently, an increase in its velocity.

One type of restriction flow meter is an orifice meter. It consists of a flat plate that has a sharp-
edged hole accurately machined in it and placed concentrically in a pipe. As liquid flows through the pipe,
the flow suddenly contracts as it approaches the orifice and then suddenly expands after the orifice back to
the full pipe diameter. This forms a vena contracta or a throat immediately past the orifice. This reduction
in flow pattern at the vena contracta causes increased velocity and hence lower pressure at the throat
(Shashi, 2015). The pressure difference between section 1, with the full flow and section 2 at the throat, can
then be used to measure the liquid flow rate.

Figure 1 - Orifice meter (Shashi, 2015)

The venturi meter, also known as venturi tube, belongs to the category of variable head flowmeters. It
consists of a smooth gradual contraction from the main pipe size to the throat section, followed by a smooth,
gradual enlargement from the throat section to the original pipe diameter (Shashi, 2015).

Figure 2 - Venturi meter (Shashi, 2015)

 In both orifice and venturi meters, the system experiences a small loss of total pressure. A discharge
coefficient is the parameter used to determine irrecoverable losses associated with a certain piece of
equipment (constriction) in a fluid system, or the "resistance" that piece of equipment imposes upon the
flow (Reader-Harris, 2011). The following equation is used for both orifice coefficient and discharge
coefficient.

Equation 1 - Coefficient of discharge

𝜐𝑜 [𝜌(1 − 𝛽 4 )]1/2
𝐶𝐷 =
[2𝑔𝑐 (𝑃1 − 𝑃2 )]1/2

Where: 𝜐𝑜 – velocity through the orifice

𝛽 – ratio of orifice diameter to pipe diameter
𝑃1 /𝑃2 – pressure at point 1 and 2

The higher the CD, the more ideal a system is. Therefore, it must be calculated for the proper
measurement of fluid flowrates using the principles of the mechanical energy equation.
 D. Equipment and Methods

Two pipe systems will be used for the experiment. One is equipped with a venturi meter while the other
is equipped with an orifice meter There are pressure gauges attached before and after the orifice and venturi.
However, this is not where the gauges should be positioned for the venturi; the gauges should be positioned
before and ‘on’ the venture itself (Malcolm J.BrandtBSc, 2017). Some errors are to be expected as a result.
A cylinder will collect the output of the pipe where the collected volume will be measured. Upon performing
the experiment, the valve would be opened at three different levels: two-thirds open, one-half open and
one-thirds open. Each level would result to a different flow rate of the output and a different pressure
reading on the pressure gauge.

For the orifice, the experiment is conducted by first turning on the motor of the pump for the water
to flow to the pipes; after the valve has been adjusted. An output of 3 liters is collected and during that time,
the pressure is measured by reading the pressure gauge. The water in the cylinder which receives the output
would then be drained and another trial is done. Three trials are done for each levels of the valve.

The same procedure is done for the venturi.

Figure 3. Operating the pipe system

 E. Results

Venturi diameter = 0.75 in

Pipe diameter = 1.25 in
 = 0.6
Table 1 - Venturi meter

VENTURI METER
Valve Trial P1 P2 △P, △P, psf Volume t, s ∀, ft3/s U, ft/sec COD
Opening psi
1/3 1 4.20 1.20 3.00 432.00 0.106 2.63 0.040 13.14 0.5805
2 4.10 1.20 2.90 417.60 0.106 2.69 0.039 12.84 0.5772
3 4.10 1.20 2.90 417.60 0.106 2.57 0.041 13.44 0.6042
½ 1 4.2 1.3 2.90 417.60 0.106 2.56 0.041 13.50 0.6065
2 4.1 1.3 2.80 403.20 0.106 2.49 0.043 13.88 0.6346
3 4.1 1.3 2.80 403.20 0.106 2.56 0.041 13.50 0.6173
2/3 1 4.2 1.4 2.80 403.20 0.106 2.36 0.045 14.64 0.6696
2 4.1 1.4 2.70 388.80 0.106 2.43 0.044 14.22 0.6622
3 4.1 1.4 2.70 388.80 0.106 2.49 0.043 13.88 0.6463

Table 2 – Venturi  vs △P

Venturi Meter
Valve Average△P, Average ∀,
Opening psi ft3/s
1/3 2.93 0.040
½ 2.83 0.042
2/3 2.73 0.044

Average flowrate vs Pressure Drop for

Venturi Meter
2.95
Average△P, psi

2.90
2.85
2.80
2.75
2.70
0.040 0.041 0.042 0.043 0.044
Average ∀, cu.ft/s

Figure 4 – Venturi  vs △P graph

Orifice diameter = 0.75 in
Pipe diameter = 1.25 in
 = 0.6

Table 3 - Orifice meter

ORIFICE METER
Valve Opening Trial P1 P2 △P, psi △P, psf Volume t, s ∀, ft3/s U, ft/sec COD
1/3 1 3.4 1.8 1.60 230.4 0.106 2.57 0.041 13.44 0.8134
2 3.4 1.8 1.60 230.4 0.106 2.51 0.042 13.77 0.8328
3 3.4 1.8 1.60 230.4 0.106 2.60 0.041 13.29 0.8040
1/2 1 3.0 1.9 1.10 158.4 0.106 2.70 0.039 12.80 0.9337
2 3.0 1.8 1.20 172.8 0.106 2.62 0.040 13.19 0.9213
3 3.0 1.9 1.10 158.4 0.106 2.70 0.039 12.80 0.9337
2/3 1 3.2 1.9 1.30 187.2 0.106 2.75 0.039 12.56 0.8433
2 3.0 1.9 1.10 158.4 0.106 2.63 0.040 13.14 0.9586
3 3.0 1.8 1.20 172.8 0.106 2.70 0.039 12.80 0.8940

Table 4 - Orifice  vs △P

Orifice Meter
Valve Average△P, Average ∀, cu.ft/s
Opening psi
1/3 1.60 0.041
1/2 1.13 0.040
2/3 1.20 0.039

Average flowrate vs Pressure Drop for Orifice

Meter
1.80
1.60
1.40
Average△P, psi

1.20
1.00
0.80
0.60
0.40
0.20
0.00
0.039 0.040 0.040 0.041 0.041 0.042 0.042
Average ∀, cu.ft/s

Figure 5 - Orifice  vs △P graph

F. Discussion and Conclusion

The results of the experiment show that for increasing fluid flowrate, there is a
corresponding decrease in the pressure drop. This is expected because of the transformation of
mechanical energy in the fluid. In examining the mechanical energy balance:

𝜐𝑜 [𝜌(1 − 𝛽 4 )]1/2
𝐶𝐷 =
[2𝑔𝑐 (𝑃1 − 𝑃2 )]1/2

One can deduce that for a fluid flowing through a contraction or expansion in a pipe
oriented horizontally, there is a transformation of energy between the two terms: dP/  and du2/2gc
since there must always be a constant amount of energy in the fluid. Thus, should a fluid's pressure
drop decrease, its flowrate must increase given that volumetric flowrate is directly proportional
with the fluid velocity:

∀ = 𝜐 ∙ 𝐴𝑝𝑖𝑝𝑒

This relationship is evident for the venturi meter, but not so much for the orifice meter. As
shown in the graph for the venturi meter, as the volumetric flowrate increases, there is a decrease
in pressure drop. However, for the orifice meter, there seems to be a slight increase in the pressure
drop as flowrate is increased. This anomaly can be explained by the errors of the pressure gauges,
the non-adiabatic nature of the system, and the distance in the positioning of the valve from the
orifice.

The coefficients of discharge for the two metering equipment were calculated. The results
show that the coefficient of discharge for the venturi meter is about 0.5-0.6, while that of the orifice
meter is about 0.8-0.9. From the definition of the coefficient of discharge; the higher the coefficient,
the closer the flow of the fluid through the equipment is with that of an ideal nozzle. This also
means that a piece of equipment has a higher energy efficiency, since smaller energy losses are
incurred. The results show that the orifice meter has a higher coefficient of discharge, and thus is
more efficient in metering.

However, it should be noted that there is an error in the placement of the pressure
tap/pressure gauge for the venturi meter. Instead of recording the pressure at the contraction, the
outlet pressure at the 11/4 pipe diameter was measured. There will be changes in the values of the
outlet pressure, which results to a lower coefficient of discharge.

With proper positioning of the gauge in the equipment, it is expected that the venturi meter
will have a higher coefficient of discharge than the orifice meter. This is due to the difference in
the geometries of the metering equipment. The orifice meter offers more resistance to flow due to
a sudden contraction experienced by the fluid, while the venturi meter allows the gradual
contraction and expansion of the fluid as it passes.

From the results and the theories that govern the behavior of fluids in pipes and meters: It
can be concluded that there is an inverse relationship between the volumetric flowrate and the
pressure drop of a fluid. In addition, different metering equipment have different coefficients of
discharge, and the calculation of these coefficients aid in the proper metering of fluids through the
principles of energy conservation in fluid mechanics.
G. Reference Citations

NPTEL. (2019). Lesson 7 Flow Measurement. Retrieved 18 July, 2019, from NPTEL:
https://nptel.ac.in/courses/108105063/pdf/L-07(SS)(IA&C)%20((EE)NPTEL).pdf
Reader-Harris, M. (2011, February 2). Venturi Meters. Retrieved from Thermopedia:
http://www.thermopedia.com/content/1241/
Shashi, M. (2015). Transmission Pipeline Calculations and Simulations Manual. Gulf Professional
Publishing.
Brandt, M. J., Johnson, K. M., Elphinston, A. J., & Ratnayaka, D. D. (2017). Valves and
Meters. Tworts Water Supply,743-775. doi:10.1016/b978-0-08-100025-0.00018-1
 H. Appendices

Equation 2 - Sample calculation for fluid velocity

𝜐 = ∀ ∙𝐴
𝑓𝑡 3
0.041
𝜈= 𝑠
𝜋
(0.752 ∙ 4 ) 𝑓𝑡 2
𝑓𝑡
𝑣 = 13.44 𝑠

Equation 3 - Sample calculation for CD

Orifice diameter = 0.75 in

Pipe diameter = 1.25 in
 = 0.6
Gc = 32.2 ft/s2
 = 62.4 lb/ft3

𝜐𝑜 [𝜌(1 − 𝛽 4 )]1/2
𝐶𝐷 =
[2𝑔𝑐 (𝑃1 − 𝑃2 )]1/2

1/2
𝑓𝑡 𝑙𝑏
13.44 𝑠 [62.4 3 (1 − 0.64 )]
𝑓𝑡
𝐶𝐷 = 1/2
𝑓𝑡 (3.4 − 1.8) 𝑙𝑏
[2 ∙ 32.2 2 ∙ 2 ]
𝑠 144 ∙ 𝑓𝑡

𝐶𝐷 = 0.8134