Second Meeting for FRWG to be held June 21, 2017, at 1:00 p.m.
are planning to have our second meeting at the CEESI North American Custody
Transfer Conference in San Antonio, Texas that is being held from June 19-21,
2017. Members should have already received notice via email and US postal mail,
or you can also visit the CEESI website at www.ceesi.com.
We are planning to meet at 1:00 p.m. on June 21 at the conclusion of the
conference. If you are unable to attend this meeting, thatís fine. I realize
that not everyone will be there. We plan to conduct our discussions mainly by
email, in any case.
you are a member of the FRWG and cannot attend, but someone else from your
company is attending, please ask if they can attend in your place. This
worked well last year. Thank you for making this effort.
main focus of this meeting will be the end-user survey that we decided to
conduct at our initial meeting. You should have received a draft of this
survey, so please submit any comments unless you already have. Thank you.
First Meeting for FRWG to be
held June 23 at 1:00 p.m.
We are planning to have our first meeting at the CEESI North American Custody Transfer Conference in San Antonio, Texas that is being held from June 21 -23, 2016. Details will soon be
forthcoming via email, or you can also visit the CEESI website at www.ceesi.com. We are planning to meet at
1:00 p.m. on June 23 at the conclusion of the conference. If you are unable to attend this meeting, thatís fine. I realize that not everyone wlll be there. We plan to conduct our discussions mainly by email, in any case.
Flow Recalibration Working Group (FRWG)
The purpose of this group is to arrive at a group of criteria that end-users can
employ to determine if their flowmeters need to be recalibrated. This does
not necessarily equate to a specific time interval. Instead, the goal is
to have some tests, programs, or criteria that can be run to determine when a
flowmeter needs to be recalibrated.
The idea for this group came
out of a series of in-person interviews I did with end-users of flowmeters in
in 2009. I interviewed 15 companies from
, and the UAE about their use of flowmeters. Many of them expressed
frustration that there was no generally agreed upon interval when their
ultrasonic flowmeters need to be recalibrated. There was also the fact
that at that time there was no recalibration facility in the
. These people asked me if I could help them arrive at a standard. I
said that I would do what I could.
Since that time I have spoken
to the AGA, which seems to have no interest in taking on this subject. One
positive development is that Emerson Process has built a flow calibration
, but it is currently limited to four inch liquid recalibrations. Some
countries have instituted their own rules about calibration frequency, but these
periods vary and seem to differ on a country by country basis.
The series of six studies that
Flow Research did in 2012 on gas flow measurement grew out of the
interviews. We are now researching a new edition of this series. Currently,
Flow Research is conducting a worldwide study of the calibration facilities for
liquid and gas recalibration. So far we have identified 125 such
facilities. We have completed a questionnaire that we plan to send to
them. The study will include a description of the capabilities of the
various facilities worldwide. We also plan to cover flowmeter
manufacturers that recalibrate flowmeters, and also mobile calibration
facilities. We are doing separate studies on liquid and gas recalibration.
I think that these studies should be a valuable database of information for our
committee work. You can find a description of these studies at www.flowcalibration.org.
This committee is strictly a
volunteer effort, and so far has no official sanction. However, my hope is
that if we do succeed in coming up with a usable set of recalibration
guidelines, we can approach some of the organizations like AGA and API for
approval of the guidelines. Short of this, we can publish our report and
circulate it among interested manufacturers and end-users. Since no one
has to my knowledge attempted this before, I think the results will be met with
quite a lot of interest.
So far, the following people
have volunteered to be on this committee:
Dr. Jesse Yoder (Flow Research) (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Tom Ballard (GE Measurement) (Thomas.email@example.com)
Peter Brand (Avans Hogeschool
Dr. Gregor Brown (Cameron) (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Bob Carrell (Hoffer Flow
Clancy (CEESI) (email@example.com)
Terry Cousins (CEESI
Measurement Solutions) (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Gupta (GAIL India Limited) (email@example.com)
Boy Jacobsen (FORCE Technology) (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Dr. Aaron Johnson (NIST) (email@example.com)
Dr. Tom Kegel (CEESI) (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Tom Kemme (Magnetrol) (email@example.com)
Dick Laan (Krohne Altometer) (firstname.lastname@example.org)
John Lansing (Lansing
Measurement Services LLC) (email@example.com)
Phil Mark (TUV SUD Ltd.) (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Tom OíBanion (Micro Motion) (email@example.com)
Pabois (Faure Herman, Groupe IDEX) (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Dean Standiford (Emerson
Process Management) (email@example.com)
Wilhelm Staudt (Endress+Hauser
Flowtec AG) (Wilhelm.Staudt@flowtec.endress.com)
Stewart (Oil & Gas Process Solutions) (Steve.firstname.lastname@example.org)
van den Berg (VSL b.v.) (RvdBerg@vsl.nl)
van Doorn (ODS Metering Systems BV) (Eric.email@example.com)
first task of the committee was to formulate criteria for determining when
an inline multipath ultrasonic custody transfer needs to be recalibrated.
This included running a software program, using a check meter, running
diagnostics, doing dry calibration, or any other method that may be effective.
We then addressed other types of ultrasonic flowmeters, as well as
other flowmeter types such as turbine, differential pressure with different
primary elements, vortex, magnetic, and thermal.
President, Flow Research
Articles About Calibration Topics