Talk:Mass flow meter

message: Maybe the page should specify that it's not about Mass Flow Meters in general, but just one particular operating principle....  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.69.111.10 (talk) 20:17, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: It is considered bad practice to use images that are too large, as they tend to disrupt the layout of the page.
Let me recapitulate some things about duplicated images.
The wikimedia software resizes static images automatically. That is, it suffices to upload a single large JPG or PNG file, and when you use the image in a page you can specify any smaller size than the size of the uploaded version. The wikimedia software will resize the image, it will cache the resized version, and when users view the page the wikimedia software will ship the smaller version.
But the wikimedia software does not resize animated GIFs. The 512x512 versions are not for inclusion on the wikipedia page, they have been uploaded to be available for classroom teaching purposes. If wikipedia policy is against multiple versions of animateds GIFs then the larger versions shouls be deleted, not the smaller versions. --Cleonis | Talk 09:38, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reverted to using the 256x256 versions of the animations 

message: Do these Coriolis effect mass flow meters work at the equator?  We typically use a rotating frame of reference, but here it seems we're using an oscillating frame.  Ergo, any meter of this design would work at any latitude without having to fiddle with the calibration. Watchwolf49z (talk) 14:56, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I found my answer, it's yes, these meters work fine at the equator.  I'm posting my reference, as it looks good, perhaps it will be of future use to this article: http://www.omega.com/literature/transactions/volume4/t9904-10-mass.html.  I propose adding this reference to the "External Link" section.  I may not be back here to make this change, so anyone can after a few weeks. Watchwolf49z (talk) 01:29, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Annual Stupid Question

message: My apologies to Resinoth, but we should vet the information here first.  If you have a reference on this information, I sure would like to read it.  We already have a flag on the citations, I think any NEW information should be fully referenced.  I say up-front, I think this information should be in it's own section, and not in the introductory section.  It's more complex that what is there, so makes for clunky prose.  I'd also like to know why you think this is notable, as generally it is the volume of the fluid we wish to measure. Watchwolf49z (talk) 01:29, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Revert

message: Is the flow-direction and phase shift correct in the vibrating meter animation?
It would seem more intuitive that the downstream-part would be phase-delayed rather than phase-advanced...?
It seems to be universally accepted that this is in fact correct - perhaps some more explanation is due?
Andrew 217.33.180.66 (talk) 18:07, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vibration flow meter animation - query over flow-direction and phase-shift 

message: Substituted at 23:24, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment