Talk:Flow measurement

message: --Mlloydmequon 17:29, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have deleted the entire "Companies selling flow measurement devices" section. Wikipedia is not a Web directory, and this list is an open invitation for spammers. If there are any truly notable companies that are worth a mention, they will be notable enough to have their own Wikipedia article, and we can link to that. —Caesura(t) 12:23, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untitled 

message: How would an instrumentation engineer differentiate between the measurement of flow and pressure? Plz help —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 61.0.17.157 (talk) 02:00, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Query for Instrumentation Engineers 

message: Wikipedia is not a place for advertising.  I took out an enormous quantity of far-too-specific text and pictures with a whole bunch of registered trademark logos on it.  The information duplicated other info that was found in the rest of the article, was way too specific, linked to proprietary websites and generally looked like a paste from a company representative.  I re-worked what I could but most of it I just took out.  WLU 20:15, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  WP:NOT 

message: how to find  the required diameter of pipe if we know discharge,velocity of flow and density of fluid in sewerge net work  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.247.154.101 (talk) 10:59, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  diameter of pipe 

message: When water needs to be pumped for a distance of 3 kilometers, and a constant pressure of 3 bar is supplied what is the optimal 
diameter of pipe that can be used?
What formula can be used to calculate the diameter of pipe to be used when the pressure substance (water) and distance are known. Can anyone provide me with information?
Arjaa (talk) 09:14, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia talk pages are not for help with an articles subject -- they are about the articles themselves. User A1 (talk) 11:51, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

text: I hope that is not is not a homework question. User A1 (talk) 09:29, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Flow of water at standard pressure of 3bar, Calculation of pipe dia. to be used? 

message: Why does the text use "flow meter" instead of "flowmeter"?. There are lots of instances where concatenating the word "meter" with the preceding noun is common i.e. calorimeter, odometer, speedometer, ammeter, barometer, anemometer, velocimeter, etc BluesLewis (talk) 01:19, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know. Use it once or twice in the article and see if use spreads? I like to saw logs! (talk) 08:36, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Both version are used and accepted in industry. Wikipedia seems to be favoring "flow meter" in all the pages I have seen.AussieMueller (talk) 20:39, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Flowmeter versus flow meter 

message: Updated the information on ultrasonic flow meters to make it clear that Doppler and transit time are two separate methods. Also reduced the marketing spin about natural gas (these technologies are used for so much more). I will be updating the Ultrasonic flow meter page shortly for similar clarity issues.AussieMueller (talk) 20:16, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ultrasonic flow meters (Dopper and transit time) 

message: One commonly-used method of verifying the accuracy of a liquid flowmeter (particularly if the liquid is water) is to let the liquid flow at some measured flow rate into a bucket for a specified period of time, and then weigh the liquid (taring the bucket, of course). Mass of liquid divided by time is the mass flow rate. It's extremely low-tech, but can yield surprisingly good accuracy. Accuracy can be improved by increasing the flow time - this reduces errors due to reaction time with the stopwatch, but you need a bigger bucket and scale. 152.51.56.1 (talk) 13:48, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Already mentioned in the mechanical flow meter section. Ray Lightyear (talk) 14:11, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: It's mentioned there as an analogy (and a good one), but it's also used as the actual verification method for various liquid flowmeters. Since we have a Calibration section with specific information for the use of radiotracers, some less complex methods should probably be suggested - including verifying one meter with another, more accurate, one connected in series.152.51.56.1 (talk) 19:32, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Calibration - the stopwatch-and-bucket method? 

message: " The density for a liquid is almost independent of the liquid conditions; however, this is not the case for gas, the density of which depends greatly upon pressure, temperature and to a lesser extent, the gas composition."
There is so much wrong in this statement. First of all saying density of liquid is almost independent of the conditions is wrong. Density of water changes ~4% between 0 - 100 degree Celsius, how is that not a significant change? It would be right to say relatively less dependent compared to gas. Second density of gas is depends to a lesser extent on the gas composition. What does this even mean? This implies if i mix gases its density doesn't change, which is completely wrong. Changing a fixed volume of pure hydrogen to same volume of 50% hydrogen and 50% Argon increases is density by 40 times.Ray Lightyear (talk) 14:24, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unclear and wrong statements 

message: I think that section confuses MAFs and AFMs (Air Flow Meters) which measure volume rather than mass.  The two specific examples I'm aware of are moving-vane type AFMs which incorporate a temperature sensor so that the engine control module can calculate air mass from the measured volume and temperature; and a heated-wire type MAF which measures mass directly by determining the current necessary to maintain a platinum wire suspended in the air stream at a predetermined temperature. Dbeierl (talk) 04:05, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mass Air Flow meter section 

message: The section "Turbine Flow Meter" mentions a phenomenon called "Dog mix interference" which only appears on Wikipedia and copies of Wikipedia articles...and nowhere else. I'm virtually certain it's a translation error, but am unsure what to replace it with. Turbulence?
(The only other place I can find that isn't a copycat article is Water metering#Turbine meters, which is pretty obviously a copy-paste from this article, or vice versa)
Cicero225 (talk) 17:36, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Good grief, that's been there since December 2010![] (Revision history search is great.) I suppose it might be a faulty translation of "liquid/solid two-phase flow" or some such, maybe even a euphemism for sewage, but rather than resolve that I've just gone ahead and replaced the whole sentence about accuracy - that suggestion that all sizes are accurate to 0.2 l/s had to go too. I'll do the other article too. Good catches! NebY (talk) 18:33, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dog mix interference? 

message: Advantages and disadvantages of orifice meter and venturi meter and Differences between venturi meters and orifice meters are strange titles for free-standing articles.  Any unique salvagable content should be brought to this article. --Wtshymanski (talk) 18:33, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge October 2017

message: The talk page at Variable area meter suggests a merge with this page.  "Variable area meter" essentially duplicates the contents at the section in this article. The link to a seond article isn't helpful here because there's no additional content. --Wtshymanski (talk) 19:50, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Merge. I fully support Wtshymanski’s proposal. Dolphin (t) 20:42, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge January 2018

message: *I encountered the term in this paper on Direct Flame Fuel Cells :
** https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1742-6596/557/1/012119/pdf , "Power generation properties of Direct Flame Fuel Cell (DFFC)S Endo and Y Nakamura"
*I found some information on it in this link:
** https://www.safetyemporium.com/cg-1607
*Seems to be useful for lower flow volumes, but i've never heard of the term before, and a quick search has it not being anywhere on Wikipedia so far?
*Either way i think it would be a good idea to at least write this down here in the talk section
*If someone with more experience/knowledge about these reads this, please add it to the page! (assuming relevant people agree)
*Granted i could maybe draft something up in the future, but i'll leave it here for now
Eric Lotze (talk) 17:11, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Good catch! Soap film flowmeters are great for calibrating flowmeters as they're so fundamental, and can be much larger than the catalogued items. Though they're no good for continual operation, it's a shame we don't have an entry here or in a stand-alone article. It might not be easy finding a source apart from a catalogue; their design and use might be both too obvious and too niche for anyone to have bothered with an extensive write-up. NebY (talk) 22:22, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

text: There's an article in Flow Measurement and Instrumentation (an Elsevier journal now available through the Wikipedia Library) that starts with a good outline, including that instructions aren't usually provided because operation is regarded as a matter of 'common sense'. :) NebY (talk) 23:10, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Soap Film Flowmeters]]