Professional Documents
Culture Documents
GUIDELINE
for the estimation of the individual
uncertainties related to the full and
part load efficiency measurement
for boilers
ANNEX to Final Report, Contract No. SAVE 4.1031/Z/99-306
Final Version July 2001
Table of Contents
Page
5.11
Hardware ....................................................................................................................... 25
5.12
5.13
5.13.2
Global repeatability of the efficiency (stability). Uncertainty due to the test rig.27
REFERENCES ................................................................................................................... 68
ANNEX 1
ANNEX 2
ANNEX 3
ANNEX 4
ANNEX 5
Example of calculation
Drift between calibrations. How to determine if there is a trend or not?
The physical principle used for the instruments
The uncertainty due to the hardware (acquisition)
Variation of the gas quality during test (case of laboratories using natural gas):
example of protocol
ANNEX 6 Uncertainty for measurement of differential water temperature
ANNEX 7 Uncertainty for standby loss measurement. Influence of ambient temperature
measurement
ANNEX 8 Main relevant results of the project IMPROVEMENT OF INTERLABORATORY
REPRODUCIBILITY FOR NOx AND CO MEASUREMETNS. CONTRACT SMT
4 - CT 95 1606 - WP 5
PRELIMINARY REMARK
This document is elaborated in the frame of the project
SAVE: CREATION OF A HARMONISED AND DETAILED CALCULATION METHOD FOR THE
EVALUATION OF THE UNCERTAINTY OF EFFICIENCY MEASUREMENT. (Contract SAVE 4.1031/Z/99306)
DEFINITIONS (ISO)
1.1 Introduction
The present section of the document aims at clarifying a number of statistical tools used for the
expression of the efficiency.
More definitions can also be found in [1], [2] and [3], which are the reference documents used
for the work carried out.
1.2 Reference documents
The methods used for the evaluation of the results of inter-comparison tests are:
[1] ISO 5725: (Precision of test methods - Determination of repeatability and reproducibility
by inter-laboratory tests)
Test
Eff. (%)
87,1
87,5
87,8
86,9
87,5
87,4
Standard deviation
0,36
Repeatability
1,01
Reproducibility [2]
The reproducibility (R) is the value, below which the absolute difference between two single test results obtained with the same method on identical test material, under different
conditions (different operators, different apparatus, different laboratories, and different
time) may be expected to lie within a specified probability of 95%.
The reproducibility is a value indicating how measurements obtained by several laboratories can
compare, for example when repeating the same efficiency test on the same boiler. The notion of
outliers is used to detect measurements for which large mistakes have been done during tests
(e.g. test carried out with wrong heat input or wrong load).
The reproducibility is calculated with the standard deviation (s) (See further below).
R = 2.83 s
Note that the reproducibility (and the repeatability) are amplitudes. They are not expressed as
value as are the uncertainties.
Example: measurement of efficiency by 10 laboratories (fictive example)
91.0
90.5
Efficiency (%)
Laboratory Efficiency
%
1
88
2
88.5
3
89
4
88.4
5
89
6
90
7
87
8
87.4
9
88
10
88.3
90.0
89.5
89.0
88.5
88.0
87.5
87.0
86.5
86.0
1
Laboratory
10
88,4
Standard deviation
0,85
Reproducibility
2,42
Efficiency (%)
The reproducibility is 2.42% (absolute value). This means that the statistical absolute difference
between two single test results is 2.42%. There is, however, a probability of 5% that it is larger
(see further confidence level). This is the reason why the amplitude Max-Min seen on the
graph or table is larger.
91.0
90.5
90.0
89.5
89.0
88.5
88.0
87.5
87.0
86.5
86.0
Max- Min
=3%
R =2.43%
Max
Min.
1
10
Laboratory
Outliers [2]
Outliers are entries among the original test results that deviate so much from comparable
entries that they are considered as irreconcilable with the other data. An outlier does not
properly belong to the experiment and is corrected or discarded in keeping with the explanation obtained after investigations.
Outliers and stagger values can be investigated by using the Dixon tests or other tests described
in standards.
Experimental standard deviation [2]
Experimental standard deviation (s): For a series of n measurements of the same measurand, the parameters characterising the dispersion of the results is given by the formula:
s =
n -1
X: average of Xi
i=1
(Xi - X)2
The standard deviation used is always an experimental standard deviation unless otherwise
specified. Note that the "traditional" standard deviation is using a dividing factor of (n) instead of
(n-1).
Uncertainty [2]
Parameter associated with the result of a measurement that characterises the dispersion of
the values that could reasonably be attributed to the measurand.
Standard Uncertainty [2]
Uncertainty of the result of a measurement expressed as a standard deviation. The standard
uncertainty is calculated from the experimental standard deviation (s).
u =s
Expanded uncertainty [2]
Quantity defining an interval about the result of a measurement that may be expected to
encompass a large fraction of distribution of values that could reasonably be attributed to
the measurand.
Uncertainty given with a confidence level
Unless otherwise indicated, one may assume that a normal distribution (see definition further
below) is used to calculate the quoted uncertainty, and if the confidence level is not given we
assume it is about 95% (see definition further below).
In the present report - when not otherwise mentioned - we are dealing with uncertainty
with a confidence level of about 95% (we write "about" because the factor 2 chosen is in fact
the rounding of 1,96 corresponding to exactly 95%).
So instead of
u (95%) = 1,96.s
we use:
u (95%) = 2.s
Measurand [2]
Particular quantity subject to measurement [2].
Error [2]
Result of a measurement minus a true value of the measurement.
Normal distribution
Calculations are generally based on a hypothesis of a normal or approximately normal distribution of the results. However, when another distribution is known, the appropriate formulas are
used (see further below).
Unless otherwise indicated, one may assume that a normal distribution was used to calculate the
quoted uncertainty [2].
10
Gaussian distribution
(STD= 1% abs. ;U= 2 % abs.)
0.50
0.45
0.35
0.30
0.25
0.20
0.15
Probability
0.40
0.10
0.05
0.00
-4
-2
For a normal distribution, the quoted uncertainty defines an interval having 90, 95 or 99% of
confidence (see further below).
The factors corresponding to the above three levels are 1.64, 1.96 and 2.58, respectively.
This means that the standard uncertainty has to be multiplied by the corresponding factor.
Example
u (95%) = 1,96.s
But as already mentioned we will here use the approximation:
u (about95%) = 2.s
Gaussian distribution
(STD= 1% abs. ;U= 2 % abs.)
1.00
0.95
0.90
0.85
0.80
0.75
0.70
0.65
0.60
0.55
0.50
0.45
0.40
0.35
0.30
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0.00
Probability
function
Probability
(Cumulated)
-6
-4
-2
Probability
11
The uncertainty and the reproducibility are always given with a certain level of confidence. In
general, most of the laboratories are using a level of 95% of confidence (calculated as about two
times the standard deviation). This means that when the uncertainty given is 2%, there is a probability (5%) that the result is outside of the range of uncertainty. On the graph it can be seen that
the cumulated probability of having the result below -2% is 2.5% and the same probability applies for having the result over 2%.
Rectangular distribution [2]
In case it is possible to estimate only bounds (upper and lower limits) of a quantity we have a
rectangular distribution. This can be expressed by:
the probability that the value of the quantity lies between a + (upper limit) and a - (lower limit) is 100%
the probability it lies outside the interval is zero
In case the upper and lower bounds are not symmetric, the standard uncertainty is:
u=
(a a ) 2
12
a2
3
For simplifications sake, we will assume that the distribution is either Gaussian or rectangular. In the example worked out in this report it was seen that for the application to the
uncertainty calculation of boiler efficiency, the hypothesis is acceptable. For information
we also describe below other distribution types.
In the computer program developed we have only considered symmetric rectangular distribution and Gaussian distribution.
By not including the non-symmetric rectangular distributions, the method becomes much
simpler (only one parameter is used to describe a given distribution). As a result, the method becomes a bit less accurate, but the effect seems to be very small.
This choice is justified by the target of having an overall acceptance of the method by the
laboratories doing type testing of boilers. Therefore, we have chosen to have a simplified
method that might be slightly inaccurate, but used; instead of having an accurate, but very
complicated method that will not be used (because of the difficulties in applying the method).
In case it is more realistic to assume that values near the bounds are less likely than those
values near the midpoint, it is then reasonable to use a trapezoidal distribution having equal
sloping sides, a base width of a + - a - = 2a, and a top width of 2 a , where 0<=<=1.
When = 0, it is a triangular distribution. When = 1, it is a rectangular distribution.
12
a2
6
As mentioned above, we will not use such distribution in the method chosen, as it requires the
knowledge of the parameters a and , which are generally not known.
1.4 Application
The guide to the expression of uncertainty in measurement [2] is giving details of how to interpret the different uncertainty sources (in the annex F of the document [2]).
u (resolution) =
(x / 2) 2
(x) 2
= 0,29 . x
3
12
Hysteresis : if the range of possible reading is x , the standard uncertainty equal to:
u (hysteresis) =
(x / 2) 2
(x) 2
= 0,29 . x
3
12
1. Calculation of a single mean correction over a certain range of interest of the influencing
parameter (e.g. 40 to 60C).
b is this mean value obtained by integration of the correction over the range of interest.
2. Calculation of the variance associated with the mean correction b over the range of interest
(this is the uncertainty of using a fixed value instead of the real correction).
T2
1
u 2 (b) =
. (b(T ) b) 2 .dT
T2 T1 T 1
3. Mean variance of the correction. This is the variance due to the actual determination of the
correction.
T2
1
2
u (b(T )) =
. u 2 [b(T )].dT
T2 T1 T 1
13
The correction is in most cases given by the calibration laboratories. So the above variance is
to be given by those.
14
A number of data are required for the calculation of the uncertainty. So far, the way to obtain
those data has not been very well described, which explains a number of differences when looking at results of calculations carried out by laboratories. The interpretation of the requirement on
how to measure a given individual uncertainty may for example lead to such differences.
The target is to give the laboratories a tool they can use in order to calculate their own uncertainty in a way that is comparable with other laboratories.
In the present situation, we cannot be sure that a laboratory claiming 2% accuracy is better than
the one claiming 2.5%. In the future, with the method proposed, this should be possible. As a
result, it will give better possibilities for laboratories for improving their own systems. Not only
will the global value of the accuracy be known, but also the details allowing to identify the weak
points of the system.
Often some of the data needed for estimation of the uncertainty are not known. Until now, those
were often not considered in the calculation (when not known, the error was not considered). In
the frame method proposed here, when the error or uncertainty is not known, a worst-case error
concept will be used.
For that sake, data from different sources are gathered in order to get statistics on the different
uncertainty factors. The worst case would typically be the highest uncertainty found within the
experience known.
The laboratory can set up its own strategy for improving its own accuracy. The less the laboratory knows about its instruments, the more it will be penalised. Taking into account the cost, potential gain in accuracy etc., it will be possible for each laboratory to perform partial or extended
test or investigation on the measurement instruments used.
Following accurately the requirements of the standards [1], [2] would lead to a very long and
difficult process for the estimation of efficiency uncertainty. A more pragmatic route has been
chosen here. When the correction or influence factor is small, it can cause an unacceptable and
unnecessary expense for the laboratory, so we will as far as possible voluntarily ignore the influences or uncertainty sources which, at the end, do not change the final result. This is typically
factors having less than 1% influence on the total uncertainty.
However, there are and there will always be factors that will need to be investigated before one
can conclude they are too small to be taken into account.
15
Independently from the measurement type, the uncertainty sources can be classified as follows:
Measure of physical parameters
1. Error of the calibration
The above uncertainties will be investigated for all instruments used for the measurement of
efficiency. They are explained in detail in Section 5 (see below).
16
17
Time
Chronometers are used, but also time given by the computer or acquisition system.
Temperature
Either Pt (platinum) or TC (thermo-couples) temperature probes are used.
Pressure (not relevant for fuel oil)
U manometer, Bourdon tube or Pressure transducer are used.
4.3 Measurement on WATER
Flow
Electromagnetic meters are mostly used but Coriolis effect meters, Faraday and Inductive effect
meter or turbines are sometimes used as well.
Temperature and temperature difference
Either Pt (platinum) or TC (thermo-couples) temperature probes are used.
4.4 Measurement on AIR
Temperature
Either Pt (platinum) or TC (thermo-couples) temperature probes are used.
Humidity
Psychrometer, capacitive sensors, semi-conductors or cooled mirrors are used.
Pressure
Barometer, capacitive or piezoresistive meters are used. Vibrating cylinder (?) was also mentioned.
4.5 Measurement on FLUE GAS
As the standards are today, the flue gas losses are not used in the calculation of the efficiency,
but this may change in the future and it is, therefore, also taken into consideration here.
Temperature
Either Pt (platinum) or TC (thermo-couples) temperature probes are used.
CO2
Infra red absorption meters are used exclusively.
O2
Paramagnetic meters are used exclusively.
4.6 Test rig
18
determined for the correction of the heat output measured. Those losses are measured by means
of an electric method as for the stand by losses (see next point).
4.7 Measurement of STANDBY LOSSES
Some laboratories measure the standby losses for the calculation of the part load efficiency.
Temperature
Either Pt (platinum) or TC (thermo-couples) temperature probes are used.
Electrical power
Digital wattmeter measuring W, A, V, cos () is used.
Because of the experience gained with instruments by the laboratories, a number of weak points
are already known. In the following we have tried to list by instrument the points that need special attention.
The physical principle used for the instruments is given in ANNEX 3.
19
CALCULATE THEM
For all meters identified in section 4, we have established a list of relevant uncertainty sources and
the basic hypothesis for the calculations. Application to specific meters and details on calculation
with examples are given in Section 6.
We have tried to define procedures that can apply to all measurements and all technologies of
instruments. It is clear that this approach is probably not entirely satisfactory and that future
adaptations will be necessary.
The uncertainty/errors are related in general to the technology used; even identical meters might
not have identical errors. When data on a given instrument are available, it should be made clear
if (and how) they can be used on another instrument of the same technology, trademark, or model.
5.1 Uncertainty due to calibration
The needed values referred to below are in general all comprised in the report (calibration certificate) provided by the organisation in charge of the calibration.
u= s=
Cal 5 The possible error due to the use of a calibration curve. ("error due to the inaccuracy in the
error model").
The calibration curve is either given on the calibration certificate or calculated with the data
from the calibration certificate. A polynomial expression of the reading error is calculated. It is
advisable that the polynomial expression shall have a degree limited to 3 and even 2 if possible.
a) After correction, the meter error is not eliminated totally: because of the accuracy of the
polynomial expression, there is in general a little difference, but it is often possible to find a
polynomial expression which can quite accurately target the experimental deviations given by
the calibration institute. In most of the cases, we expect this factor should be much lower than
the error of the meter.
20
Again here the results might depend on the value measured. In order to make the work easier,
exactly the same approach as above is suggested. Over the range of utilisation the error lies
between one min. and max. value. It is assumed that this is a case of a rectangular distribution
[2], which means that:
the probability that the value of the quantity lies between a + (upper limit) and a - (lower
limit) is 100%.
the probability that it lies outside the interval is zero.
The standard uncertainty in this case is:
u=
(a a ) 2
or u =
12
a2
if we consider a rectangular symmetric distribution.
3
b) If no correction is made, the instrument error remains. In order to make the work easier,
exactly the same approach as above is suggested. Over the range of utilisation the error lies
between one minimum and maximum value. It is assumed that we have a rectangular
distribution [2], which means that:
the probability the value of the quantity lies between a + (upper limit) and a - (lower limit)
is 100%.
the probability it lies outside the interval is zero.
(a a ) 2
or u =
12
a2
if we consider a rectangular symmetric distribution.
3
When not given directly by the calibration institute, the drift between calibrations can easily be
measured by comparing the new obtained calibration curve with the previous one. The data are,
therefore, available from the calibration reports. The drift could be a function of the value to be
measured.
The history of the drift is very important. The more data are available the more precise is the
determination of the drift.
The drift is a systematic error but which is not known in forehand and, therefore, cannot be
corrected.
As a result we have to consider the drift as a random error.
There can be two situations, generally depending on the physical principle of the instrument:
1. There is a trend of decreasing drift after each calibration
2. The drift is random
ANNEX 2 describes how to decide whether or not there is a trend of decreasing drift.
In order to make the calculation easier and simple, it is suggested to consider on the range of
utilisation one single maximum value of the drift. In this way, the sign of the drift will not be
taken into account. The value can be either relative or absolute, depending on the profile of the drift.
21
Taking into account the method proposed, the choice of the value (relative or absolute) which is the
most constant over the range of utilisation will be made.
The standard uncertainty is in this case:
a2
3
with a being the drift as defined in ANNEX 2.
u=
The random drift (within a calibration period) is in general not known. It is supposed to be much
smaller than the calibration drift and can, therefore, be neglected.
5.4 Resolution
The resolution of the meters is to be taken into account in the uncertainty calculation. For example gas meters are generally giving one pulse for each unit of gas volume which went through
the meter. The resolution is, therefore, an absolute value( x ) in l of gas. The absolute standard
uncertainty is:
u (resolution) =
(x / 2) 2
(x) 2
= 0,29 x
3
12
The meters used for the test are used in conditions that are not necessarily identical with the
calibration conditions.
Therefore, the influence of various factors as
ambient temperature and variations in ambient temperature
ambient humidity
water temperature
pressure
voltage
etc.
may influence the meter.
The table given below in this section indicates the potential influences of various parameters on
instruments. Note that this first version of the table will need to be updated in the light of new
experience and new instruments.
In general the influence factors have to be corrected.
a) In case the influence is known
In case the influence is corrected, the remaining uncertainty after correction is considered as 0.
In case the influence is NOT corrected, the uncertainty is calculated using a realistic range of
variation of the parameter considered.
b) In case the influence is NOT known
22
In case the influence is NOT known a worst case should apply; however, the development of this
is not possible in the frame of the present project and such worst case table has to be developed in
the future. It requires a detailed analysis of the instrument behaviour and this work shall
preferably be done in collaboration with the measurement instrument manufacturers.
Various parameters may influence the meters. The influence factors, if any, are to be described in the technical documentation by the meter manufacturer. But sometimes the calibration data can be used to determine the influence of a given parameter, if this influence is
measured during the calibration (e.g. temperature of the water for water flow meters).
In most cases, the influence of the parameter is small and will, therefore, not be corrected. We
are, therefore, in the known case of [2], where the correction from a calibration curve is
not applied.
In most cases, the influence given is linear, e.g. in [l/C] or [l/mbar] etc.
For example, the influence of ambient temperature on a gas flow meter is + 0.01 l/C.
As seen previously, the guideline [2] stipulates the following:
Calculation of a single mean correction over a certain range of interest of the influencing
parameter (e.g. 40 to 60C). b is this mean value obtained by integration of the correction
over the range of interest. In case no correction is applied b = 0.
Calculation of the variance associated with the mean correction b over the range of interest.
This is the uncertainty of using a fixed value (zero in this case) instead of the real correction.
T2
1
2
u (b) =
. (b(T ) b) 2 dT
T2 T1 T 1
In general, the correction is a linear function of the influence parameter.
b(T) - b =A.T + B where A and B are constants.
1
A2 T 3
.[
A B T 2 B 2 T ]TT 12
3
T2 T1
In case B= 0, the uncertainty is obtained with:
u 2 (b) =
A 2 (T2 T1 )
1
.
T2 T1
3
3
u 2 (b) =
T. variat. Water T.
Atm.
Voltage
Pressure
Humidity Other
23
PERTURBATING PARAMETER
Amb. T.
T. variat. Water T.
Atm.
Voltage
Pressure
Humidity Other
C
C/D
D
D
C
C/D
C
C/D
D (6)
D (6)
C? (6)
D
D
D
C/D
B? (6)
B/C (6)
D
D
C/D
B (6)
C/D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
B (6)
GAS
Calorific value/Wobbe index
Chromatog.
D
Calorimetry
C/D
Use of Pure gas
Wobbe meter
Density
Chromatog.
D
Calorimetry
C/D
Use of Pure gas
Densimeter
PAAR, Pyknometer
Gas flow
Vol. Dry
C
Vol. Wet
Mass meter
?
D
Balance
B/C (6)
B (5)D
Gas composition
Gas composition
C
C
A (6)
A (6)
(1) A (6)?
(2) B (6)
B (6)
(1) A
(6)?
B (6)
Eletromagnetic
Faraday Inductive
Coriolis Effect
Turbine
Ultra sound
(=acoustic ?)
C/D
C/D
D
D
(3) C
D
D
C
C
C
B (6)
D
D
D
D
D
(4) D
D
D
C/D
B (6)
C/D
D
D
D
C/D
B (6)
C/D
D
D
D
C/D
B (6)
C/D
D
A (6)
B (6)
B (6)
D
C
C
B (6)
WATER
Flow
Temperature
Pt
TC
Temperature difference
Pt
TC
AIR
Temperature
Pt
TC
Humidity
Psychrometer
Capacit.
Semi- Cond.
A (6)
A (6)
A (6)
B (6)
B (6)
B (6)
Calibration with
air instead of gas
Strong hysterisi
24
PERTURBATING PARAMETER
Amb. T.
T. variat. Water T.
Mirror
Barometer
Capacit.
Piezoresistive
D
A (6)
A (6)
A (6)
A (6)
Atm.
Voltage
Pressure
C
Humidity Other
Pressure
FLUE GAS
D
C
D
D
B (6)
B (6)
See synthesis of
project NOx CO
[8] in ANNEX
STANDBY LOSSES
Electrical power
Digital Wattmeter
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
[a]
5.6 Linearity
The linearity error of a gas or water meter is the possible difference between the calibration
curve and the real value not measured (between calibration measurement point having being
used for establishing the calibration curve). In other words, it is the possible error due to the fact
that the curve might not be exactly adapted, not on the calibration points but in-between.
As the linearity error cannot be measured, it is suggested that the linearity is included in the error
of the instrument (calibration curve).
5.7 Hysteresis
The hysteresis is either given by the manufacturer of the instrument or by the calibration
organisation. The hysteresis is a systematic error, which can be corrected, but it is difficult to
handle simply. Therefore, in the (normally rare) cases where there is a hysteresis error, it is
suggested to consider on the range of utilisation a maximum error x . The standard uncertainty is
equal to
u (hysteresis) =
(x / 2) 2
(x) 2
= 0,29 x
3
12
25
Hysterisis
200
190
180
170
160
150
140
130
120
110
100
0
10
In case the curve is not a typical hysteresis curve as the one above (see example of 6.3 water
flow), it can be concluded that there is no hysteresis or that there is a greater uncertainty source.
In both cases the hysteresis error will be considered as zero.
5.8 Instruments
This includes any error of the instrument given by the manufacturer and not included in the list
of errors already taken into account above.
5.9 Other
When not using an acquisition system, the "human" reading of the counter introduces an error (in
this case, this reading error shall be considered also in relation with the resolution of the meter).
Other aspects from the method and procedure are supposed to have no influence, but sometimes
a specific procedure can lead to an error.
5.11 Hardware
The hardware may introduce an error when the signal from the meter is treated in the acquisition
system.
The uncertainty due to hardware is supposed to have a normal distribution.
A study done by CETIAT (2000) shows that the uncertainty due to the hardware is very small
compared to the uncertainties due to the instruments themselves. Its is generally neglected.
However, the conclusion cannot apply to all cases, as it was also seen that some manufacturers
give rather large figures.
It is always preferable to consider the whole or complete measurement line (from the instrument
to the acquisition system) when it is possible to do so. (Reference CETIAT: NT99206, 99210,
99211).
But it is rather time consuming and complicated to get a fair value for the uncertainty, taking
into account the whole chain after the measurement probe, also taking into account whether the
calibration is performed with or without the probes connected.
26
As it seems that the error is in general less than about 0.1%, the effort of getting a fair value is
not justified, therefore, it is proposed to use a fixed value of 0,1% for the hardware drift (time,
etc.) unless the value of the manufacturer is known.
For the temperature measurement, a value of 0,2C shall apply, unless the real uncertainty/error is given in the technical documentation of the acquisition system. In future, a procedure
shall be developed in the GLP to describe how this error can be checked in practice in order to
be sure it is lower than the value proposed.
The resolution error due to the hardware shall be taken into account separately (see under Resolution). See also additional details in ANNEX 4.
5.12 Representativity of the measurand
What we call representativity is the error that is caused by the fact that what the laboratory
measures is not exactly what is wanted or needed to be measured. This error is linked to the fact
that the meter or probe is not placed in the right place or that the measurement does not occur at
the right time for different reasons. It should also include the possible sampling time influence
on the measurement.
A typical example is the measurement of calorific value of the gas when using gas from the network (the composition of which is subject to variations). Some laboratories carry out the analysis
of gas before the measurement, and the variations of the gas calorific value during the test shall
be estimated. When proceeding to several samplings during the test, the possible variations of
gas in between the analysis points shall be estimated as well.
In general, the representativity can be due either to a mistake of the laboratory (in this case it is
difficult to estimate the effect) or to an error because of simplification in a measurement procedure (in this case the cost in accuracy of the simplification can be estimated). The representativity of the measurand can be the main factor of uncertainty or error. It is also the one the laboratory has the entire responsibility of (compared to instruments where laboratories depend on
instrument manufacturers data, calibration certificates, etc.).
The sampling time effect shall be carefully considered In case of a fluctuation of parameters (do
we have the fluctuation correctly integrated in the measurement?).
But a fluctuation of a parameter can also create some instability. This error is linked with the
repeatability of efficiency (does the fluctuation create an alteration of the efficiency to be measured?).
5.13 Calculation of efficiency
In case corrections are carried out on the efficiency (correction of the influence of ambient conditions according the GLP [4]), an error caused by the fact that a correction is generally not perfect is taken into account. As long as no detailed estimation of this error is made, we will suppose it is 1/3 of the correction.
27
u=
a2
(standard uncertainty)
3
The efficiency measured every 10, 20 or 30 minutes is subject to variations that may be caused
by:
fluctuation of boiler efficiency due to the influence of ambient conditions, gas quality, combustion etc.
dynamic effects on the boiler, measurement probes etc.
The ambient condition effect is already taken into account by the corrections, but in general, the
corrections are only carried out on the final result of efficiency and not on the efficiency measured every 10, 20 or 30 minutes. (In any case, the correction shall apply on a relative long time
period to eliminate possible errors due to the boiler time constant). So in practice, it is not convenient to dissociate the ambient condition effect from the other effects leading to perturbation
in efficiency constancy. Therefore, we suggest to use directly the value of the standard deviation
measured in order to get an overall figure for the efficiency repeatability, knowing that this value
is probably a bit overestimated.
The standard deviation is the value resulting from the application of the stability criteria as described in the GLP [4]:
u= 2s
28
Chromatography
The chromatography technique is generally not used directly by the boiler test operators themselves, but by experts. The use of a chromatograph is more sophisticated than the use of a simple
water meter, the calculation of the accuracy is also much more complicated. In order to facilitate
the calculation we have proposed a number of simplifications so as to make the use of the method possible for non-experts. The method can be discussed and revised in the light of the contribution of chromatograph users/experts. In the following we have proposed the same approach as
for the other errors.
The reference standard for the calculation of U is the ISO 6974-2: 2000 Natural gas - Determination of composition with defined uncertainty by gas chromatography.
Uncertainty due to calibration
The above points (Cal 2 to Cal 5) are, in general, small compared to the calibration of the uncertainty.
29
The drift between calibrations is not a relevant uncertainty when the calibration is carried out before
each analysis.
Random drift
The random drift is supposed to be much smaller than the calibration drift and can, therefore, be
neglected.
Resolution
The resolution is considered to be very small in comparison to other errors. It is not taken into
account.
Influence of various parameters (temperature, humidity, pressure) / Linearity / Hysteresis
The influence factors, if any, are to be described in the technical documentation of the meter
manufacturer. Unless the technical document mentions any, they are considered to be very small
in comparison to other errors and are not taken into account.
Instrument/Repeatability
When no specific data is available, the repeatability of test can be used to determine experimentally
the influence of the instrument errors. When impure gas is used, the overall uncertainty is obtained
by weighting as above (see Calibration).
Other
The stratification in calibration bottles shall be considered, but not so much is known on this
subject at present.
Method and procedure to use the instruments
This is a very important point as this uncertainty might very well be much higher than all the
other together.
In case the calorific value is calculated over the period of test (and used as an average), the following shall be considered:
the variation of the gas quality during the test
the possible delay caused by the gas volume between the analysis and the boiler
For the variation of the gas quality during the test (if laboratories are using natural gas) a specific
protocol needs to be developed (See example of in ANNEX 5).
30
6.1.1.2
WI a U b
CH4 (99,9%)
70% CH4 and 30% 0,6% N2
Drift between calibration
The drift between the calibration is evaluated with two different methods:
1
Control every two weeks using pure methane. A statistical study of these controls, shows
that the worst case corresponds to a variance of 1,6 10 -5
Control every two months by chromatography. This control is done using the distributed
gas. A statistical study of theses controls, shows that the worst case corresponds to a variance of 1,095 10 -5
The value obtained by the calibration gas (CH4) is used in the following calculations.
The WOBBE meter operates continuously. The value of the indication is always taken just before the efficiency measurement starts. The variation of the indication during the testing period is
controlled. We suppose that there is influence of this variation on the efficiency measured since
it is averaged over the testing period.
Random drift
Not relevant.
Resolution
The resolution of the voltmeter is the only error considered during the calibration of the WOBBE
meter with the two reference gases. This resolution is taken equal to 0,1 mV.
u (resolution) =
(x / 2) 2
(x) 2
= 0,29 x
3
12
The value given by the WOBBE meter depends more on the humidity and the pressure of the air
than on the temperature.
31
The pressure of the air and the gas are controlled and maintained constant by regulators. The
accuracy depends then on the sensitivity of the regulators used. The humidity affects directly the
values given because the amount of water present in the air does not undergo (participate) to the
combustion but it absorbs some of the heat generated.
The temperature does not affect the values read because the products of combustion are returned
to the ambient temperature.
Linearity
Not relevant.
Hysteresis
Not relevant.
Instruments
Not relevant.
Other
Not relevant.
Method and procedure to use the instruments
Not relevant.
Hardware
Not relevant.
Uncertainty on corrections
Not relevant.
Representativity of the measurand
H = WOBBE x d 1/2
The uncertainty associated with the calorific value is composed of the uncertainties of the
WOBBE index and the specific gravity.
The uncertainty associated with the specific gravity is given in 6.1.2.9 and lead to
U = 0,50%
32
The uncertainty associated with the WOBBE index takes into account the calibration, the
drift and the resolution. It was calculated in a previous work done at CETIAT [6] and is
equal to 0,42%.
The uncertainty associated with the calorific value is then the combination of the WOBBE index
and the specific gravity.
[U(H)/H]2 = [U(WI)/WI]2 + [U(d1/2)/d]2
or
[U(H)/H]2 = [U(WI)/WI]2 + [U(d)/d]2
The calculated uncertainty is then equal to
U = [(0,5 ) + ( 0,42 ) ]1/2 = 0,54%
6.1.1.3
In case the laboratory uses pure gas the gas shall have a certificate stipulating the tolerance on
the composition.
The laboratory guaranties that the CH4 component is at least equal to the value desired by the
testing laboratory. Some gas companies produce very high quality CH4.
6.1.2 Gas density
As above, chromatography, calorimetry or use of pure gas are used to measure and calculate the
density the gas. Densimeters can be used as well.
The gas specific gravity (density) is measured by introducing on the two sides of a paddle, the
gas and air at relative pressure equal to zero. The ratio of the pressures at the exit with no flow is
equal to the specific gravity of the gas.
d = Pg / Pa
The accuracy of the measurement depends on the adjustment of the zero pressure of the gas. This
adjustment is done at regular intervals and is controlled before each measurement of the specific
gravity.
The pressure of the air and the gas are read on the same inclined manometer.
The uncertainty on the specific gravity depends mainly on:
the drift
the resolution
33
Cal 3 The influence of ambient conditions during the calibration. See Cal 1.
Cal 4 The repeatability of the calibration.
Cal 5 The possible error due to the use of a calibration curve.
The drift is estimated by making regular controls using calibration gases with known properties
or by analysing the gas with a chromatograph. It does not exceed 10-.
The calculation of the uncertainty gives U (drift and calibration) = 0,33%.
Random drift
Not relevant.
Resolution
The resolution when reading the pressure of the air is of a graduation and is due to the possible variation of the zero on the reading scale.
The calculation of the uncertainty gives U = 0,38%.
Influence of various parameters (temperature, humidity and pressure)
The gas density may be affected by the humidity if the air is not dried before the measurement,
which is not the case.
Linearity
Not relevant.
Hysteresis
Not relevant.
Others
Not relevant.
Method and procedure to use the instruments
Not relevant.
Hardware
Not relevant.
Uncertainty on corrections
Not relevant.
Representativity of the measurand
34
The gas flow can be measured either directly (6.1.4) or the volume (number of impulses) (6.1.3)
and time (6.1.5) can be measured. The calibration results in an average volume corresponding to
one impulse.
The flow meter given in the present example is a gas meter ESTER G4/6.
Uncertainty due to calibration
Standard deviation of
the error measured
(%)
98-03
96-11
0,4
0,3
0,2
0,1
0
0
10
12
Flow (m3/h)
During calibration, each point has been measured 6 times and the figure above indicates the standard
deviation of the error obtained (data given by the calibration laboratory). The results are depending
on the flow measured. In order to make the work easier, it is suggested to consider the range of utilisation only (0.5 to 12 m3/h).
The standard uncertainty is in this case:
u= s=
n
1
(Xi - X)2
n - 1 i=1
with n being the number of calibration carried out. The standard uncertainty can be read directly on
the curve above.
The maximum repeatability error is, therefore, about 0.1%. (amplitude 0.2%).
35
98-03
Poly. (98-03)
1,5
Error (%)
1
0,5
0
0
-0,5
10
12
Q m3/h
0.057
0.11
0.51
2.06
4.57
10.48
0.0073
0.0618
0.4327
1.268
1.16
-0.026
Result (%)
-0.37
0.27
0.7
1.14
1.19
-0.04
Error (%)
-0.377
0.2082
0.2673
-0.128
0.03
-0.014
Again the results are depending on the flow measured. In order to make the work easier, exactly the
same approach as above is suggested. Over the range of utilisation only (0.5 to 12 m3/h) the error
lies between 0.27% and -0.13%. It is assumed that this is a case of the a rectangular distribution
[2]:
the probability the value of the quantity lies between a+ (upper limit) and a- (lower limit) is
100%
the probability it lies outside the interval is zero
In this case the standard uncertainty is:
u=
(a a ) 2
= 0.115%
12
Drift (%)
0,2
0,1
0
-0,1
-0,2
Flow (m3/h)
10
12
36
Q m3/h
0.057
0.11
0.51
2.06
4.57
10.48
98-03
-0.37
0.27
0.7
1.14
1.19
-0.04
96-11
-0.43
0.02
0.5
0.99
0.99
0.11
DRIFT (%)
0.06
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.2
-0.15
The figure above shows the example of the calibration drift for the gas meter (ESTER G4/6) over a
period of two years. To make the calculation simple, we suggest that over the range of utilisation
(0.5 to 12 m3/h), the drift lies between -0.2% and 0.2%. It is assumed that we have a rectangular
distribution.
In this case the standard uncertainty is:
a2
u=
= 0.12%
3
As no previous calibration data is available, this value is used directly.
Random drift
The random drift is supposed to be much smaller than the calibration drift and can, therefore, be
neglected.
Resolution
The gas meters are generally giving one pulse for each unit of gas volume that went through the
meter. The resolution is, therefore, an absolute value ( x ) in l of gas. The absolute standard
uncertainty is:
u (resolution) = 0,29 x
In the present example, the resolution of the meter is 1 l. So the absolute standard uncertainty is:
u (resolution) = 0,29 x = 0.29 l
The relative uncertainty is calculated knowing the quantity of gas that went through the meter.
Influence of various parameters (temperature, humidity and pressure)
The gas meters can be influenced by various parameters. The influence factors, if any, are to be
described in the technical documentation of the meter manufacturer.
This example is not based on real data, but is given to illustrate how to treat a possible influence factor.
37
Linearity
The hysteresis is supposed to be very small with all kinds of flow meters considered here. However, for certain types of meter it should be checked that there is no start-stop effect.
Other
There is no other known uncertainty with this meter, so u = 0%, but the following possible and
general problems with gas meters shall be listed:
Errors due to the fact that the calibration is carried out with air and not gas
Start-stop error (e.g. in case there is inertia)
Specific problems when measuring boilers with pilot flame
Absorption of gas in the oil of gas meter
Method and procedure to use the instruments
When not using an acquisition system, the reading of the counter introduces an error (in this
case, this reading error shall be considered also in relation to the resolution of the meter). The
reading error is supposed to have a normal distribution.
Other aspects from method and procedure are supposed to have no influence.
u = 0%
Hardware
In case of gas metering the hardware is supposed to have only very small or no influence.
u = 0%
Uncertainty on corrections
Not relevant.
u = 0%
Representativity of the measurand
In principle, a gas meter is not subject to this error, unless there is a gas leakage after the meter.
u = 0%
6.1.4 Gas flow
For the so-called dry flow meters the influence of the humidity of the gas can be a problem.
The solution of this problem is either to use a gas saturated in humidity (but in practice this is
difficult) or to use a dry gas in bottle (probably the best solution).
For the mass flow meters, the uncertainty due to the density of the gas should also be taken into
account (conversion to volume flow).
38
6.1.5 Time
Time is either measured by the computer used for the acquisition or with a chronometer.
In the first case, we will make the hypothesis that the uncertainty is small in relation to all other
uncertainties and so consider that U(t) = 0.
In the second case, the following examples is given:
Uncertainty due to calibration
The random drift is supposed to be much smaller than the calibration drift and can, therefore, be
neglected.
Resolution
Generally, the chronometer resolution is not a problem (the electronic resolution is in any case
below 0,01s). For manual chronometers the absolute value ( x ) is about 0.5 s. The absolute
standard uncertainty is:
u (resolution) = 0,29 x
In the present example, the resolution of the meter is 0.5s. So the absolute standard uncertainty
is:
No hysteresis.
39
Other
The manual operation starting and stopping a chronometer introduces an error of about 0,25 s.
Hardware
Not relevant.
u = 0%
Representativity of the measurand
Not relevant.
u = 0%
6.1.6 Temperature
Platinum Probes
U (2k) = 0.056C
The certificate of calibration stipulates that the uncertainty includes the reference (Cal 1), the
calibration method and rig (Cal 2), the condition of calibration (Cal 3), but also the repeatability (Cal
4).
For Pt100 probes, a polynomial expression (degree 2) of the temperature is given by the calibration
laboratories (function of the resistance).
When no specific error is given in the calibration report, it is supposed that the uncertainty in
included is the one given above.
40
The calibration curve is to be implemented in the measuring chain (e.g. acquisition system).
However, In case that, instead of the calibration curve, an average polynomial expression is used,
the corresponding uncertainty shall be calculated.
Drift between calibration
The drift between calibration is varying from probe to probe, and the same type of probe can have
very different drift profiles. Sudden and unexplained drift has been seen, as well a slow and regular
drift. Therefore, it is important to keep a good historic of the drift.
The drift may depend on the temperature level and, therefore, it shall be considered in relation to the
temperature level the probe is used for.
Variation [C]
25
50
75
100
Temperature [C]
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
The figure above shows the example of the calibration drift of a DGC Pt100 used for the gas
temperature metering. Over the range of utilisation, the drift is always lower than 0.05C.
The standard uncertainty is in this case:
u=
a2
= 0.0289%
3
Random drift
The random drift is supposed to be much smaller than the calibration drift and can, therefore, be
neglected.
Resolution
41
The influence factors, if any, are to be described in the technical documentation of the meter
manufacturer. For the temperature probes (Pt100) there is no known influence for the time being.
Linearity
The hysteresis is supposed to be very small within the range of utilisation of Pt100 (< 400C in
any case).
Other
The time constant of the probe can introduce an error when there is a sudden change in the gas
temperature. However, this does not occur in principle.
u = 0%
(Time constant of the probes: GdF 1,6 mm To95%= 3 to 4 seconds).
Method and procedure to use the instruments
u = 0%
Hardware
In case of temperature metering the hardware can have a rather important influence. It is suggested to start with:
u = 0.1C (standard uncertainty)
The laboratories shall further discuss this value.
Uncertainty on corrections
Not relevant.
u = 0%
Representativity of the measurand
The measurement of the gas temperature can give a problem in case the environment of the
probe influences the value of the gas temperature measured. This is especially true when the
temperature of the gas is very different from the temperature of ambient air, or if the gas temperature is measured too far away from the gas meter. We suggest to use a "standard value" until
this is clarified.
u = 0.1C
42
6.1.6.2
This information comes from a study done at CETIAT concerning the use of Pt and TC for water
temperature measurements.
It was found that the uncertainty of the thermocouples depends mostly on:
non-homogeneity of the temperature of the water flowing in the pipe (representativity)
calibration of the thermocouple
stability and fluctuations of the temperature
and to a lesser degree on:
non-homogeneity of the thermocouple itself
non-homogeneity of the bath temperature and any external heat (during calibration)
Uncertainty due to calibration
The random drift is supposed to be much smaller than the calibration drift and can, therefore, be
neglected.
Resolution
The resolution of the acquisition system used for resistance measurement is 0,01 mA
U = 0,003C
Influence of various parameters (temperature, humidity and pressure)
43
Stability is determined by a thermocouple installed in the centre of the unsteady state flow during the first 10 seconds of measurements. The uncertainty component related to the stability is
estimated to:
U = 0,45C
Method and procedure to use the instruments
Not relevant.
Hardware
The manufacturer gives the influence of the ambient temperature on the acquisition system.
U = 0,014C (example by CETIAT)
Uncertainty on corrections
Not relevant.
Representativity of the measurand
See 6.1.6.1.
6.1.7 Pressure
U-manometer (e.g. with barometers), Bourdon tube or pressure transducer are used. The absolute
pressure (range 1000 mbar) or the relative pressure (range 20 mbar) can be measured.
6.1.7.1
The uncertainty including the reference material, the resolution and repeatability is 0,1 mbar (k =
2)
Drift between calibration
It is very small.
Random drift
Not relevant.
44
Resolution (reading)
(x / 2) 2
(x) 2
The ambient temperature influences the volume of the liquid in the tube (volumic dilatation coefficient of 0,0007 / K. This is very small. On the Plexiglas of the tube (0,09 mm/m.K: this is 0,1%
for 10 K),
However, the same laboratory (GdF) indicates a correction of 0.7% of full scale per C for
temperature above 25C.
The viscosity of the liquid will influence the response time, but not the measured value.
The uncertainty on the density of the liquid (0,88 kg/l is very small).
Linearity
(x / 2) 2
(x) 2
Instruments
This includes any error of the instrument given by the manufacturer and not already taken into
account.
The manufacturer gives a freedom from bias (See 5.29 of NF X 07 001) of full scale (k = 2).
Repeatability error / fidelity: 0,1 mbar (u = 0,1 . 0,29)
Other
Not relevant.
Uncertainty on corrections
Not relevant.
45
Not relevant.
6.1.7.2
Bourdon tube
No example available.
6.1.7.3
Pressure transducer
The pressure transducer is generally used to measure absolute or relative pressure of the gas. This
means that the range of use is typically about 1000 mbars (100000 Pa)
The pressure transducer given in the example is a JUMO 4 AP 30-010.
The certificate of calibration indicates in a table the calibration uncertainty as a function of the
pressure. The certificate stipulates that the uncertainty (2k) includes the reference (Cal 1), the
calibration method and rig (Cal 2), the condition of calibration (Cal 3), but also the repeatability (Cal
4).
The uncertainty depends very much on the pressure measured:
P ref
(Pa)
(Pa)
(%)
30
32001
42
0.13
64002
51
0.08
96003
52
0.05
128005
51
0.04
160006
47
0.03
However, in the range of use (about 1000 mbar) the uncertainty can be considered as constant for
100.000 Pa.
U (2k) = 52 Pa = 0.05%
46
Pressure (Pa)
180000
160000
140000
120000
100000
80000
60000
40000
20000
0
P ref (Pa)
Poly. (P ref (Pa))
0.0
5.0
10.0
15.0
Ui (V)
(a a ) 2
(standard uncertainty)
12
In the present example we are using the calibration curve and U = 0%.
Drift between calibration
The drift can easily be calculated by comparing the new obtained calibration curve with the previous
one. The data are, therefore, available from the calibration reports. In case of absolute pressure, a
single value of the drift is calculated for about 1000 mbar.
We have no data for the example of the JUMO pressure device, but data from DGC (DRUCK)
suggest that drift in the range of 0.8% is not unrealistic (over 2 years).
The standard uncertainty is in this case:
u=
a2
= 0.46%
3
47
Random drift
The random drift is supposed to be much smaller than the calibration drift and can, therefore, be
neglected.
Resolution
The resolution including the acquisition system is 0.1 mbar. The absolute standard uncertainty
is:
u (resolution) = 0,29 x = 0.029 mbar
The linearity error of pressure transducers is without doubt very small (the calibration curve is
close to being linear). We will, therefore, not consider this error.
Hysteresis
The hysteresis is supposed to be very small with all kind of pressure transducers considered here.
Other
Not relevant.
u = 0%
Representativity of the measurand
The pressure is measured on the gas meter and it is, therefore, in principle no such error.
u = 0%
6.2 Measurement on FUEL OIL
6.2.1 Calorific value
48
Repeatability
(MJ/kg)
Reproducibility
(MJ/kg)
The calorific value is determined using different standards according requirements of repeatability and reproducibility. The following table presents the standards, the method used for the determination of the calorific value and the repeatability and reproducibility of the measurements
required by each standard.
0,05
0,15
0,096-0.1
0,2-0,45
Bomb calorimeter
Bomb calorimeter: gives GHV
0,13
0,2
0,4
0,4
Standard
ASTM D 486890
ASTM D 480995
ASTM D 240-92
NF M 07-030
Method used
The balance used for the weighting of the oil presents the following uncertainties:
U(k=2) = 0,02%
This value takes into account the systematic error, the repeatability, the calibration and the resolution.
The uncertainty of the determination of a mass, M, using a balance consists of the main following components (it appears that according to CETIAT the other sources are very small):
calibration of the masses (references)
calibration of the balance
reading on the balance (resolution)
Component of the uncertainty related to the masses (calibration)
49
We then have:
u 1 M 5
1 10 3
2,5 10 3 kg
2
The balances are set in such a way that systematic error is equal to zero.
The correction is, therefore, equal to zero and the standard uncertainty of this correction is equal
to the experimental standard deviation of the observed values. A maximum value of this standard
uncertainty for all balances is:
s 2 M 110 3 kg
Component related to the reading of the balance
110 3
2 3
2,9 10 4 kg
Remark
When using CETIATs liquid flow meter calibration bench, other specific components, such as
the correction for the evaporation and the component related to the non-symmetrical movement
of the partiteur (the manual system used to start and stop the measuring of the fuel oil weight),
are also considered.
The standard uncertainty of the measurement of the mass M is:
u M u 12 M s 2 M u 2 M
2
3
Uncertainty due to calibration
The drift is estimated by making regular controls and is too small to be taken into account.
Random drift
Not relevant.
Resolution
50
u (resolution) =
(x / 2) 2
(x) 2
= 0.29 x
3
12
The linearity of a balance is also checked. In this example it has a very small influence only.
Hysteresis
(x / 2) 2
(x) 2
= 0,29 x
3
12
Instruments
This includes any error of the instrument given by the manufacturer and not already taken into
account. No other points are to be added in this example.
Other
Not relevant.
Representativity of the measurand
Not relevant.
6.2.3 Time
51
Electromagnetic meters are mostly used, but Coriolis effect meters, Faraday and Inductive effect
meter or turbines are sometimes used as well.
In the following, the general remarks apply for all meters above.
The flow meter given in the example is a water flow meter MASSFLO Mass 2100 (Danfoss). It is a
Coriolis effect meter.
Uncertainty due to calibration
The certificate of calibration stipulates that the relative uncertainty related to the calibration rig at
calibration condition is Cal 1 to 3 (k=2) = 0,09% (2 standard deviation). The report mentions that
the uncertainty includes the reference (Cal 1), the calibration method and rig (Cal 2), the condition
of calibration (Cal 3), but also the repeatability (Cal 4).
Cal 4 The repeatability of the calibration.
The repeatability is included in the global uncertainty of calibration (see above)
Cal 5 The possible error due to the use of a calibration curve.
The calibration data are used to determine the polynomial expression of the flow (here a linear
expression).
Calibration at 40 deg. C
Flow (kg/s)
0.30
0.25
y = 0.018762x - 0.075078
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0.00
10.0
12.0
14.0
16.0
18.0
20.0
I (m A)
The difference between the flow calculated and the flow measured during the calibration is
considered as the error of the meter, for which correction should be made.
52
Calibration at 40 deg. C
error calibration curve
0.02
Flow (kg/s)
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.00
-0.0110.0
12.0
14.0
16.0
18.0
20.0
-0.01
-0.02
I (m A)
The calibration data for a water temperature of 60C shows that the formula is slightly different.
This point is treated further under the influence of various parameters.
The results depend on the flow measured, but in order to make the work easier, it is suggested to
take only the two extreme values of the error, which lies between -0.010 and 0.015%.
It is assumed that it is a case of rectangular distribution [2]:
The standard uncertainty is in this case:
u=
(a a ) 2
= 0.0072%
12
Over the range of utilisation (200 to 1700 kg/h), the drift between calibration of this meter lies
between -1.5 and -3.5 kg/h. (DGC data 1998-1997). There is no clear correlation between the drift
and the flow, so here we express the drift in absolute value as it will give a more realistic
uncertainty at the end. It is assumed that we have a case of rectangular distribution.
The standard uncertainty is:
u=
a2
= 2.02 kg/h
3
Random drift
For all types of water meters, the random drift is supposed to be much smaller than the calibration
drift and can, therefore, be neglected.
Resolution
The water flow meters are generally having a very small resolution. However, in case the resolution is not small, the absolute standard uncertainty is:
u (resolution) = 0,29 x
53
The water flow meters can be influenced by various parameters. The influence factors, if any, are
to be described in the meter manufacturers technical documentation. The calibration reports
might also give some indications. The water temperature is a parameter which might have an
influence on the signal given by the meter. In case the calibration curve of the meter is not taking
into account this effect, an uncertainty shall be calculated as illustrated in the example below
(the effect discussed here is also on mass flow meters and is not the effect linked with water density variation).
The technical documentation of the meter contains no information on the influence of ambient
conditions, but the calibration has been performed at two different water temperature.
Using the calibration curve formula at 40C for another temperature set is leading to a systematic
error.
Example 1, the error is not flow depending and a fixed value of correction is used.
We suppose a correction:
b(T) = 0.13 (T-40)/20.
If the correction of the calibration curve is not applied, but an average correction used instead,
the uncertainty due to this simplification is the following:
Over the water temperature range 40-60, we will use the average correction b = 0.13 10/20 =
0.065 (this is the correction which in principle applies to 50C.)
The variance associated with the mean correction over the range of interest is:
T2
u 2 (b) =
1
(b(T ) b) 2 dT
T2 T1 T1
2
A2 T 3
1
0,13
u (b) =
A B T 2 B 2 T ]TT 12
[
T2 T1 20
3
with
A=1
B = 50
2
Application
u 2 (b) = 0.00141
u (b) =
0.0375
is the uncertainty because we use a fixed value instead of the real water temperature correction.
U = 2.s = 0.084%
54
The error is depending on the flow (e.g. effect of 0.18% for 20 K at 400 kg/h).
Suppose a correction:
b(Q,T) =
A(T) Q+B(T)
with
A(T) =
B(T) =
b(Q,T) =
=
Error (%)
0.200
0.150
y = -1.29E-04x + 2.32E-01
0.100
0.050
0.000
0.0
200.0
400.0
600.0
800.0
1000.0
Flow (kg/h)
Supposing that a unique value of correction is used; over the water temperature range 40-60, the
average correction b = 7.73E-02 will be used (this is the correction at 50C. and 600 kg/h)
The variance associated with the mean correction over the range of interest is:
u 2 (b) =
Q2
T2
1
1
(b(T ) b) 2 dT dQ
Q2 Q1 Q1 T2 T1 T 1
It is obvious that in this case the variance associated with the mean correction will be much more
complicated to calculate than the error itself!
Therefore, in this case it is suggested to proceed with the real correction.
In this case we need to know what is the uncertainty remaining after the correction.
Supposing we use the model of correction above the correction will be given by the expression
b(Q,T) = (C Q+D) (T-40)/20
55
From the previous figure it is clear that the model is not perfect and that the errors at 60C
are as follows:
Error due to the correction model
Error (%)
0,010
0,005
0,000
-0,005
200
400
600
800
1000
-0,010
Flow (kg/h)
So, n case the influence is corrected, the remaining uncertainty after correction (at 60C) is
given by:
a2
(standard uncertainty)
3
a is about 0.008%.
u=
The hysteresis is supposed to be very small with all kinds of flow meters considered here.
56
Error (%)
0,05
0,1
0,15
0,2
0,25
0,00
-0,01
-0,02
-0,03
-0,04
-0,05
-0,06
-0,07
-0,08
-0,09
-0,10
0,3
Up
Up
Down
Flow (kg/s)
In the present example, the calibration has been carried out with increasing flows (Up) and decreasing flow (Down). If there is a hysteresis it is much lower than the repeatability of calibration and can, therefore, not be detected.
Instruments
When not using an acquisition system, the reading of the counter introduces an error (in this
case, this reading error shall be considered also in relation to the resolution of the meter). The
reading error is supposed to have a normal distribution.
Other aspects from the method and procedure are supposed to have no influence.
Hardware
In case of water flow metering the hardware is supposed to have only very small or no influence.
Uncertainty on corrections
Not relevant.
Representativity of the measurand
A water meter is in principle not subject to this error unless there is a water leakage after the
meter. In case of volumetric flow meters, the density of the water shall be calculated with the
water temperature measured as closed as possible of the meter.
6.3.2 Water temperature
57
The temperature measurement has been treated in Section 6.1.4. There are, however, some points
for which 6.1.4 is not directly applicable:
Other
The water temperature probe response time and the sampling time are adding errors [7].
A model has been developed in order to make the calculation of this error possible (U = f (response time, sampling time, load, etc.)). See ANNEX 6.
Probe type
U1: Offset error
U2 Max error 10s sampling
Pt 6 mm
0.05
0.05
Pt 3 mm
0
0.04
TC 1 mm
0
0.03
U (total ) =
2
2
(U 1 ) (U 2 / st)
with
st = sampling time
Representativity of the measurand
The value of the measurement of the water temperature may depend a lot on the location of the
probe and the efficiency of the mixing system aiming at giving a homogenous temperature.
The non-homogeneity of the water temperature at the measurement point may be due to the difference between the water temperature and the pipe wall temperature or when crossing a heat
exchanger. It can reach values up to about 1C and can, therefore, be an important factor in the
uncertainty of the temperature measurement.
A solution would be to improve the homogeneity of the temperature in the pipe. This is done
naturally in the pipe, but the value of the straight length necessary is very high. The ratio
length/diameter shall be above 100. However, mixing device as diaphragms or nozzles (venturis) can be used to reduce this ratio to about 10.
We suggest using a "standard value" until this effect is clarified.
u = 0.05C
If no mixing device is used, the value is u = 0.2C
However, a CETIAT study on TC indicates that the influence of the non-homogeneity of the
water temperature in the duct is found using thermocouples at unsteady state regimes. It is estimated to be:
U = 0,89C
Note that in principle, the influence of the mixing system is higher on the forward temperature
(just after the boiler). The return temperature should in principle be more homogenous as the
58
water has been circulating in the pipes before returning to the boiler. For the sake of simplicity
and also because we do not have elements of information we will not treat the two temperatures
differently.
FROM CETIAT:
In a pipe with a mixing device, the maximum gap between the average temperature and the farthest temperature is 0,05 K. Without mixing, this gap depends
essentially on the design of the system used and it is difficult to give any value.
Also the contact probe-water shall be carefully considered. Between 40 and
80C, the gap observed between the measured values in a "not in direct contact
with water" probe and the temperature measured by a temperature intruding
probe is non-significant or negligible if the system is well adapted and if a well
adapted conducting substance is used.
In some cases, instead of using the two water temperatures in the calculation, only one is used in
combination with the temperature difference. The advantage of such a system is that the global
uncertainty on the heat output of the boiler can be quite low if the laboratory proceeds with a
verification of the temperature difference. This is done by verifying the temperature difference
when having the two probes merged in the same bath.
Pt100 temperature probes are given as an example.
Uncertainty due to calibration
The uncertainty of the verification is given by the standard deviation of the value T1-T2 measured during the verification.
DGC experience give s = 0.004 K or lower
It does NOT include:
Cal 2 The uncertainty due to the verification method and verification rig (e.g. possible influence
of the location of the probe in the oil). Some experiences have been carried out U(2k) is
estimated at 0.05 K or lower
Cal 3 The influence of ambient conditions during the calibration.
This influence is supposed very small.
Drift between calibration/verification
a2
= 0.0115
3
Random drift
The random drift is supposed to be much smaller than the calibration drift and can, therefore, be
neglected.
Resolution
59
The hysteresis is supposed to be very small within the range of utilisation of Pt100 (< 400C in
any case.
Repeatability
The water temperature probe response time and the sampling time are adding errors [7].
A model has been developed in order to make the calculation of this error possible (U = f (response time, sampling time, load, etc.)). See ANNEX 6.
Probe type
U1: Offset error
U2 Max error 10s sampling
Pt 6 mm
0.05
0.05
Pt 3 mm
0
0.04
TC 1 mm
0
0.03
U (total ) =
2
2
(U 1 ) (U 2 / st)
with
st = sampling time
Method and procedure to use the instruments
In case of temperature metering, the hardware can have a rather important influence. When temperature difference is concerned, the error might be lower than the one for the absolute temperature. As the electronics is the same, if there is an influence of e.g. the ambient temperature etc.,
the error will be similar and the effect on dT not seen. However, a number of errors linked to
hardware are random and, therefore, the uncertainty due to hardware is not 0. It is suggested to
start with half of the value proposed for the absolute temperature:
u = 0.05C (standard uncertainty)
60
Uncertainty on corrections
Not relevant.
Representativity of the measurand
As for absolute water temperature, the water temperature difference may depend a lot on the
location of the probe and the efficiency of the mixing system aiming at giving a homogenous
temperature. However, as a number of those error are systematic, the global error is probably
lower.
We suggest to use a "standard value" equal to half of the value used for absolute temperature
until this effect is clarified.
u = 0.05C
6.4 Measurement on AIR
6.4.1 Temperature
Psychrometer, capacitive sensors, semi-conductors or cooled mirrors are used. This is not a very
important measurement as the result is only used for correction in some situations with condensing boilers. As a result it is not treated here.
6.4.3 Pressure
Barometer, capacitive or piezoresistive meters are used. The appliances used are the same as for
gas absolute pressure (see above).
6.5 Measurement on FLUE GAS
As the standards are today, the flue gas losses are not used in the calculation of the efficiency,
but this may change in the future and it is, therefore, also taken into consideration here. (see also
ANNEX 8).
6.5.1 Temperature
61
6.5.3 Oxygen, O2
Some laboratories measure the standby losses for the calculation of the part load efficiency.
6.7.1 Temperature
62
For the water we suggest 0,25 and 0,5C, respectively. The figures given include the uncertainty
of measurement.
The effect of this uncertainty on the losses measured is given by the following expression:
Losses k .(Twater Tair ) n
Where k is a coefficient proportional to the losses and n a coefficient taking into account the
radiative-convective character of those (n= 1.25).
6.7.2 Electrical power
Method
REL.
ABS.
in %
in W
1.000
Repeatability
Calibr curve
0.100
Temperature
Pressure
Humidity
Other
6. Linearity
0.100
0.200
7. Hysterisis
8. Instrument
9. Other
10. Meth. and proc.
11. Hardware
12. Unc. on corrections
13. Representativity
The above confirms CETIAT data mentioning that the relative uncertainty associated with the
wattmeter is about 10-3 (0,1% on reading and 0,1% scale).
63
The pump of the rig has in principle no influence in case the conditions for measuring the test rig
losses are the same as the ones used to measure the boiler losses. However, the water temperature - but especially the water flow - can be rather different and an effect up to 10 W can be expected.
6.7.4 Overall determination of the uncertainty
Below we have developed a simplified method for the determination of the standby losses
measurement. As some factors seem to be determinant, it is not necessary at this stage to carry out a
more detailed analysis.
64
W
%
DATA
225
1.04
DATA
1
%
W
0.25
1.25
50
1.15
2.88
3.06
6.89
DATA
400
175
1.04
4.16
DATA
2
0.5
2.5
50
1.15
5.77
23.09
DATA
W
%
6.89
26.41
15.09
65
UNCERTAINTY CALCULATION
The formulae for the uncertainty variance for full and part load are given in the following tables.
The relative variance of efficiency is given by:
V( )
V( Qin )
V( Qout )
+
2
Qin
Q2out
V ( )
Table 1
FULL LOAD
HEAT EXPRESSION
Gas flow
qv,g Pg Patm TN
Tg TN
PN
Heat Input: Qm
Oil flow
RELATIVE VARIANCES
H iv
qv,ooHim
V (qv , g )
qv2, g
V( q v , o )
q 2v , o
Fuel weight
V( q v , w )
q 2v , w
V( q v , w )
q 2v , w
V( Tg )
V( H iv )
V ( Patm )
2
H 2iv
( Pg Patm ) 2 (Tg TN )
Bo2
o2
o2
o2
H im 2
B2w
2w
2w
(T2 T1 ) 2
C 2p (T2 T1 ) 2
B2w
V(Tw ) V( p w ) V( T) V( H ( T T1 )) V( H (T1 ))
C 2p ( T) 2
2w
2w
T2
2
M W H (T2 ) H (T1 ) L
t
Direct recirculation
( Pg Patm ) 2
V( M f ) V( t ) V( H im )
2
M 2f
t
H im 2
Mt
H im
t
V ( Pg )
C p (T2 T1 )
M W Cp
V( t )
(V(T1 ) V(T2 )
V(M W ) 2
t
M W C p (T2 T1 ) L
M W C p (T2 T1 ) L
MW
M C (T T ) L (V(H 1 ) V(H 2 ))
W p 2
B2L
V( L)
( v(TW ) V(Ta ))
( M W C p (T2 T1 ) L) 2
( M W C p (T2 T1 ) L) 2
Table 2
HEAT EXPRESSION
Vg Pg Patm
Gas flow
t
Heat Input: Qm
PN
Oil flow
Voo H im
t
Fuel weight
Mt
H im
t
RELATIVE VARIANCES
TN
H
Tg TN jv
V( Vg )
Vg2
2 Bo2
t2
o2
o
o2
Vo2
H 2im
V( M f )
V( t ) V( H im )
2
M 2f
t
H im 2
Heat exchang- q
v,w w[H( T 2) - H(T1)]
er primary
circuit
V( q v , w )
q 2v , w
V( q v , w )
q 2v , w
Direct reCirculation
V( Pg )
V(Tg )
V( t )
V( Patm )
V( H iv )
t
( Pg Patm ) 2 Pg Patm ) 2 (Tg TN ) 2
H 2iv
M W H (T 2 ) H (T1 ) L
t
B2w
V(Tw )
B2w
V(Tw )
V( w )
w
V(T1 ) V( T2 )
( T2 T1 )
V( H 1 ) V( H 2 )
C 2p (T2 T1 ) 2
V( w ) V( T) V( H ( T T1 )) V( H (T1 ))
Pw 2
T2
C 2p ( T) 2
C p (T2 T1 )
M WCp
V( t )
M C ( T T ) L V( M W ) t 2 M C ( T T ) L ( V(T1 ) V(T2 ))
W p 2
W p 2
1
1
M C (T T ) L ( V( H 1 ) V( H 2 ))
W p 2
MW
B2L
( M w C p ( T2 T1 ) L)
( v(Tw ) V(Ta ))
V( L)
( M w C p ( T2 T1 ) L)
67
68
REFERENCES
[1]
69
ATMOSPHERIC
PRESSURE
Rel. Abs.
Value measured
998
mbar
Distribution
Distribution
factor
factor (2k)
U (2k)
U (2k)
U (2k)
% of
(%)
total
Method
Normal
1.00
0.0500
0.0000
0.05
0.2 -
Repeatability
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
Calibr curve
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.9238
0.0000
0.92
55.9 -
3. Random drift
0.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
4. Resolution
B'
0.29
0.0000
0.0577
0.01
0.0 -
Temperature
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0116
0.0000
0.01
Pression
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
Humidity
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.5785
0.0000
0.58
Other
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.5785
0.0000
0.58
6. Linearity
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
7. Hysterisis
B'
0.29
0.0029
0.0000
0.00
8. Instrument
Normal
1.00
0.0050
0.0000
0.01
9. Other
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
11. Hardware
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
13. Representativity
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
5. Influence param.
UNCERTAINTY
Rel.
Abs.
1.24 %
12.33 mbar
200
DO NOT FILL IN
Distribution
Distribution
factor
factor (2k)
U (2k)
U (2k)
U (2k)
% of
(%)
total
Method
Normal
1.00
0.2400
0.0000
0.24
1.2 -
Repeatability
Normal
1.00
0.1000
0.0000
0.10
0.2 -
Calibr curve
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.2425
0.0000
0.24
1.2 -
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.2309
0.0000
0.23
1.1 -
3. Random drift
0.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
4. Resolution
B'
0.29
0.0000
0.0006
0.00
0.0 0.0 -
Temperature
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0001
0.00
Pression
Rect. Sym.
0.58
1.1524
0.0000
1.15
Humidity
Rect. Sym.
0.58
1.1524
0.0000
1.15
Other
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
6. Linearity
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.2309
0.0000
0.23
1.1 -
7. Hysterisis
B'
0.29
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
8. Instrument
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
Normal
1.00
0.9980
0.0000
1.00
11. Hardware
Normal
1.00
0.0025
0.0000
0.00
Normal
1.00
0.9980
0.0000
1.00
13. Representativity
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
5. Influence param.
9. Other
Time (*)
UNCERTAINTY
Rel.
2.21 %
Abs.
4.42
GAS PRESSURE
Rel. Abs.
Value measured
1018.07
mbar
Distribution
Distribution
factor
factor (2k)
U (2k)
U (2k)
U (2k)
% of
(%)
total
Method
Normal
1.00
0.0500
0.0000
0.05
0.3 -
Repeatability
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
Calibr curve
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.9238
0.0000
0.92
99.7 -
3. Random drift
0.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
4. Resolution
B'
0.29
0.0000
0.0577
0.01
0.0 -
Temperature
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0113
0.0000
0.01
Pression
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
Humidity
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
Other
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
6. Linearity
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
7. Hysterisis
B'
0.29
0.0028
0.0000
0.00
8. Instrument
Normal
1.00
0.0049
0.0000
0.00
9. Other
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
11. Hardware
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
13. Representativity
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
5. Influence param.
UNCERTAINTY
Rel.
0.93 %
Abs.
9.42 mbar
Gas Temperature
Rel. Abs.
Value measured
22.96
deg. C
Distribution
Distribution
factor
factor (2k)
U (2k)
U (2k)
U (2k)
% of
(%)
total
Method
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0560
0.24
16.4 -
Repeatability
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
Calibr curve
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0577
0.25
17.4 -
3. Random drift
0.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
4. Resolution
B'
0.29
0.0000
0.0058
0.03
0.2 -
Temperature
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
Pression
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
Humidity
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
Other
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
6. Linearity
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
7. Hysterisis
B'
0.29
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
8. Instrument
Normal
1.00
0.0218
0.0000
0.02
9. Other
Normal
1.00
0.0436
0.0000
0.04
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
11. Hardware
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.1000
0.44
52.3 -
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
13. Representativity
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0500
0.22
13.1 -
5. Influence param.
UNCERTAINTY
Rel.
0.60 %
Abs.
0.14 deg. C
235.17 J/kg
Rel. Abs.
Value measured
3000.00
Distribution
Distribution
factor
factor (2k)
U (2k)
U (2k)
U (2k)
% of
(%)
total
20.0 -
Method
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.1000
0.00
Repeatability
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
Calibr curve
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
3. Random drift
0.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
4. Resolution
B'
0.29
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
Temperature
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
Pression
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
Humidity
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
Other
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
6. Linearity
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
7. Hysterisis
B'
0.29
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
8. Instrument
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
9. Other
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.2000
0.01
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
11. Hardware
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
13. Representativity
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
5. Influence param.
UNCERTAINTY
Rel.
0.01 %
Abs.
0.22
80.0 -
T water2
Rel. Abs.
Value measured
80.32
deg. C
Distribution
Distribution
factor
factor (2k)
U (2k)
U (2k)
U (2k)
% of
(%)
total
Method
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0560
0.07
16.4 -
Repeatability
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
Calibr curve
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0577
0.07
17.4 -
3. Random drift
0.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
0.29
0.0000
0.0058
0.01
0.2 -
Temperature
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
Pression
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
Humidity
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
Other
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
6. Linearity
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
7. Hysterisis
B'
0.29
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
8. Instrument
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
9. Other
Normal
1.00
0.0125
0.0000
0.01
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
11. Hardware
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.1000
0.12
52.3 -
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
13. Representativity
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0500
0.06
13.1 -
B'
4. Resolution
5. Influence param.
UNCERTAINTY
Rel.
0.17 %
Abs.
0.14 deg. C
T water1
Rel. Abs.
Value measured
60.4
deg. C
Distribution
Distribution
factor
factor (2k)
U (2k)
U (2k)
U (2k)
% of
(%)
total
Method
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0560
0.09
16.4 -
Repeatability
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
Calibr curve
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0577
0.10
17.4 -
3. Random drift
0.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
0.29
0.0000
0.0058
0.01
0.2 -
Temperature
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
Pression
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
Humidity
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
Other
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
6. Linearity
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
7. Hysterisis
B'
0.29
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
8. Instrument
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
9. Other
Normal
1.00
0.0166
0.0000
0.02
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
11. Hardware
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.1000
0.17
52.3 -
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
13. Representativity
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0500
0.08
13.1 -
B'
4. Resolution
5. Influence param.
UNCERTAINTY
Rel.
0.23 %
Abs.
0.14 deg. C
dT
Rel. Abs.
Value measured
19.92
deg. C
Distribution
Distribution
factor
factor (2k)
U (2k)
U (2k)
U (2k)
% of
(%)
total
Method
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0500
0.25
30.9 -
Repeatability
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0040
0.02
0.2 -
Calibr curve
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0231
0.12
6.6 -
3. Random drift
0.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
0.29
0.0000
0.0058
0.03
0.4 -
Temperature
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
Pression
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
Humidity
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
Other
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
6. Linearity
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
7. Hysterisis
B'
0.29
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
8. Instrument
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
9. Other
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
11. Hardware
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0500
0.25
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
13. Representativity
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0500
0.25
B'
4. Resolution
5. Influence param.
UNCERTAINTY
Rel.
0.45 %
Abs.
0.09 deg. C
WATER FLOW
Rel. Abs.
Value measured
735.76
kg/h
Distribution
Distribution
factor
factor (2k)
U (2k)
U (2k)
U (2k)
% of
(%)
total
Method
Normal
1.00
0.0900
0.0000
0.09
1.7 -
Repeatability
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
Calibr curve
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0173
0.0000
0.02
0.1 -
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
4.0415
0.55
63.2 -
3. Random drift
0.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
4. Resolution
B'
0.29
0.0392
0.0000
0.04
Temperature
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0092
0.0000
0.01
0.0 -
Pression
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
Humidity
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
Other
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
6. Linearity
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
7. Hysterisis
B'
0.29
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
8. Instrument
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
9. Other
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
Normal
1.00
0.2713
0.0000
0.27
11. Hardware
Normal
1.00
0.1356
0.0000
0.14
Normal
1.00
0.2713
0.0000
0.27
13. Representativity
Normal
1.00
0.0004
0.0000
0.00
5. Influence param.
UNCERTAINTY
Rel.
0.69 %
Abs.
5.08 kg/h
WATER
DENSITY
Rel. Abs.
Value measured
983.02
kg/m3
Distribution
Distribution
factor
factor (2k)
U (2k)
U (2k)
U (2k)
% of
(%)
total
Method
Normal
1.00
0.0200
0.0000
0.02
100.0 -
Repeatability
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
Calibr curve
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
3. Random drift
0.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
4. Resolution
B'
0.29
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
Temperature
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
Pression
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
Humidity
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
Other
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
6. Linearity
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
7. Hysterisis
B'
0.29
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
8. Instrument
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
9. Other
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
11. Hardware
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
13. Representativity
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
5. Influence param.
UNCERTAINTY
Rel.
0.02 %
Abs.
0.20 kg/m3
WATER ENTHALPY
Rel. Abs.
Value measured
252676.75
335950.90 J/kg
Distribution
Distribution
factor
factor (2k)
U (2k)
U (2k)
U (2k)
% of
(%)
total
Method
Normal
1.00
0.0700
0.0000
0.07
100.0 -
Repeatability
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
Calibr curve
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
3. Random drift
0.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
4. Resolution
B'
0.29
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
Temperature
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
Pression
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
Humidity
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
Other
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
6. Linearity
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
7. Hysterisis
B'
0.29
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
8. Instrument
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
9. Other
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
11. Hardware
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
13. Representativity
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
5. Influence param.
UNCERTAINTY
Rel.
0.07 %
Abs.
176.87 J/kg
45.00
kg
Distribution
Distribution
factor
factor (2k)
U (2k)
U (2k)
U (2k)
% of
(%)
total
Method
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0025
0.01
0.2 -
Repeatability
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0010
0.00
0.0 -
Calibr curve
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
3. Random drift
0.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.0 -
4. Resolution
B'
0.29
0.0000
0.0002
0.00
0.0 -
Temperature
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
Pression
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
Humidity
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
Other
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
6. Linearity
Rect. Sym.
0.58
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
7. Hysterisis
B'
0.29
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
8. Instrument
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
9. Other
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
11. Hardware
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
13. Representativity
Normal
1.00
0.0000
0.0500
0.11
5. Influence param.
UNCERTAINTY
Rel.
0.11 %
Abs.
0.05 kg
82
Drift
0.6
0.5
Value
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
0
10
12
Calibration Nr
In both cases, we suppose a rectangular distribution (see example in Section 6.1.3 Gas Volume) of
the drift.
(*) A value is obtained during one calibration. The next value is obtained after the calibration carried
out at the "normal" calibration frequency of the meter. (e.g. the drift obtained during 5 calibrations
carried out the same day are NOT valid in this case).
83
Chromatography, calorimeters or use of pure gas are the different ways to measure and calculate
the calorific value (or the WOBBE index of the gas if the specific gravity is known.)
Gravimeters are used to measure the specific gravity of the gas if it is not known.
Principle of Chromatography: (Calorific value and specific gravity)
The gas chromatograph is an instrument, with which all gas mixtures can be analysed. It consists
of a column filled with a stationary phase packing material, through which a steady flow of a
carrier (reference) helium or air gas is passed. A small sample of the gas to be analysed is injected into the carrier gas stream and passed through the column, where the components of the mixture are selectively retarded according to their individual affinities to the stationary phase packing.
Each component will, therefore, escape from the column at its characteristic time. Detectors such
as thermal conductivity sensing elements or a catalytic combustion cell are installed downstream
of the column in the carrier gas stream. The presence of each component is detected as it leaves
the column with the carrier gas.
The composition of the mixture is represented by a chromatogram, which is a strip chart record
of the detector output. The time of appearance of each peak is a characteristic of a particular
component, and each peaks height and area are proportional to the quantity of that component in
the mixture.
New chromatographs use advanced technological innovations. They can be connected to computers and can directly print out the composition of the gas to be analysed.
From the gas composition one can calculate directly the calorific value of the gas and its specific
gravity. The calorific value and the specific gravity of the gas give the WOBBE index.
Calorimetry (Calorific value)
Calorimeters are used to measure the calorific value of the gas. They use water or air to absorb
the heat released by the combustion of the gas.
84
WOBBE meters
The WOBBE meters are air-cooled recording calorimeters.
These instruments are used to measure the calorific value of the gas if the specific gravity is
known (usually measured as well).
A WOBBE METER consists of a small burner supplied by a combustible (the gas to be analysed) and combustion air at constant pressure. Dilution air is used to absorb all the heat of combustion. The heat released by the combustion is equal then to the increase in enthalpy or temperature of the dilution air.
This increase in temperature is represented by an electrical signal, which is proportional to the
volumetric WOBBE INDEX at the normal conditions of pressure and temperature.
A3.2. Specific gravity of the gas
The specific gravity (densit) of the gas is the ratio of its density (masse volumique) under the
observed conditions of temperature and pressure to the density of dry air at the same temperature
and pressure. The pressure is usually around the atmospheric pressure. Different techniques are
used to determine the specific gravity of the gas.
85
admission, respectively, into two separate identical chambers. The difference between the torque
causes a limited movement of the system that is transmitted to a pointer indicating the ratio of
the torque produced by the gas flow to the torque produced by the air flow which are proportional to the specific gravity.
The manufacturers claim 0,5% accuracy.
A3.3 Flow rate measurements
The flow rate of gas and water is measured by different methods based on volume or mass measurements. The main meters and their principles of operation are outlined below.
Turbine meters
These meters use a wheel. The axis of the wheel either coincides with the axis of the flow (axial
turbines) or is perpendicular to the flow axis (tangential turbines). The wheel is made to move by
the action of the fluid flow. The measurement of the spinning speed of the wheel gives the volume flow rate.
Ultra(sonic) sound meters
There are two principles of using sound waves.
Transient time flow meters measuring the difference in an ultrasonic sound wave when flowing
in the direction of the flow and then in the opposite direction of the flow. These meters can be
installed inside or outside the pipe.
DOPPLER effect meters: These meters measure the frequency variation of the ultrasonic sound
wave reflected by the particles or the air bubbles transported by the fluid flow. The meters are
installed on the pipe.
Electromagnetic flow meters
These flow meters use FARADAY induction law stating that a conducting material of length, L,
moving at a velocity, V, in a plane perpendicular to the force lines of a magnetic field of density,
B, will receive an induced voltage e equal to the product ( B L V).
When this is applied to electromagnetic flow meters, the fluid represents the electrical conducting medium with a length equal to the diameter of the sensor. Since the induction is kept constant, the induced voltage will be proportional to the average speed of the flow crossing the sensor.
Volumetric flow rates
The principle of such flow meters is based on filling a very well defined volume of fluid from
the inlet. This volume is then transmitted to the outlet of the flow meter. Many techniques are
used for such flow meters.
paddle ( palettes) flow meters
piston ( piston) flow meters
screw flow meters
geared oval wheels ( roues ovales dentes) meters
bellows ( soufflets) meters
The metering is influenced by pressure fluctuations of the flow. These meters may use roll indicators (indicateurs rouleau), needle indicators or may be equipped with a frequency outlet (impulse) or an electrical current.
Vortex meters
86
A streamlined obstacle installed in the flow produces a vortex with a frequency proportional to
the flow velocity allowing the measurement of the flow rate.
They are installed in the pipe and produce a small pressure drop. They can be used for water, gas
or steam.
T maximum (C)
P maximum (bar)
Liquid usage
Comments and
remarks
Turbine
0,5
500
200
**
**
Volumetric
Electromagnetic
0,5
1
100
100
**
X
**
*
Ultra sound
100
**
DOPPLER effect
100
**
Vortex
CORIOLIS effect
1,5
0,75
150
300
0
150
0
150
0
200
150
200
100
*
*
**
**
Flow meters
Pressure drop
Gas usage
Uncertainties (%)
Impulse signal
Costly- reduced size
87
Indirect or derived from fundamental systems or based on the variation certain properties
of the sensing material under pressure action.
Inclined columns
U-tube manometers allowing an enlargement of the range of pressure measurement (length of the
column). This is very well adapted for low-pressure measurement. The uncertainties vary from
2% to 12% depending on the scale used.
Numerical balance using a piston
The upper tray of the balance is replaced by a piston cylinder assembly that allows the measurement of the force applied by the gas on the surface of the piston and then converted to a pressure.
These balances are used for wide range of pressure measurement due to the multiplying and dividing systems.
The relative uncertainty varies from 2 10-5 to 2 10-4%.
Changing shape systems
The sensible element is a metal changing in shape under the pressure effect.
88
These probes measure the unbalance of the inductance between two inductive coils, caused by
the displacement of a membrane. They are used for low-pressure measurements and the output
signal varies from 4 to 20 mA or from 0 to 5 V.
Piezoelectric probes
These probes are systems based on the variation of the physical properties of the material. The
system uses a crystalline material, which electrically polarise under the effect of the pressure.
The outlet signal is a linear function of the pressure.
Are used for measurement of rapidly changing pressures.
The resistance measurement of the sensible element is performed with a an ohmmeter or measurement bridge. In all cases, the simple connection (use of 2 wires) introduces an error on the
value of the resistance. This is because the resistance of the connection cables is installed in series with sensible element.
In practice, it is preferable to use 3 or 4 wires to get rid of the connection resistance which introduces an error on the measurement.
Platinum (Pt) is mostly used for its following characteristics:
Resistance at 0C
25 Ohm
100 Ohm
1000 Ohm
Sensibility
0,1 Ohm / C
0,4 Ohm / C
4 Ohm / C
89
Thermocouples
Any circuit composed by different electrical conducting metals, and with the presence of temperature differences, gives rise to an electromotive force which depends only on the material and
the temperature distribution in the circuit. Many physical applications are deduced.
PELTIER effect: the connection of two different metals A and B at the same temperature T
generates an electromotive force proportional to the temperature T.
THOMSON effect: The connection of 2 point on the same metal at different temperatures
generates an electromotive force which depends on the metal and the temperatures of the 2
points.
SEEBECK effect: is a combination of PELTIER and THOMSON effects and is the principle
of the thermocouple.
A thermocouple is then an electrical closed circuit composed of two junctions of two different
metals at different temperatures. The hot junction is the measurement junction and the cold junction is the reference junction. The generated electromotive force is measured by a millivoltmeter.
Copper/Constantan
Iron/Constantan
Chromel/Alumel
Platinum/Rhodium
Rhenium/Tungsten.
90
tion is high when the water content of the ambient air is small. The difference between the two
thermometer readings gives an indication about the air humidity.
The wet and dry temperatures are used to determine the relative humidity of the air from 0C to
100C.
The uncertainty is around few percent and depends mainly on the accuracy of the thermometers
used.
Psychrometry is always considered the reference method for humidity determination.
Electrolytic hygrometers
The water vapour in the ambient air is absorbed by a phosphoric anhydride solution where are
placed two electrodes, then separated by electrolysis. The intensity of the electrical current passing in the film depends on the amount of water absorbed in accordance with FARADAY law.
This type of instrument measures the concentration of water vapour in the air in g/cm3 expressed
later as a volumetric ratio.
The uncertainty is in the order of 5% of the value expressed in a concentration form in the
range of 1 to 30 000 ppm volume, equivalent to a dew point temperature of -75C to +25C.
Therefore, this instrument is more adapted to the measurement of low humidity values.
Impedance variation Hygrometers
The electrical properties of several elements vary with the humidity. The change of the electrical
resistance or the capacitance with the humidity is the principle used in this type of instruments.
In the case of a capacitance hygrometer, the probe is a condenser or capacitor sensible to water
content. In case of a resistance hygrometer, the probe is a resistance. In both cases the variation
of the capacitance or the resistance is converted to an indication representing the relative humidity.
The uncertainty of such meters is about 2 to 5% for a dry temperature between 0C and
100C.
Condensing Hygrometers
Condensing Hygrometers measure the dew point temperature of air. It is the temperature at
which water contained in air starts to condense.
91
These meters can operate over a very wide range of temperature 90C to +90C with an uncertainty of
0,2C to 0,5C.
This meter is very sensitive and presents a good reproducibility (0,05C) as given by the manufacturers. This is why it is used for intercomparison between reference laboratories.
A3.7 Measurement on FUEL OIL
Calorific value
An external laboratory (the laboratory performing the test sends a sample of fuel to an external
laboratory) generally provides the calorific value of the fuel oil.
The calorific value is determined by calorimeters as described for the gas.
Density
Only relevant with use of volume flow meters. It is also given by an external laboratory with the
calorific value and the composition of the fuel oil.
Fuel oil flow
Balances are used exclusively for fuel oil. Flow meters are used for the setting up of the test to
find the closest calorific input of the boiler. During the efficiency measurement, the balance is
used. The flow rate is the difference between the amount of fuel oil at the beginning of the test
and the amount of the fuel oil at the end of the test divided by the time measured using a chronometer. The balance is more accurate than the flow meter.
Time
Chronometers are used.
A3.8. Measurements on FLUE GAS
As the standards are today, the flue gas losses are not used in the calculation of the efficiency,
but this may change in the future and it is, therefore, also taken into consideration here.
The main parameters are the composition of the products of combustion and the temperature.
The temperature measurement is done as for the gas or the water as described before.
The products of combustion consist of CO2, O2, H2O, CO, N2, CnHm and NOx. For the purpose of
this project, only CO2 or O2 is used for the calculation of the efficiency by using the losses in the
combustion products.
CO2
Infra red meters are used exclusively for CO2 concentration measurement.
The infra red radiation emitted by a filament heated to a high temperature is divided into two
beams which cross two chambers.
The first chamber is filled with the gas to be analysed and the second one with a reference gas
(N2). At the outlet of these chambers the two beams reach a receiver composed of two other
chambers filled with the gas to be analysed.
If the component is present in the compartment or the chamber, the infra red radiation entering
the detector is attenuated with respect to that coming from the reference chamber or compartment. The equilibrium established in the receiver is then perturbed. This perturbation is recorded
and depends on the concentration of the component to be measured.
O2
Paramagnetic meters are used exclusively for O2 concentration measurement.
92
The principle of paramagnetic meters is based on the fact that a gas installed in a nonhomogeneous magnetic field is subjected to a force which is parallel to the magnetic field and is
the increasing direction of the fields if the gas is paramagnetic. This force is proportional to the
magnetic susceptibility of the gas.
Oxygen has a very high magnetic susceptibility compared to the other gases. The following figures give an indication of the magnetic susceptibility of the common gases.
O2: 100- CO2: -0,27-N2: 0- CO: 0,01- NO: 43- NO2: 28.
93
94
95
Time constant
Time constant
Type
63.2%
90%
Open TC type K
0.2 s
0.3 s
1 mm TC type K
0.5 s
0.6 s
2.6 s
5.0 s
38 s
81 s
As a result of this, temperatures measured during an on/off period are shown in the 2 following
diagrams for measurements with 1 mm + 3 mm probes and 1 mm + 6 mm probes. The results are
compared with TC probes.
FLOW TEMPERATURE FROM LIGHT WALL-HUNG BOILER
Boiler: 11 kW, water flow 320 kg/h, on: 48 s, off: 552 s, output: 0.96 kW
55
50
45
40
35
30
25
50
100
150
200
Time [sec]
250
300
96
Note that the results are measured for about the same conditions (flow a bit different).
As seen from these diagrams the measured temperature rise and the highest temperature are quite
different for measurements with different temperature probes.
FLOW TEMPERATURE FROM LIGHT WALL-HUNG BOILER
Boiler: 11 kW, water flow: 350 kg/h, on: 48 s, off: 552 s, output: 0.96 kW
55
3 mm Pt 100 [C]
1 mm TC type K [C]
50
45
40
35
30
25
650
700
750
800
850
900
Time [sec]
To analyse the stability (from cycle to cycle) of temperature profiles the measurements are normalised in this way:
Temperature measured with 1 mm TC type K just before start of boiler is called 0% (we consider that the TC is the reference: it is the probe which has the smaller time constant)
Corresponding temperatures measured with other probe are not changed in time
In this way the temperature rise and fall can be compared in development from start of boiler
until the next start.
97
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
1mm K,1 [%]
30
20
10
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Time [sec]
98
The comparison is made on a boiler running in on/off mode with an on period of 48 sec. and an
off period of 552 sec. That is close to "worst case" during testing of a boiler (this is about 10%
load; in DK tests are carried out down to 1kW part load, which is 5% load).
The next two diagrams are showing consequence of difference in probe and in sampling frequency.
INFLUENCE FROM SAMPLING FREQUENCY
Effect: 11 kW, water flow: 370 kg/h, on: 48 sec, off: 552 sec
Reference: sampling interval 1 sec with 1mm type K probe
0,5
3mm Pt 100 [C]
1mm TC type K [C]
3mm Pt 100 [C]
1mm TC type K [C]
0,4
0,3
0,2
0,1
0,0
-0,1
-0,2
-0,3
-0,4
-0,5
1
10
Sampling interval for temperature [sec]
100
99
0,4
0,3
0,2
0,1
0,0
-0,1
-0,2
6mm Pt100 [C]
1mm TC type K [C]
6mm Pt100 [C]
1mm TC type K [C]
-0,3
-0,4
-0,5
1
10
100
These diagrams show that sampling interval in this case can be up to 10 sec. without having an
error on mean temperature difference of more than 0.05C. As we cannot be sure this error is
systematic, we can consider it as a maximum uncertainty.
The question is whether we can accept such an error. It is indeed about 0.8% of efficiency for the
30% part load test and is as a result among one of the largest uncertainty sources. Therefore,
special attention shall be given to that point (see below).
The following tables show the values of measurement (for two sets of results with different
flows), as they would be with different sampling intervals.
100
1mm type K
3mm Pt100
1mm type K
3mm Pt100
1s
2,11
2,10
2,36
2,35
2s
2,11
2,09
2,36
2,35
5s
2,10
2,08
2,35
2,34
10 s
2,08
2,06
2,33
2,32
20 s
2,09
2,03
2,34
2,28
30 s
2,12
2,04
2,38
2,28
60 s
2,10
2,07
2,41
2,37
1mm type K
6mm Pt100
1mm type K
6mm Pt100
1s
2.59
2.63
3.09
3.14
2s
2.58
2.63
3.09
3.14
5s
2.57
2.62
3.09
3.14
10 s
2.55
2.59
3.09
3.14
20 s
2.53
2.55
3.11
3.13
30 s
2.56
2.51
3.20
3.13
60 s
2.56
2.45
3.40
3.22
The conclusion of these results is that influence from time constant and different types of temperature probes can be a determining source of error, especially for part load tests. The sampling frequency shall not be too low compared to the on period for the boiler and the response
time of the probe shall not be too large.
The calibration of the temperature probes is important, and especially the systematic difference
between probes for forward and return temperature must be corrected before calculation of mean
temperature difference during a running cycle for the boiler under test.
As a result the following is proposed to amend the GLP document:
The sampling time shall in any case not be lower that 10 s for the part load tests.
The Pt100 6 mm probes are not recommended for the part load tests. It is however allowed using
them, but the uncertainty calculation shall be done in the following way (applicable to any
probe).
There are two different uncertainties linked to the dynamic conditions:
101
Pt 6 mm
0.05
0.05
2
2
(U 1 ) (U 2 / st)
with
st = sampling time
Application:
Sampling ABSOLUTE ERROR ON dT (K)
time (s)
Pt 6 mm
Pt 3 mm TC 1 mm
1
0.050
0.004
0.003
2
0.051
0.008
0.006
3
0.052
0.012
0.009
4
0.054
0.016
0.012
5
0.056
0.020
0.015
6
0.058
0.024
0.018
7
0.061
0.028
0.021
8
0.064
0.032
0.024
9
0.067
0.036
0.027
10
0.071
0.040
0.030
Pt 3 mm
0
0.04
TC 1 mm
0
0.03
102
103
Scope
A number of tests carried out at the laboratory facilities at Danish Gas Technology Centre during
2001 have established the influence of measurement of Air temperature in different positions
around the Test Rig.
Conclusion
At the DGC laboratory there seems to be a relatively stable temperature gradient from floor
(measured 20 cm above floor) to app. 2 m above floor on app. 3C. Placing the Pt100 probes
with 2,5 or 5 m to the ceiling does not affect the temperature gradient.
Placing the Pt100 probes too close to the hot parts of the Test Rig causes some problems. But
placing the Pt100 probes 1,5 m or less above the Test Rig could cause the same problems:
Gradients up to 6C due to warm up-streaming air have been measured.
Air Temperatures - Position 2
200
190
180
170
160
150
140
cm above Floor
130
120
110
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Temperature, C
15 cm from Rig
25 cm from Rig
75 cm from Rig
The figure above shows an example of the results from tests, where the Pt100-probes were
placed 15 cm, 25 cm and 75 cm from the Test Rig.
The results show that the measurement point for temperature significantly influences the measurements carried out and that there is a need for standardisation.
Electricity power measurement
Accupower Gold manufactures the power supply in use; the model is AU 1500-50.
104
105
Work Package 5 of the project above deals with the influence of the NOx, CO, O2, CO2
analyser, and characteristics on measured NOx and CO emissions
Note: Analyses of NOx and CO are not relevant for the issue of this project, but O2 and CO2 are.
A. INTRODUCTION
Objective of the package
The overall objective of the package is to develop a uniform method of error determination so
that a limit for maximum uncertainty can be set for all European countries.
The drift (with time, temperature and pressure), the interferences (of CO2, O2, H2O, NO, NO2,
CO), and the linearity are the main characteristics which have been controlled on the CO, NOx,
O2 and CO2 analysers.
106
sampling;
transfer and treatment;
analysers;
calibration;
measurement;
conversion calculations.
Uncertainty in reproducibility of the sources of emission
The following situations are treated:
Case of systematic errors
The error is not known: it cannot be corrected. The worst case does apply and is treated as a
107
108
The following errors are minimized when having a good homogeneity of the sample.
1.1 Influence of the sampling probe (random error)
Two errors are considered here
a) The sample probe design is according to the standards, but there are errors due to construction
tolerances
b) The sample probe used is not of the same design as given in the standards
The following applies for CO, NO, NO2, O2 and CO2
U
U sample
[%mv]
1.2
Uwc =
2% mv
2.
2.1
[% mv]
[% mv]
=
=
0
abs (Ewc)
[% mv]
0
Eleak
[% mv]
=
=
109
abs(Ewc)
E_wc is the worst case error in [% of fs or mv] per [% or ppm] of interfering component (CO2,
O2, H2O, CO, NO, NO2, SO2, H2)
The worst cases are given in the table of C
The error is known but not corrected
E
E_interi
E_interi is the known error in [% of fs or mv] per [% or ppm] of interfering component (CO2, O2,
H2O, CO, NO, NO2, SO2, H2)
U
Correction
CO22 cal is the content of CO2 in the bottle of calibration gas used for NO2 analyzer.
Example 2 interference on zero: eo = NOx_ z_i_CO2
NO2cor
Reminder: after correction, es and eo have in general an effect leading to larger values (es and eo
< 0)
Remark for CO2-analysis and CO-analysis
110
Valuable reduction of the interference can be achieved, when the manufacturer takes account of
the composition of the flue gas.
3.2
Linearity (systematic)
U fs =
[%fs]
abs (Ewc)
[%fs]
[%mv]
U fs = U z_drift_t
[%fs]
111
= U fs fs / mv4
[%mv]
[%mv]
[% fs/C]
[% mv]
E drift_T
[%mv]
[%mv]
Edrif_T
[%mv]
Edrift _T / RRE
[%mv]
[%mv]
Edrift _T / RRE
[%mv]
Correction
mv cor
112
[% mv/C]
[% mv]
[%mv]
[%mv]
Edri_T
[%mv]
(Edrift_T / RRE)
[%mv]
[%mv]
(Edrift_T / RRE)
[%mv]
Correction
mv cor
mv + E drift_T mv / 100
[% mv/C]
[% mv]
[%mv]
[%mv]
Edri_P
[%mv]
(Edrift_P / RRE)
[%mv]
113
[%mv]
(Edrift_P / RRE)
[%mv]
Correction
mv cor
mv + E drift_P mv / 100
[% mv]
Remarks
For accurate measurement the analyzer can been provided with an automatic pressure compensation
(Rwc = 0,5%mv and ewc = 0);
for NOx-analyzers with low absolute pressure in the reaction chamber pressure effect can be
ignored
Repeatability
E
U repeat
[%mv]
U calib
[%mv]
U repeat_cal
[%fs]
= U fs fs / mv
[%mv]
114
5.
Measurement
5.1 Reproducibility
Ur
[%fs]
= U fs fs / mv
[%mv]
6.
Conversion calculation
The following applies for CO, NO, NO2, O2 and CO2
6.1 Uncertainty on values expressed dry air free (daf)
Does not apply for CO2 and O2.
6.2 Uncertainty on values converted in mg/kWh
Does not apply for CO2 and O2.
7.
Uncertainty in reproducibility of the emission
The following applies for CO, NO, NO2, O2 and CO2
115
F.
LIST OF SYMBOLS
NOx
concentration of NOx in [ppm]
concentration of NO2 in [ppm]
NO2
concentration of CO2 in % CO2
CO2
concentration of CO2 in % H2O
H2O
concentration of O2 in % O2
O2
r
random uncertainty (value)
R
random uncertainty
Re
random uncertainty of the systematic error
Rwc
worst case random uncertainty
e
systematic error (value)
E
systematic error
Ewc
worst case systematic error
mv
measured value
fs
full scale
dT
temperature difference
dp
pressure difference
N
efficiency converter
Tcal
temperature during calibration
Tuse
temperature during use
pcal
pressure during calibration
puse
pressure during use
CO2cal
CO2 concentration in NOx-calibration gas
O2 concentration in NOx-calibration gas
O2cal
H2O concentration in NOx-calibration gas
H2Ocal
U
Uncertainty
116
117
Analyzer
CO2
Principle
IR
Type
UNOR 6N
Maihak
Rosemount
880 IR
Rosemount
Binos 1
Ultramat 22
Value
Unit
Repeatability
[%fs]
Linearity
[%fs]
0.1
0.1
0.3
0.1
0.1
[%mv]
Uncertainty in concentration
of calibration gas
[%fs]
Value
0.2
0.2
[%fs]
unit
0.1
0.3
[%fs/*C]
0.2
[%mv/*C]
0.2
[%mv/mbar]
0.1
Zero interference O2
[%fs/%O2]
Span interference O2
[%mv/%O2]
0.9
[%fs/%H2O]
[%mv/%H2O]
2 10-5
[%fs/ppm CO]
Span interference CO
[%mv/ppm CO]
Zero interference NO
[%fs/ppm NO]
Span interference NO
[%mv/ppm NO]
[%fs/ppm NO2]
[%mv/ppm
NO2]
[%fs/%SO2]
[%mv/%SO2]
Zero interference H2
[%fs/%H2]
Span interference H2
[%mv/%H2]
Convertor efficiency
[%mv/NO2/NO
x]
[%mv/l/h]
118
Analyzer
O2
Principle
EC
PM
Type
Rosemount
Unit
PMA 10
Servomex
oxynos 100
Value
Repeatability
Linearity
[%fs]
0.1
[%fs]
0.003
[%fs]
[%mv]
Uncertainty in concentration
of calibration gas
[%fs]
Value
0.04
0.005
0.67
0.08
0.1
0.1
unit
0.03
[%fs/*C]
0.01
[%mv/*C]
0.1
[%mv/mbar]
0.15
[%fs/%CO2]
2.89
[%mv/%CO2]
0.0
[%fs/%H2O]
0.0
[%mv/%H2O]
Zero interference CO
[%fs/ppm CO]
Span interference CO
[%mv/ppm CO]
Zero interference NO
[%fs/ppm NO]
Span interference NO
[%mv/ppm NO]
[%fs/ppm NO2]
[%mv/ppm NO2]
[%fs/%SO2]
[%mv/%SO2]
Zero interference H2
[%fs/%H2]
Span interference H2
[%mv/%H2]
Data of O2 analyzers
0.17
0.67
[%mv/l/h]
119
Partner:
G2
RU
Analyzer:
O2
O2
O2
O2
O2
O2
Type:
Oxyn.100
servo570A
6G
PMA10
Value
unit
repeatability
0.06
0.08
0.18
0.58
0.17
[%fs]
0.15
0.66
0.00
linearity
[%fs]
0.03
0.10
0.25
0.00
0.02
[%fs]
0.03
0.45
0.10
0.00
0.39
[%mv]
calibration gas
Value
0.25
e
1.80
1.80
[%fs]
e
unit
0.21
[%fs/*C]
-0.09
[%mv/*C]
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
[%mv/mbar]
[%fs/[%CO2] ]
-0.10
[%mv/[%CO2] ]
zero interference O2
[%fs/[%O2] ]
span interference O2
[%mv/[%O2] ]
-0.26
[%fs/[%H2O] ]
0.32
[%mv/[%H2O] ]
zero interference CO
0.00
0.00
[%fs/[ppmCO] ]
span interference CO
0.00
0.00
[%mv/[ppmCO] ]
zero interference NO
0.00
[%fs//ppmNO] ]
span interference NO
0.00
[%mv//ppmNO] ]
0.00
[%fs/[ppmNO2] ]
0.00
[%mv/[ppmNO2] ]
[%fs/[%SO2] ]
[%mv/[%SO2] ]
zero interference H2
[%fs/[%H2] ]
span interference H2
[%mv/[%H2] ]
sample flow
0.05
0.00
0.00
0.49
%mv/ (l/min) ]
120
Partner:
DT
G2
RE
Analyzer:
CO2
CO2
CO2
CO2
CO2
Type:
Uras K
Binos1.2
U22
U 5E-2R
864.00
Value
unit
repeatability
0.74
0.11
0.29
0.14
0.58
[%fs]
linearity
0.63
0.35
2.83
[%fs]
0.28
0.00
[%fs]
0.54
1.35
0.57
[%mv]
calibration gas
1.79
0.80
1.80
1.80
0.85
[%fs]
Value
unit
0.00
[%fs/*C]
-0.06
[%mv/*C]
0.00
-0.01
0.00
[%mv/mbar]
[%fs/[%CO2] ]
[%mv/[%CO2] ]
zero interference O2
0.06
0.00
-0.04
[%fs/[%O2] ]
span interference O2
0.28
-0.03
-0.13
[%mv/[%O2] ]
0.00
-0.12
[%fs/[%H2O] ]
0.00
0.22
[%mv/[%H2O] ]
zero interference CO
0.00
[%fs/[ppmCO] ]
span interference CO
0.00
[%mv/[ppmCO] ]
zero interference NO
0.00
[%fs//ppmNO] ]
span interference NO
0.00
[%mv//ppmNO] ]
0.00
[%fs/[ppmNO2] ]
0.00
[%mv/[ppmNO2] ]
[%fs/[%SO2] ]
[%mv/[%SO2] ]
zero interference H2
[%fs/[%H2] ]
span interference H2
[%mv/[%H2] ]
sample flow
1.38
0.32
0.00
0.19
Error determination of the partners for the infrared based CO2 analyzers
2.94
%mv/ (l/min) ]
121
Analyzer
O2
Principle
Paramagnetic
Source
CR1404
Literature
Protocol
Value
Uwc
Uav
Uwc
Uav
Uwc
Uav
Uwc
Repeatability
0.5
0.2
0.3
0.2
0.6
0.2
0.6
[%fs]
Linearity
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.7
0.3
0.7
[%fs]
0.3
0.3
0.1
0.3
0.2
0.3
[%fs]
6.3
6.3
023
0.5
3.3
6.3
[%mv]
1.0
1.8
1.0
1.8
[%fs]
Uncertainty in concentration of
calibration gas
Final
Value
ewc
eav
ewc
eav
ewc
eav
ewc
unit
0.2
0.2
0.7
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.7
[%fs/*C]
0.4
-0.0
-0.1
-0.1
-0.1
-0.1
-0.1
[%mv/*C]
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.1
[%mv/mbar]
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
[%fs/%CO2]
-0.1
-0.1
-0.1
-0.1
[%mv/%CO2]
-0.3
-0.3
-0.3
-0.3
[%fs/%H2O]
-0.3
-0.3
-0.3
-0.3
[%mv/%H2O]
0.0
0.3
0.0
0.3
[%fs/ppm CO]
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
[%mv/ppm CO]
Zero interference NO
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
[%fs/ppm NO]
Span interference NO
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
[%mv/ppm NO]
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
[%fs/ppm NO2]
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
[%mv/ppm NO2]
Zero interference CO
Span interference CO
[%fs/%SO2]
[%mv/%SO2]
Zero interference H2
[%fs/%H2]
Span interference H2
[%mv/%H2]
0.4
0.7
0.1
0.5
0.3
0.7
[%mv/l/h]
122
Analyzer
CO2
Principle
Infrared
Source
CR1404
Literature
Protocol
Value
Uwc
Uav
Uav
Uwc
Uav
Uwc
Repeatability
0.5
0.4
0.7
0.4
0.7
[%fs]
Linearity
1.7
2.8
1.7
2.8
[%fs]
0.2
0.3
0.2
0.4
0.2
0.4
[%fs]
0.1
0.1
0.8
1.4
0.5
1.4
[%mv]
1.4
1.8
1.4
1.8
[%fs]
Uwc
Uncertainty in concentration of
calibration gas
Final
Value
ewc
eav
ewc
eav
ewc
eav
ewc
unit
0.3
0.2
0.3
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.3
[%fs/*C]
0.4
0.2
0.2
-0.1
-0.1
0.1
0.2
[%mv/*C]
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.2
[%mv/mbar]
Zero interference O2
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.1
[%fs/%O2]
Span interference O2
0.0
0.3
0.0
0.3
[%mv/%O2]
-0.1
-0.1
0.4
0.9
[%fs/%H2O]
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.2
[%mv/%H2O]
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
[%fs/ppm CO]
Span interference CO
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
[%mv/ppm CO]
Zero interference NO
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
[%fs/ppm NO]
Span interference NO
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
[%mv/ppm NO]
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
[%fs/ppm NO2]
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
[%mv/ppm NO2]
0.9
0.9
[%fs/%SO2]
[%mv/%SO2]
Zero interference H2
[%fs/%H2]
Span interference H2
[%mv/%H2]
1.0
3.0
1.0
3.0
[%mv/l/h]