FUNDAMENTALS OF ULTRASONIC FLOW METERS
Keven Conrad and Larry Lynnworth
Panametrics, Inc.
7255 Langtry, Houston, TX 77040-6626 and 221 Crescent Street, Waltham, MA 02453-3497
ABSTRACT
Ultrasonic contrapropagation methods have been used
to measure the flow of natural gas since the 1970s, flare
gases since the 1980s, and smokestack gases in cem
(continuous emissions monitoring) since the 1990s. Since
the early 2000s, ultrasonic clamp-on flow measurements,
previously restricted mainly to liquids, were found
effective in measuring in standard steel pipes, the flow
of steam, natural gas and other gases and vapors,
including air, as long as the flow velocity was not so high
as to cause excessive beam drift or excessive turbulence
(in other words, below about Mach 0.1), and provided
the acoustic impedance of the gas was equivalent to air
above about six bar and no important molecular
absorption or scattering mechanisms were present.
Although the flow of gases by ultrasonics has long been
thought to be more difficult to measure than liquids, in
fact the measurement is easier in two important respects.
One is, for the contrapropagation method, the upstream
- downstream time difference is generally much greater
for gases, as a consequence of the much lower sound
speeds in gases compared to liquids. The other
significant factor that becomes important in mass flow
metering (including scfm output) is the existence of
theoretical and/or empirical relationships between
ultrasonic propagation and density, where either of such
relationships is easier to exploit for gases than for liquids.
To provide an idea of the scope of applications
addressable with ultrasonic technology that is
commercially available now or likely to be available in
the near future, this paper starts with an analysis from
the point of view of acoustic impedance; considers
designs as a function of the number of nozzles, from
zero to a dozen; and lists factors conducive to high
accuracy versus factors detrimental to high accuracy,
i.e., conducive to uncertainty.
INTRODUCTION
Ultrasonic contrapropagation methods have been used
to measure the flow of natural gas since the 1970s, flare
gases since the 1980s, and smokestack gases in cem
(continuous emissions monitoring) since the 1990s.
Contrapropagation means sound waves are timed in a
direction with the flow and later or simultaneously, against
the flow. At low Mach number, <<1, the time difference
is directly proportional to the flow velocity VPATH along
the path. Even at Mach 0.1 the time difference is very
nearly proportional to the velocity along the path. In any
event, by timing upstream and downstream, the correct
velocity can be computed along the path.
PAGE 52 2002 PROCEEDINGS
AMERICAN SCHOOL OF GAS MEASUREMENT TECHNOLOGY
Depending on the uncertainty in flow profile, the velocity
along the path or paths can be converted to an area-
averaged velocity VAVG. For a single path it is common to
relate the path and area-averaged velocities by a meter
factor K defined by K = VAVG/VPATH. The actual volumetric
flowrate Q = VAVG × A where A = area of the conduit. This
means Q = KVPATH. In certain multipath flowmeters the
paths and weights assigned to the paths are such that
the resulting integration of individual path measurements
is largely independent of profile details. Of course, as
the flow departs from ideal conditions, even a quadrature
integration method becomes less accurate, but in many
practical situations, accuracies better than 0.5% are
routinely obtained.
Since the early 2000s, ultrasonic clamp-on flow
measurements, previously restricted mainly to liquids,
were found effective in measuring in standard steel pipes,
the flow of steam, natural gas and other gases and
vapors, including air, as long as the flow velocity was
not so high as to cause excessive beam drift or excessive
turbulence (in other words, below about Mach 0.1), and
provided the acoustic impedance of the gas was
equivalent to air above about six bar and no important
molecular absorption or scattering mechanisms were
present. The caveats mean, avoid carbon dioxide; avoid
some or all halogen vapors; and beware of mist or
particulate-laden gases. Another limit: the gas (or steam)
temperature T cannot exceed the T limit of the transducer
or couplant, whichever is lower. [1, 12]
Although the flow of gases by ultrasonics has long been
thought to be more difficult to measure than liquids, in
fact the measurement is easier in two important respects.
One is, for the contrapropagation method, the upstream
- downstream time difference is generally much greater
for gases, as a consequence of the much lower sound
speeds in gases compared to liquids. (Exception:
hydrogen gas; its sound speed at 100˚C ~ speed of sound
in ordinary water.) The other significant factor that
becomes important in mass flow metering (including scfm
output) is the existence of theoretical and/or empirical
relationships between ultrasonic propagation (sound
speed c and/or attenuation coefficient α) and molecular
weight or density, where such relationships may be easier
to exploit for gases than for liquids. Examples supporting
the determination of gas density from ultrasonic
measurements, after T compensation, include: the
amplitude of the received signal in still gas is nearly
proportional to gas pressure; the sound speed c is
inversely proportional to the square root of MW
(molecular weight), and gas density is proportional to
molecular weight times pressure. At high molecular
weight and/or high pressure, these simple (linear)
approximations are inadequate. Virial equations and
supercompressibility provide a remedy.
To provide an idea of the scope of applications
addressable with ultrasonic technology that is
commercially available now or likely to be available in the
near future, this paper starts with a short theoretical section
in which the contrapropagation equations are derived. This
is followed by profile considerations. Then we go to
acoustic impedance. Lastly, we consider designs as a
function of the number of nozzles, from zero to a dozen;
and list factors conducive to high accuracy versus factors
detrimental to high accuracy, i.e., conducive to small or
large uncertainty. There are other “fundamentals” besides
these. However, to keep this paper to reasonable length,
only these topics are treated. The references, particularly
the 2002 paper by Walters et al. [15] deal with aspects
beyond the scope of this paper.
DISCUSSION
Theory
1. Equations for a Contrapropagation Flowmeter
In the contrapropagation method, ultrasonic (or
sometimes audible) waves are transmitted upstream and
downstream. From the transit times t1 and t2 in each
direction, and knowledge of the path and flow profile,
the average flow velocity VA is determined. A rather
simple derivation of the basic flow-sensing equation is
possible if one imagines a fluid of sound speed c flowing
at a uniform velocity V < c in a duct of cross-sectional
area A, interrogated by two point sensors on the axis
and spaced a distance L apart. The transit times in the
upstream and downstream directions, respectively, are
t1 = L/(c – V) and t2 = L/(c + V). (1 & 1a)
The reciprocals of these transit times, when multiplied
by the axial projection of the axial interaction path L, are
L/t1 = c – V and L/t2 = c + V. (2 & 2a)
Accordingly,
∆t
V=
L
2 [ 1
t2 ] [ ]
1 = L
t1 2 t1t2
(3)
and
c=
L
2 [ 1
t2 ] [ ]
1 = L
t1 2
t
t1t2
(4)
The upstream-downstream time difference can be
obtained from Equation (1) as ∆t = 2LV/(c2-V2). This can
be expressed in terms of the Mach number MN=V/c for
MN << 1:
2LV / c2
∆t = = (2LV / c2) (1 + MN2 + MN4 + ...) (5)
1 – MN
At sufficiently small Mach numbers, the following
approximations are valid:
V ≈ c2∆t/2L and ∆t ≈ 2LV/c2 (6 & 6a)
2. Profile Considerations
As is well known [2], flow of any fluid in a pipe is lower
near the wall and higher near the center. Disturbances
upstream or downstream perturb the profile and most
real profiles are not symmetrical about the axis. Gas flow
profiles can be more complicated than simple liquid
profiles for various reasons including: (a) gases are
compressible; (b) at high Mach number, MN 0.3, the
flow itself becomes “compressible flow;” (c) condensate
perturbs the boundary conditions and can materially
affect the duct area A available for gas flow. See Table 2.
Liquids. To deal with complex liquid flow patterns in such
a way that an accurate measure of total flow is obtained
despite the complexity, manufacturers of ultrasonic
flowmeters found that one diameter path did not suffice.
Thus we find a progression from one diameter traverse
in [14] to crossed diameter paths in [13], and quadrature
multipath solutions in [2(b) or 7]. Essentially the same
quadrature multipaths were utilized for high-accuracy
(low-uncertainty) gas flow measurement. Midradius paths
are also used, but unlike the history for liquids, their first
use (1975) by Roger C. Baker appears to be in air [cited
in 7 & 15 ] , later in liquids and most recently, in natural
gas by Jan G. Drenthen and his colleagues. [See 2(b) or
15 for these references].
3. Acoustic Impedance Z
The characteristic acoustic impedance Z = ρc where ρ =
gas density and c = sound speed in the gas. Why is Z
important? Because it determines the fraction of available
ultrasonic energy from the transducer transmitted into
the gas, and vice versa. Figure 1(a) plots gases, liquids
and solids as a function of their ρ and c. As this is a log-
log plot, lines having a slope of –1 are lines of constant
Z. The Z for most solids, say steel, is orders of magnitude
greater than for methane or any other gas at ordinary
conditions of temperature T and pressure P. Solids are
in the >10 megarayl range. Gases are in the 0.1 to 1
kilorayl range. [Plots for gases only are given in Figs.
1(b-d). When c yields average MW (molecular weight) or
density, mass flowrate MF is not far behind.]
Entering a gas on such a chart requires that the gas’
sound speed and density are known. Entries are usually
associated with STP (0˚ C, 760 mm Hg). The locus for
methane, if examined carefully, reveals a slight increase
in c as P increases, as well as the expected nearly
proportionate increase in density ρ as P increases.
2002 PROCEEDINGS PAGE 53
AMERICAN SCHOOL OF GAS MEASUREMENT TECHNOLOGY
 The departure from linearity between density and
pressure is often treated by a supercompressibility factor.
See for example, pages 29-52 in the chapter by Bill
Buzzard in David W. Spitzer’s 2001 book cited in [2].
One of the ways of overcoming some of the large
mismatch in impedances for gases at or near atmospheric
pressure is to build the transducer with a quarterwave
impedance matcher between the solid piezoelectric (of
high Z) and the gas. Figure 2(a) shows a T7 transducer
built this way. To preserve the transducer from unwanted
effects of the “gas,” a Ti, SS or other thin metal layer
surrounds the piezo and matcher, in these designs [8; 8(b)].
Sometimes, as in cem (continuous emissions monitoring),
one transducer is not enough, so arrays are used [Fig. 2(b)].
Fiberacoustic “BWT” bundled waveguides [6] have been
used in many gas applications (up to ~ 500˚C) without
any matcher [Fig. 2 (c), (d)].
This matching idea works if the transducer is “wetted,”
i.e., in contact with the gas as in Figure 2(a). In clamp-on
(Figure 3) the transducer wedge contacts the steel (or
other material), not the gas, so another solution is
necessary to overcome the mismatch. Clamp &
installation details are given in Fig. 3(b-d).
One might say the low Z of a gas is mostly due to its low
density, compared to steel or other elastic solids. We can
also ask, are there special consequences of the low c of a
gas, say methane, compared to steel? One consequence
is, in clamp-on, the angle of the sound beam refracted
into the gas is small, say 5 to 8 deg, according to a
calculation using Snell’s Law of Refraction. This implies,
a V measurement along a path only a few degrees off
normal, is going to be very sensitive to crossflow. If
crossflow is significant, crossed clamp-on paths as shown
in Figure 3(f) may be necessary. A second consequence
of low c and small refracted angle is that paths off the
diameter (as seen in the end view) are not reachable with
today’s technology. This means a clamp-on quadrature
is out of reach. Exception: hybrid [Figure 4(g)].
The “good” news associated with low c is the time
difference ∆t between upstream and downstream
interrogations is larger, typically in the many (tens of)
microseconds range, compared to liquids, where ∆t may
be just a few microsences and must be resolved to 1 ns
or less. On the other hand, the attenuation coefficient in
gases is usually much higher than in liquids, and along
with impedance mismatch, constrains the ultrasonic
frequency to be < 1 MHz for gases, whereas for liquids ƒ
> 1 MHz is common.
How long have we waited for a practical clamp-on
ultrasonic flowmeter for gases to become available
commercially? One answer is thirty-nine years. This
answer is based on (a) the GC868 announcement in [9],
and on (b) the last paragraph in [14]. That 1966 patent is
one of the earliest (perhaps the earliest) clamp-on U.S.
patents for liquid flow, and claims a Japanese priority
date of 1962.
PAGE 54 2002 PROCEEDINGS
AMERICAN SCHOOL OF GAS MEASUREMENT TECHNOLOGY
4. Designs As a Function of the Number of Nozzles
Zero Nozzles. This means clamp-on (Figure 3). For
details see [1 & 9] or www.panametrics.com, PCI or PCI
R&D pages, Ultrasonic Report UR-264. Accuracies
around 2% have been achieved with one path. Crossed
diameters can improve the accuracy, as in [13]. As of
mid-2002, applications were restricted in general to metal
pipes of diameter >3 inches (>75 mm) but less than about
2 ft (600 mm). These are guidelines. At high pressure, if
V is not too high, gas flows in pipes as large as 30 inches
have been measured by clamp-on. Bad pipe, heavy wall,
noisy environment, and/or access limited to one side,
can frustrate the method. Success depends on a number
of factors, including the state of the equipment, e.g., its
software version, as well as pipe and flow conditions.
As has been the practice for liquids since the 1960s and
1970s [11, 13, 14], measurements in ⊥ planes (X in end
view) yield better accuracy than measurements in one
plane only. Unlike liquids [Fig. 3(a), parts (1) & (7)], the
vee path, with both transducers on the same side of the
pipe, is hard to use when the fluid is a gas, because of
too much acoustic crosstalk. Sometimes crosstalk is
called acoustic short circuit noise.
One Nozzle. Insertion probes can go in oblique or
normal. Some ultrasonic solutions use an intrusive
reflector but the transducers themselves are flush to the
ID or recessed by up to a foot (300 mm) or so if the gas
is hot. The advantages of the one-port compared to >1
port are economy and ease of installation. Drawbacks
are accuracy, to the extent the profile is uncertain. The
one-port samples only a small chord segment. If the
reflector is located about 60% of the radius in from the
wall, and to the extent the profile obeys a Nikuradse
power law, then the flow averaged from the wall to that
reflector nearly equals VAVG. However, the length of the
chord segment, in the end view, is only 0.3D where
D = pipe inside diameter. This small sample may be
contrasted with multipath sampling for a 12-nozzle
spoolpiece referred to at the end of this section. One-
ports are shown in [15].
Two Nozzles. Examples from the “flare gas world” are
given in [10 & 15]. The bias 90 arrangement samples a
short chord segment but seems to provide adequate
accuracy. It is probably the most common hot-tap
geometry for flare gas flow measurements.
Twelve Nozzles. Custody transfer spoolpieces shown
in Figure 4(d) use crossed paths (hence four transducers
per plane) in each of three parallel planes (hence 12
transducers total).
Accuracies (by which we mean uncertainties) are 0.5%
or better, 0.3% in some tests. By using transducers
shown in Figure 4(e), tests can be run in air at atmospheric
pressure. Air calibration allows relatively economical
testing under various disturbed-flow conditions such as
upstream elbows, diameter changes, partly open valve,
or their combinations. [3] Quadrature integration (Figure measurement of secondary flow, especially circulation,
4) is intended to suppress the effects of flow profile. The is dealt with in [5].
TABLE 1.
Factors Conducive to High Accuracy Versus Factors Detrimental to
High Accuracy, i.e., Conducive to Uncertainty
High accuracy if: Low accuracy or uncertain results if:
Long straight run, steady flow, single phase Nearby upstream disturbances; intermittently two-
phase or multiphase
Quiet environment, no electrical interference Noisy environment; crosstalk unavoidable
Good pipe (concentric ID & OD), roughness known Rough or scaled pipe, roughness unknown and subject
and not changing to changes over time; gas fouls transducers
Gas is known and does not exhibit molecular Highly attenuative, e.g., carbon dioxide, halogens;
absorption; T & P allow good transmission; P too low or T too high, such that absorption due to
equipment provides adequate reciprocity (signals classical viscosity and thermal conductivity effects
from A → B look like signals B → A) is high
Flow velocity is in a range such that the ∆t falls into V is too low or too high to be accurately and reliably
an easily measured range; no cycle skip; no packet measured by the available sensors and electronics
skip; no ambiguity about arrival time

FIGURE 1. Some basic acoustic ideas and facts for gases. (a) Impedance nomogram for gases, liquids and solids. (b) In
this ρc plot for gases, the c’s range from ~100 to 1300 ms-1, the MW’s from 2 to 240, but γ, the ratio of specific heats, lies
between 1 and 1.67. The effect of gas absolute temperature T is shown on cAr when argon is heated at constant density,
drawn assuming cAr increases in proportion to T1/2. (c) Flare gas: empirical relation between c at 38C˚ and average molecular
weight (MW) for 2 ≤ MW ≤ 58. (d) ①Air density ρ vs temperature T. ② Sound speed c vs T. ➂ ρ vs c.
(P = 760 mm for graphs ①-➂.) Note that even if RH (relative humidity) is not known, between 0˚C and 60˚C, c yields with
small uncertainty. For details see Matson, J., Mariano, C. F., Khrakovsky, O., and Lynnworth, L. C., Ultrasonic Mass
Flowmeters Using Clamp-On or Wetted Transducers Proc of the 5th International Symposium on Fluid Flow Measurement
(April 7-10, 2002) or refer to the website of the authors’ firm, where Ultrasonic Report UR-240 may be posted.
© 2002 Panametrics.

2002 PROCEEDINGS PAGE 55

AMERICAN SCHOOL OF GAS MEASUREMENT TECHNOLOGY
 TABLE 2.
Diameter, midradii, their combination, tomographic and quadrature arrangements.
Complex flow patterns, high-accuracy, motivate multipaths on or off the diameter.

PAGE 56 2002 PROCEEDINGS

AMERICAN SCHOOL OF GAS MEASUREMENT TECHNOLOGY
FIGURE 2. Some transducer fundamentals. (a) T7 “air transducer” for 100-kHz operation has a flange OD = 19 mm and is
internally impedance-matched [8]. (b) Array of sources as used in cem (continuous emissions monitoring) applications
[4]. (c) Left: BWT® bundle waveguide icon represents a fiberacoustic waveguide. Right: Close-up photo of a BWT
transducer. (d) Details of an early BWT transducer from the mid-1990s [6].

2002 PROCEEDINGS PAGE 57

AMERICAN SCHOOL OF GAS MEASUREMENT TECHNOLOGY
 FIGURE 3. (a) Refraction with clamp-on, calculated assuming a refracted angle θ2 of 60˚ for a shear wave in the steel pipe,
depends on sound speed c3 in the fluid. Referring to items (1)-(3) commercial contrapropagation clamp-on flowmeters
available since the early 1990s include the PT868 and 6068 for measuring the flow of liquids. In water, the vee path usually
works, and θ3 is about 25˚ at room temperature. In air, θ3.AIR is only about 6˚ and the transducers usually need to be placed
on opposite sides of the pipe. (5) For liquid clamp-on, the vee path [shown in (1)] tends to cancel crossflow as well as
double the sensitivity to flow compared to a single traverse. For gases, odd numbers of traverses are preferred, to reduce
crosstalk. This means, if crossflow is significant, crossed paths are recommended. The velocities measured along the
legs of the X should be averaged. Best solution: find a long straight run far from disturbances and joints. For gases
[diagrams (4) & (5)] the flowmeter instrument (6) introduced in 2001 is the GC868 (Ao, 1999; Ao, et al. (2002); Lynnworth
2001). Diagram (7), drawn for LOX or LN2, shows the refracted angle θ3 ≈ 16˚, nearly midway between water (25˚) and air
(6˚). (b) Clamp and gas paths, schematic. (c) Clamps and instrument for clamp-on gas flow measurement [1, 12]. (d)
Application on steam.
© 2001 Panametrics.

PAGE 58 2002 PROCEEDINGS

AMERICAN SCHOOL OF GAS MEASUREMENT TECHNOLOGY
FIGURE 4. (a) Example of a solid PanAdapta® precision plug for liquids. This plug is not to be removed when the line is
pressurized as it is a permanent part of the pressure boundary. Its outer surface is prepared to receive a removable
transducer. Frequency range: 0.5 to 5 MHz. (b) Similar to preceding case except the plug for gases consists of a bundle
of thin waveguides welded within a sleeve. The bundle plug can be as short as one inch or as long as several feet (25.4
mm to ~1 m). This sleeved sealed waveguide construction allows the removable piezoelectric transducer assembly to be
separated from the buffer bundle. (c) Schematics show planes of measurement in end view, and the crossed paths in a
three-dimensional SolidWorks rendition. (d) Photos of a spoolpiece manufactured by RMG and corresponding to the
schematics in (c). (e) Example of a T11 transducer. It is Ti-housed, internally quarter-wave matched, and twelve of them
are used in (d). (f) Plugged version of (c). (g) Liquid version of the concept shown in (f).

2002 PROCEEDINGS PAGE 59

AMERICAN SCHOOL OF GAS MEASUREMENT TECHNOLOGY
 FIGURE 5. Plastic pipe, air flow at atmospheric pressure. These measurements, made by our colleague Oleg Khrakovsky,
used ordinary liquid flowmeter clamp-on equipment, which was sufficient because the pipe was plastic, not steel.

Schematic

FIGURE 6. FIGURE 7.
Short, thick-walled N-path spoolpiece whose OD matches Hybrid example: “cow” = clamp-on + wetted
flange raised face dimensions. The “flanged transducer” transducers.
is the T7 air transducer [ 8(c)] shown in Figure 2(a).

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The work reported here includes important contributions
from Shirley Ao, Jim Hill, and their and the authors’
colleagues. The authors acknowledge Panametrics’
permission to reproduce passages, tables and
illustrations from its copyrighted reports including
UR-273 and -274.www. Saul Jacobson, Toan Nguyen,
David Hesketh, Jed Matson, Paul Ceglia and others at
Panametrics and Hans J. Kastner, Andreas Weber and
others at RMG contributed to the equipment in Figure 4(d).
The manuscript was prepared by Lin L. Leeming.

PAGE 60 2002 PROCEEDINGS

AMERICAN SCHOOL OF GAS MEASUREMENT TECHNOLOGY
BIBLIOGRAPHY AND REFERENCES
1. Ao, X., Matson, J., Kucmas, P., Khrakovsky, O., and
Li, X. S., Ultrasonic Clamp-On Flow Measurement
of Natural Gas, Steam and Compressed Air,
Proceedings of the 5th ISFFM (5th International
Symposium, Fluid Flow Measurement) (April 7-10,
2002).
2. Brown, A. E., Ultrasonic Flowmeters, in Spitzer, D.
W. (Editor): Flow Measurement, pp. 415-442, ISA
(1991); (b) Brown, A., and Lynnworth, L., Ultrasonic
Flowmeters, in Spitzer, D. W. (Editor): Flow
Measurement - Practical Guides for Measurement
Control, 2nd Edition, Ch. 20, pp. 517-575, ISA (2001).
3. Hill, J., Weber, A., and Koyama, T., Qualification of
Ultrasonic Flowmeters for Custody Transfer of
Natural Gas Using Atmospheric Air Calibration
Facilities, submitted for Proc. 20th North Sea Flow
Measurement Workshop, St. Andrews, Scotland
(Oct. 22-25, 2002).
4. Jacobson, S. A., Flow Measurement System
Including Ultrasonic Transducers, U. S. Patent
5,460,047 (October 24, 1995).
5. Johari, H., and Durgin, W. W., Direct Measurement
of Circulation Using Ultrasound, Experiments in
Fluids 25 pp. 445-454 (September 1998). (Later and
earlier related references are in [15].)
6. Liu, Y., Lynnworth, L. C. and Zimmerman, M. A.,
Buffer Waveguides for Flow Measurement in Hot
Fluids, Ultrasonics, 36 (1-5) pp. 305-315 (February
1998); (b) Liu, Y., and Lynnworth, L.C., U. S. Patent
5,962,790 (October 5, 1999); (c) CIP (continuation-
in-part) U. S. Patent 6,343,511 (February 5, 2002).
7. Lynnworth, L. C., Ultrasonic Flowmeters, Chap. 5,
in Physical Acoustics - Principles and Methods,
Mason, W. P., and Thurston, R. N., (Eds.), 14 pp.
407-525, Academic Press (1979); (b) Ultrasonic
Measurements for Process Control Theory,
Techniques, Applications, Academic Press (1989);
(c) with Magori, V., Industrial Process Control Sensors
and Systems, Chapter 4, pp. 275-470 in: Papadakis,
E. P., (Guest Editor), Ultrasonic Instruments and
Devices: Reference for Modern Instrumentation,
Techniques, and Technology, 23 in the series Physical
Acoustics, Academic Press (1999).
©2002 Panametrics. All rights reserved. Version May 2, 2002
8. Lynnworth, L. C., Patch, D. R. and Mellish, W. C.,
Impedance-Matched Metallurgically Sealed
Transducers, IEEE Transactions on Sonics and
Ultrasonics, SU-31 (2) pp. 101-104 (March 1984);
(b) Lynnworth, L. C., Fowler, K. A. and Patch, D. R.,
Sealed, Matched Piezoelectric Transducer, U. S.
Patent 4,297,607 (Oct. 27, 1981); (c) LCL, Ultrasonic
Transducer System with Crosstalk Isolation, U. S.
Patent 5,515,733 (May 14, 1996).
9. Scelzo, M., A Clamp-on Ultrasonic Flowmeter for
Gases, Flow Control 7 (9) pp. 34-37 (Sept. 2001).
10. Smalling, J. W., Braswell, L. D., Lynnworth, L. C. and
Wallace, D. R., Flare Gas Ultrasonic Flow Meter,
Proceedings 39th Texas A&M Annual Symposium on
Instrumentation for the Process Industries, pp. 27-
38 (January 17-20, 1984); (b) Smalling, J. W.,
Braswell, L. D. and Lynnworth, L. C., Apparatus and
Methods for Measuring Fluid Flow Parameters, U.
S. Patent 4,596,133 (June 24, 1986); (c) U. S. Patent
4,754,650 (July 5, 1988); (d) U. S. Patent 4,856,321
(August 15, 1989).
11. Suzuki, H., Nakabori, H., and Yamamoto, M.,
“Ultrasonic Method of Flow Measurement in Large
Conduits and Open Channels,” p. 11538 in C. G.
Clayton (Ed.), Modern Developments in Flow
Measurement, Peregrinus, London (1972).
12. Ting, V. C. and Ao, X., Evaluation of Clamp-On
Ultrasonic Gas Flowmeters for Natural Gas
Applications, Proc. 20th North Sea Flow
Measurement Workshop, St. Andrews, Scotland
(Oct. 22-25, 2002).
13. Yamamoto, M. and Amano, A., Ultrasonic Flow
Quantity Measuring System, U. S. Patent 3,555,899
(Jan. 19, 1971).
14. Yamamoto, M., and Ito, K., Ultrasonic Flowmeter
System, U. S. Patent 3,237,453 (March 1, 1966).
15. Walters, J., Smalling, J. W., Ao, S., Hill, J. and
Lynnworth, L. C., Transit-time Ultrasonic Flowmeters
for Gases, presented at and published in the Proc.
41st Annual CGA (Canadian Gas Association) Gas
Measurement School, Grand Okanagan, Kelowna
BC, Canada (June 4-6, 2002). See also,
UR-274.www, a Panametrics website version of this
paper.
2002 PROCEEDINGS PAGE 61
AMERICAN SCHOOL OF GAS MEASUREMENT TECHNOLOGY