Emerson Exchange 365

hashem ali

Thank you for the detailed information. I investigated pressure based level options based on your application. I considered both Electronic Remote Sensors (ERS™) Systems and traditional capillary based systems. Because of the small tap to tap distance, a tuned-system™ assembly would be recommended. A tuned-system assembly uses a direct mount seal on the high pressure tap at the bottom of the vessel and a seal with capillary up to the top tap. More information on different types of pressure and remote seal seal level systems is available at the link below:

www2.emersonprocess.com/.../00840-1400-4801.pdf

If you stay with the 2” size flange connections, a tuned-system assembly accuracy would be in the range of +/-1 to 2.5 inH2O over the entire temperature range. If you were able to increase the size fo the connection to a 3” flanged connection, the performance over the entire operating range could be 0.6 inH2O. As mentioned previously, performance improves with large diameter remote seals. Below are the complete model numbers I assumed for the 3” connection version.

3051CD2A22A1AS2
1199WLAB4AFFW71DA00
1199MLD57AFFW71DA00

You can use the following product datasheets for more information on those models. Note that the low pressure 1199 system uses 3.5m of capillary which is more length than you need, but it is intentional as the added fill fluid in the longer length of capillary helps to provide better “tuning” of the system for better overall performance.

• 3051 PDS: www2.emersonprocess.com/.../00813-0100-4001.pdf
• 1199 PDS: www2.emersonprocess.com/.../00813-0100-4016.pdf

My focus is on pressure based level solutions, but radar is certainly another viable solution for this application. Radar requires a top-down measurement, so you would need to have a way to access the level from the top of the vessel or would need to add a bridle to the existing 2”flanged connections. Radar directly measures the fluid in the vessel. A radar solution could be very accurate and could have accuracies in the ± 0.2” range or perhaps better. Radar does require more configuration during the installation phase, but we have a software tools are available to make that configuration easy. Ingemar Serneby can add additional details or suggest a radar model for you to consider.

Hope this helps, let me know if anything is unclear.

Nathan

In reply to Nathan Stokes:

In addition to Nathan's thorough reply, I would like to make the following clarifications regarding radar: Guided wave radar are generally very simple to install and even though a bridle generally will make a good fit for a guided wave radar, it will fit top mounted nozzles as well - and in some cases also side mounted nozzles by using a bent probe - if the vessel wall is flat and unobstructed on the inside.
If you forsee obstacles inside the tank in the close proximity to the guided wave radar probe, I would propose a coaxial probe. The coaxial probe is totally insensitive to disturbances in its close proximity as the radar signal is confined within the probe. The coaxial probe is however more sensitive to build-up inside, which may result in disturbing echoes.
My best probe recommendation is the single lead probe as it is extremely resistant against build-up. The single lead probe does however need some clearance around it (typically 10cm clearance to a smooth metallic tank wall and 50cm clearance to disturbing objects).
The configuration of a guided wave radar is, as Natan stated, really easy and is guided step-by-step by the RadarMaster software.
I would propose a 5301 with a single lead probe (if space permit) and a High Temperature / High Pressure process seal that will resist the maximum temperature and pressure in this application (the standard seal cover up to 40bar pressure and 150degC, which is not sufficient according to the figures given in your previous email).

Kind regards/Ingemar