Applications of Fluid MechanicsNo Access

Fluid–structure interaction analysis of coriolis mass flowmeter

Tian-Xing Huang

School of Automation, Northwestern Polytechnical University, Chang’an District, Xi’an, P. R. China

E-mail Address: 1249368198@qq.com

Search for more papers by this author

Jian-Xin Ren

School of Automation, Northwestern Polytechnical University, Chang’an District, Xi’an, P. R. China

E-mail Address: renjianxin@nwpu.edu.cn

Corresponding author.

Search for more papers by this author

, and

Pei Zhang

School of Automation, Northwestern Polytechnical University, Chang’an District, Xi’an, P. R. China

E-mail Address: 973606251@qq.com

Search for more papers by this author

https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217979220401190Cited by:1 (Source: Crossref)

This article is part of the issue:

Special Issue — Proceedings of the Eighth International Symposium on Physics of Fluids (ISPF8), 10–13 June, 2019, Xi'an, China

Abstract

Coriolis mass flowmeter (CMF) is widely used in the industrial field. In mass flow measurement, there are many impurities in measured fluids that will adhere to the inner wall of the vibrating tube of CMF. The vibration characteristics of CMF would change due to the structural change, i.e., wall clung state, which will generate the wall clung state fault. In this paper, aiming at the wall clung state fault of CMF, the finite element model of CMF is established based on ANSYS. The velocity distribution of fluid in the vibrating tube of CMF is analyzed, considering the fluid–structure interaction. The location of the wall clung state in a vibrating tube is determined. Then, the fault model is established. The mechanism of the vibration transmission characteristics outwards of CMF caused by the wall clung state is analyzed by harmonic response analysis. Finally, the failure mode of CMF is investigated.

Keywords:

PACS: 02.60.Cb

You currently do not have access to the full text article.
Recommend the journal to your library today!

References

1. T. Yano et al., Artif. Organs 27, 920 (2003). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
2. S. Deparis et al., J. Comput. Phys. 327, 700 (2016). Crossref, Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
3. W. Li, Y. Yang and W. Shi, Trans. Chin. Soc. Agric. Mach. 46, 82 (2015). Google Scholar
4. K. Kan et al., J. Mech. Sci. Technol. 31, 1561 (2017). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
5. X. Zheng, L. Wang and K. Weng, Trans. Chin. Soc. Agric. Eng. 32, 78 (2016). Google Scholar
6. C. B. Lee and J. Z. Wu, Appl. Mech. Rev. 61, 030802 (2008). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
7. C. B. Lee and X. Y. Jiang, Phys. Fluids 31, 111301 (2019). Crossref, Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
8. C. B. Lee and S. Fu, Exp. Fluids 30, 354 (2001). Crossref, Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
9. M. Anklin, W. Drahm and A. Rieder, Flow Meas. Instrum. 17, 317 (2006). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
10. X. Y. Lu et al., Appl. Mech. Mater. 713, 39 (2015). Crossref, Google Scholar
11. B. B. Li, X. M. Liu and Z. Long, J. Vib. Shock 34, 54 (2015). Google Scholar
12. Y. Yu et al., Proc. Eng. 174, 956 (2017). Crossref, Google Scholar