Quote:
Originally Posted by Botnst
Apparently you don’t like off-the-shelf instrumentation. Ok.
If you have depth, regardless of the shape is the container, you have pressure at any depth. A simple sightglass attached by hollow tube at top and bottom gets you close to instantaneous depth, depending on velocity, tube pore diameter and tube length. Easily accounted for. Get velocity approximation by angle of bed of channel also need roughness, which is where Manning’s comes in.
Can’t use a sightglass, either?
A flow problem that doesn’t allow existing instruments or a sightglass is a stupid customer or a schoolhouse exercise. If the latter, good luck with that. If the former — that’s a hell of a problem!
|
I'll put it this way. I used to work in RF Filter design. The RF engineers I worked with did much of their design using simple calculations and experience as the closest RF modeling software would take hours to estimate the problem. My current field of design doesn't have any software to model what we're doing, it just doesn't exist yet.
So, I'm trying to get a specific piece of data from a specific part of the system which I'm adapting for a new design. To tell me that my problem is either the result of a "stupid customer" or a "schoolhouse exercise" is pretty pedantic.