Should I choose electromagnetic or ultrasonic flow meters for urban drainage monitoring?

Full pipe = electromagnetic (±0.5%), partial pipe = radar (non-contact, maintenance-free). Consider fullness, water quality, installation, and maintenance

For urban drainage monitoring, the choice between electromagnetic and ultrasonic flow meters depends on your specific application. For full-pipe pressurized flows (pump station outlets, trunk mains), LGF electromagnetic flow meters deliver ±0.5% accuracy for high-precision metering. For partially filled pipes with sediment and debris, HZ-KSLF Doppler radar flow meters offer non-contact measurement unaffected by water quality.

Key factors: 1) Pipe fullness — full pipe use electromagnetic, partial pipe use radar; 2) Water quality — radar tolerates high sediment better; 3) Installation — electromagnetic requires shutdown, radar allows hot-tap; 4) Maintenance — non-contact radar is maintenance-free.

CSSOC provides complete solutions: LGF electromagnetic (DN10-DN2000) + HZ radar flow meters with EC32/EC60 RTU systems for network-wide monitoring.

Application Selection

Related Questions

How should I select the LGF-PA66 for booster pumping stations and high-rise building zone metering? Which flow meter suits reclaimed water pipelines? Is the LGF-PA66 right for recycled-water duty? LGF-PA66 electromagnetic flow meter vs turbine flow meter: which one should I use for clean water? How should I choose between the 0.2% and 0.5% accuracy versions of the LGF-PA66 electromagnetic flow meter? How to implement lightning and surge protection for field-installed vision-fusion radar level meters?

Related Products

LGF Mag Flowmeter HERO V9 RTU HERO V9-EC32 RTU Doppler Radar Flowmeter
How to reduce per-point deployment cost for DMA (District Metered Area) monitoring? What are the full-scale calibration methods for Ecolor ultrasonic flowmeters and visual fusion radar level meters?