EXPERIMENT NO.

CALIBRATION OF PRESSURE GAUGE

USING DEAD WEIGHT APPARATUS

1. Objective: The objective of this experiment is to produce a calibration curve of a bourdon

gauge.

2. Apparatus/Equipment:
Hydraulics Bench
Bourdon Gauge (see photo)
Dead Weight Calibrator (see photo)

Description of Apparatus:
The Dead Weight Calibrator apparatus comprises a precision round piston and cylinder (see Figure
3.1). Weights can be added to the piston so a number of pressures can be produced within the cylinder.
The cylinder is mounted on a baseboard which is supported on leveling screws and equipped with a spirit
level.

Pressure gauge is a simple device and normally very reliable in service. The basic element of the
gauge is a curved elastic tube, usually brass or stainless steel which changes its geometry when filled
fluid under pressure. This deformation is transmitted by a linkage to the gauge pointer which in turn
indicates the gauge reading.

The gauge to be calibrated is connected to the cylinder of the Dead Weight Apparatus by a flexible
tube. Water is then allowed to enter into the connected system through the inlet of the gauge and let it
 flows into the hose connecting the gauge and the cylinder of the Dead Weight Apparatus. Drain is
provided for water from the cylinder after passing the piston.

3. Theory:
Bourdon gauge is a simple device and normally very reliable in service. The basic element of the
gauge is a curved elastic tube, usually brass or stainless steel which changes its geometry when filled
with fluid under pressure. This deformation is transmitted by a linkage to the gauge pointer.
Pressure (p) is force distributed over a surface, that
is,

F
p=
A
where F = force
A = area

In here the load placed on the piston is the force, F, and the cross-sectional area of the piston that
is in contact with the liquid (water) is the area, A.

4. Procedure

1) The pressure gauge and dead weight apparatus were connected to the water supply of the
hydraulic bench.
2) The pump was turned on to allow water to flow through the gauge and dead weight apparatus. The
gauge reading corresponding to the weight of the piston was noted.
3) Calibration weights were added and the corresponding gauge reading was read.
4) The cylindrical pressure was computed by dividing the total weight (weight of piston + calibration
weight) by the area of the piston.
 5. Results

Mass Diameter Area of Mass of Total Gauge Cylinder Absolute %

of of Piston Piston Weight Mass Reading Pressure, Gauge Gauge
Piston (m) (m2) (kg) (kg) G P Error Error
(kg) Trial 1 (kPa) (kPa)

(kPa)

0.5 0.01767 0.000245 0.0 0.5 20 20.020 0.02 0.099

0.5 0.01767 0.000245 0.5 1.0 40 40.040 0.04 0.099

0.5 0.01767 0.000245 1.0 2.0 75 80.082 5.082 6.346

0.5 0.01767 0.000245 1.0 3.0 115 120.122 5.122 4.264

0.5 0.01767 0.000245 2.0 5.0 190 200.204 10.204 5.097

0.5 0.01767 0.000245 2.0 7.0 270 280.286 10.286 3.670

Sample Computations: 𝐹
Cylinder Pressure (P) = 𝐴
D= Diameter of Piston = 0.01767 m
0.5𝑘𝑔×9.81m/𝑠 2 1𝑘N
= 0.245×10−3
× 1000N
G= Average Gauge Reading1 = 28.5kPa
= 20.02 kPa

𝜋 Absolute Gauge Error = / P-G /

Area of Piston = 4 (𝐷 2 )
=/ 20.02 kPa- 20 kPa /
𝜋
= 4
(0.01767 2 )
= 0.02 kPa
= 0.245 × 10−3 m2

Total mass = Mass of Weight + Mass of Piston / P−G /

% Gauge Error = × 100
𝑃
= 0.0 kg + 0.5kg
= (0.02/20.02) x 100
= 0.5 kg
= 0.099 %
 Graph of Absolute Gauge Error vs Gauge Reading
12

10
Absolute Gauge Error (kPa)

0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
-2
Gauge Reading (kPa)

Graph of Percent Gauge Error vs Gauge Reading

7

5
Percent Gauge Error (%)

0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
-1
Gauge Reading (kPa)
6. Discussion of Results

When applied with a series of weights in intervals of 0.5, 1 and 2 kg, both the gauge pressure
and theoretical pressure increased, and as weights were taken off, also in intervals, both gauge
pressure and theoretical pressure decreased. This is the expected result.
The percent gauge error ranged from 0.099% to 6.346%. These results also show that the
percent error varied widely. This means that the gauge is rather inaccurate, and probably needs
recalibration. However, its inaccuracy varies with respect to the pressure acting on it. The higher the
total weight, the larger the error; the error increased as more weights were added.

The first graph on the previous page plots the average gauge reading against the absolute
gauge error, both in kPa. For the most part, the graph’s slope is positive, denoting direct
proportionality. The second graph plots the average gauge reading against the percent gauge reading
in kPa.

7. Conclusion
The results show a minimal range of error, the maximum value of which is over 6 percent.
This error is due to three factors – temperature, vibration, and pulsation. These effects are due to the
unstable position of the equipment. This may also affect the position of the pointer of the gauge. Air
bubbles were also found inside the tubes which are more compressible than water and thus this may
also affect the gauge reading.
The gauge readings were rather inaccurate when loaded with heavier weights, but became
more accurate as pressure decreased, as can be observed by looking at the graphs on the previous
page. However, a noticeable “jump” occurred in the third set-up this might be due to human error --
wrong reading of the gauge. The positive slope of the graph indicates that the pressure and the error
are directly proportional.
It is also notable that a large reference or absolute gauge error associates with a high percent
error. This is expected, since the percent error is the absolute error divided by the theoretical pressure
of the weights. The absolute error is higher at lower cylindrical pressures, so the generated quotient
would be high; the absolute error is low when heavier weights were loaded, so a small absolute error
divided by a large cylindrical pressure gives a small percentage.

The relative height between the dead-weight calibrator and the gauge is important in the
calibration. This is through analysis of the hydrostatic equation that states that pressure equals specific
weight multiplied by the depth – in other words, pressure is a function of the depth. If the connection
of the gauge to the hose were positioned at a lower altitude than the surface where the water meets
the piston, there is depth relative to the surface of the fluid where pressure is minimum. Pressure
increases as altitude decreases, so the lower the gauge relative to the calibrator, the higher the pressure
reading in the gauge.