SIENCUN
协创仪表

How to Choose Between Ultrasonic and Electromagnetic Flowmeters

Tech Articles 2026-05-03By SIENCUN
This article compares ultrasonic and electromagnetic flowmeters from working principle, applicable media, accuracy, installation and maintenance, helping engineers make reasonable choices based on conditions such as conductivity, bubbles, pipe diameter, etc. Selection principles based on standards (e.g., GB/T 18604, GB/T 2624) are emphasized, avoiding brand preference.

1. Working Principle Differences

Ultrasonic flowmeters measure flow velocity using the transit time difference or Doppler effect of sound waves in moving fluid, applicable to both conductive and non-conductive liquids. Electromagnetic flowmeters are based on Faraday's law of electromagnetic induction and require liquid conductivity ≥5μS/cm.

2. Applicable Media and Conditions

  • Conductivity: Electromagnetic flowmeters require conductive media; ultrasonic flowmeters have no such limitation.
  • Bubbles or Solids: Doppler ultrasonic flowmeters can measure liquids with bubbles or solid particles, but transit-time method requires clean media; electromagnetic flowmeters are insensitive to bubbles, but solid deposition may affect electrodes.
  • Pipe Diameter Range: Ultrasonic flowmeters (especially clamp-on) suit large diameters (DN25~DN5000), while electromagnetic flowmeters typically cover DN10~DN3000.

3. Accuracy and Stability

Electromagnetic flowmeters typically offer accuracy of 0.2%~0.5% reading, less affected by temperature and pressure; ultrasonic flowmeters have accuracy around 0.5%~1.0% reading, more influenced by fluid state and installation conditions. For custody transfer, electromagnetic flowmeters are more reliable.

4. Installation and Maintenance

  • Ultrasonic flowmeters (clamp-on) require no pipe cutting, easy installation, but need sufficient straight pipe (10D upstream, 5D downstream); electromagnetic flowmeters require pipe cutting but have lower straight pipe requirements (5D upstream, 3D downstream).
  • Electromagnetic electrodes are prone to corrosion and require periodic cleaning; ultrasonic transducer fouling can affect signals.

5. Economic Considerations

For small diameters, electromagnetic flowmeters are more cost-effective; for large diameters, ultrasonic flowmeters (clamp-on) have advantages. Additionally, ultrasonic flowmeters have no pressure loss, offering energy savings.

6. Selection Recommendations

ConditionRecommended Type
Conductive liquid, clean or with few bubblesElectromagnetic flowmeter
Non-conductive liquid (oils, organic solvents)Ultrasonic flowmeter (transit-time)
Large diameter, low pressure loss requirementUltrasonic flowmeter (clamp-on)
High accuracy for custody transferElectromagnetic flowmeter

A municipal water supply company selected SIENCUN ultrasonic flowmeters for a DN1200 raw water pipeline, replacing traditional electromagnetic flowmeters, reducing installation costs and achieving zero pressure loss. It is recommended to calibrate according to GB/T 18604 (ultrasonic) or GB/T 2624 (electromagnetic) based on specific conditions.