It looks like you’re using an ad blocker.
Would you like to support LEO?
Disable your ad blocker for LEO or make a donation.
The dead time between two sensors in a pipe depends on the volume flow rate. In German I would say "Die Sensoren sind nicht direkt nebeneinander, was unweigerlich zu einer volumenstrom-abhängigen Totzeit führt.". In English, can I say "The sensors are not positioned directly next to each other, which inevitably leads to a volume-flow-dependent dead time." ? Or is that "Germanism" and I should rather try to rephrase it (e.g., "...leads to dead times, which depend on the volume flow rate")? At least the word "weather-dependent" exists, doesn't it?
Edit: --- I just realised that I am not sure what "volume flow" (without "rate" ) means.
I think if you say something is XYZ-dependent, people might take that as implying that it is only dependent on XYZ. Which is why it matters whether "volume flow" = "volume flow rate" or "volume flow rate" over a specified distance.
Ich wundere mich über zwei Dinge:
Warum "Totzeit" statt z. B. "Ansprechverzögerung" oder schlicht "Verzögerung" (time lag)?
Die eigentliche Einflussgröße sollte die Flussgeschwindigkeit (und deren Richtung) sein. (Die kann man natürlich sowohl aus Volumenstrom als auch aus dem Massenstrom errechnen.)
To my knowledge, there is both "volume flow" and "volume flow rate", where the later emphasizes the value, i.e., 5 l/h or 10 l/h. So it is definitely more precise to say that the dead time effect depends on the volume flow RATE. But I would also say, that "volume-flow-rate-dependent" is just too much.
So summing up, it is probably better to say "....the dead time effect depends on the volume flow rate" instead of "... volume-flow-dependent dead time".
agree with littlefoot
.. entails a dead time that depends upon the volumetric flow rate
It is sometimes helpful, may I say, to give a complete sentence