PTS Flowbench Forum

1960FL wrote:

Yep, change of plans...

So Chad you now have an FP1 for sale?

Looking forward to more numbers and do you think you could get a water reading on the depression side as well?

Rick

No, I'll never sell my FP1. I have 7 years of data with it and I feel that is how you build a data base.

I'll get the reading if you explain to me how to do it!

Chad,

Just kidding about hte FP1 some competative humor

What I am trying to get to is; Is your depression monometer (Oil based) reading the same as water or is it reading low? As to my prior post if you look at the linearity it looks like the depression is off on one of the monometers by about 5% thus one is reading 26.6 and the other 28 +/-. Just take your readings from SF and multiply by 1.05??? they get very close

Your first calibration is 346.3 so 346.3 * 1.05 = 363.6 your PTS read this plate at 356.3 and your SF with electronics read it at 359.9 & 360.7 all less than 1.25% error. I would say it could be the PTS DM depression Calibration but your FP1 reads the same.

SOOOO what I am saying here is, if it all makes sense and this is a feeling not fact yet, is that the depression monometer is either reading low or the bench is leaking in the incline tube pickup on the motor side which is throwing off the readings this could also be why the numbers move kind of funny.

Rick

I just got a LS3 head from Darin at Reher Morrison and flowed it on a 4.060 on both benches. I used my electronics on the SF, and read the manometers. The manometers are in the weeds!

PTS and SF calibrated with 245cfm and 356cfm plates. PTS and SF tests were done on the same sized orifice, 3.059.

Personally, the factor on the bench is WRONG!


LIFT RM///PTS///SFwEL///Man
.200 147//145//143//133
.300 216//220//217//207
.400 281//281//281//260
.500 321//325//323//315
.600 346//349//347//338
.700 355//355//354//345
.800 366//367//363//352

Riddle me this! I'm having a hard time getting this.

SF on the 3.059 #5 hole.
PTS 2.054 plate that reads 441.0 on my PTS bench
PTS 2.054 plate on the SF reads 441.9 with a .600 dc

The manometer reads 97.4% of 442.2 = 430.7 cfm

PS. If anything the manometer is .02 off. 28" on the FP shows 27.8 on manometer.

OK Guys...

Got the blue gauge oil and did it exactly like the manual says. Small hole flowed 22% and both holes on #4 flowed 240cfm.

Chad just double checking what is going on here, here is a link to the SF doc that say's incline gets Blue oil (Not Violet) and Depression gets Red oil

http://www.superflow.com/support/brochu ... _parts.pdf

Not sure on your bench but thought i would post and ask as SF may have changed based on posts from Speed talk.

BTW McMaster now this could mess you up if the wrong or mixed of blue is in the gauge.

The wrong blue oil would put the incline off by about 7.2% based on these numbers but that would be in the wrong direction to your issue.


Full-Strength Liquid Refills
Red 0.826 3/4 oz. +-40° to +140° F 3974K7 7.00
Red 0.827 16 oz. +35° to +125° F 4037K21 45.50
Blue 1.91 3/4 oz. +32° to +140° F 3974K11 76.11
Blue 1.75 7 oz. +20° to +150° F 4037K26 121.88

Next,

OK, I put a head on it. #3 hole, 28" w/100% manometer, in manometer mode, 13.4 across the plate.

13.4 / 1.91 = 7.0157 " monometer??? Does not sound like a standard piece ??

Something does not sound right what is the rough measurement on the incline rise 100% to 0

Rick

They both have the correct oil. In fact it came from SF.

OK, so I have a question. Let's say I'm on #5 hole, 3.059 and I calibrate it with my FP with my 246 and 356 cfm plates. The bench is marked 442.2 cfm on #5 hole. Then say I put a 3.500 plate on the #5 hole. I run the depression up to 28". Shouldn't that hole read 442.2cfm even though the plate is much larger since I'm at 100% manometer?

Chad,
I don't think so because at 28" the 3.5" orifice should flow 850 cfm if it has a .6 cd. If the #5 hole is 3.059" and then they say it is 442.2 CFM then they are calibrating it at 13" Delta P. If the actual Delta P was 16" then the 3.059" hole on #5 would in all actuality would be 491.2 CFM. So if you are reading the inclined at 50% using SF calibration you would have a flow reading of 221.1 cfm. But if you used 50% reading of 491.2 the the flow reading would be 245.6 cfm. So I think the really answer is finding the real Delta P of you bench.

Earlier you said that you had 13.4 across the plate at 100% on #3. Did you have a something hooked up to measure the pressure differential between the upper and lower chamber then. I think I missed that. If that is so then the 3.059 #5 would be 449.5 cfm at 100% if you were using a .6 cd on the orifice. That would mean that at 97.4% reading on the manometer you should be getting a reading of 437.8 CFM that is a difference of about 1% between the other readings. To get the readings to coincide with the PTS instead of .6 cd you would only have to consider the cd to be .605 and then they match. I think you are darn close. I still feel that SF is using the wrong Delta P for calibration.

John

Yes I had the FP in manometer mode.

How can a 3.500 orifice flow 800 cfm through a 442 cfm hole?

If they are indeed calibrating at 13" then the 442.2 is not correct?? And if it should be 449.5 instead of 442.2 then my 356 plate at 78.2% would really be 352 cfm.

correct??

Now if I understand it correctly you are trying to check the 3.5" orifice on top of the bench at 28" correct? The 3.059" one is inside and that one gets it's value from the Delta P of 13.4" H2O.

Chad,
And you are correct in the fact that you bench probably could not pull 28" H2O through a 3.5 inch hole on top of you bench but if it had enough capacity it would go over 100% on the inclined and empty your reservoir