Overclock.net banner
641 - 660 of 666 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
161 Posts
Fast Fate,

Good day to you and thank you for that information.

I did not know @gaggeg authored that.
redface.gif
It was actually a deciding factor resulting in working on a way to mount that beast on an S8. Very cool.

A follow up question please. Basically am I on the right path and if not ideas to get on the right path?

Background

I am using Martin's Pump Planning Guide to calculate my loop; the generic PQ curve he posted is how I derived the pumps PQ and target flow rate. Your work is the source of my block restriction values. When in doubt I round against the pump. Skinnie's, Martin's and Extreame Rigs are my back up sources.

I am looking for overkill on the loop due to summer time ambient temps, bounces around mid eighties to low triple digits Fahrenheit. Might have to add some glycol in case of a winter power failure. I may overclock a wee bit too.
biggrin.gif


https://martinsliquidlab.wordpress.com/pump-planning-guide/comment-page-1/

Just in case I did not say it clearly enough your work is appreciated, being used, and highly valued. Thank you.
thumb.gif


Cheers,

Mad Monk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
193 Posts
Hey guys, there is a page on this thread discussing the calibration of an MPS400 and I have a question somewhat related to this. I bought an MPS100 without realizing the low flow range that this was intended for and I wanted to know if I could bore a larger hole to make a faux MPS400, assuming this is the only difference. I saw that a user did this on an MPS200 and made it work like an MPS400 so I'm hoping I can do the same thing on an MPS100. Thanks.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,569 Posts
Discussion Starter · #643 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chaoszero55 View Post

Hey guys, there is a page on this thread discussing the calibration of an MPS400 and I have a question somewhat related to this. I bought an MPS100 without realizing the low flow range that this was intended for and I wanted to know if I could bore a larger hole to make a faux MPS400, assuming this is the only difference. I saw that a user did this on an MPS200 and made it work like an MPS400 so I'm hoping I can do the same thing on an MPS100. Thanks.
Yes, you can bore out the MPS100 to mimic a 400.
The ID of the sensor is the only difference.

Both myself and Jac have posted somewhere in here.
I went to the limit with bore size going larger than a 400 standard ID
while IIRC Ja'c mimicked a 400.

What ever you bore size, I'ld highly suggest custom calibration after the bore is done.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
193 Posts
Thanks for the quick reply, I will get to that and post the results! I don't have a calibrated flowmeter to do an accurate calibration of the device on but perhaps I can use the "bucket and scale" method with stopwatch.

Another question regarding the D5 pump; my pump is pwm but does not send a readable rpm signal to the computer even though I can control the speed. My understanding is that my D5 pump may not use the intel standard for pwm signal and for that reason it doesn't say what rpm the pump is running even though I can control it. Anyone know if I can mod the pump pwm cable to be able to have a readable rpm?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,569 Posts
Discussion Starter · #645 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chaoszero55 View Post

Thanks for the quick reply, I will get to that and post the results! I don't have a calibrated flowmeter to do an accurate calibration of the device on but perhaps I can use the "bucket and scale" method with stopwatch.

Another question regarding the D5 pump; my pump is pwm but does not send a readable rpm signal to the computer even though I can control the speed. My understanding is that my D5 pump may not use the intel standard for pwm signal and for that reason it doesn't say what rpm the pump is running even though I can control it. Anyone know if I can mod the pump pwm cable to be able to have a readable rpm?
The Diva Mod will fix compatibility issues with PWM control from an Aquaero (and other controllers) with non-conforming PWM D5 pumps.
BUT
RPM reading should not be an issue even without the Diva mod, so I think you might have another yet unseen issue at play here.

useful reading by @IT Diva herself about the Diva Mod in the OCN Aquaero Owners Club

post #56
post #59
post #63
post #83
post #2043
post #2048
post #2058
post #2093
 
  • Rep+
Reactions: Chaoszero55

·
Registered
Joined
·
324 Posts
Aqua Computer Inline Filter with Stainless Steel Mesh
Filter Restriction Test

Filter with stainless steel mesh, ball valves and mounting plate, G1/4

I had this filter in pieces and packed away for over 12 months because it began to leak from the cover plate where the taps are.
Today I cleaned it all up and put new o'rings in and Bob's your Uncle - all sweet again.
I ran a 3 hour leak test on it prior to taking any readings just to make sure there was no leaking or dampness anywhere -
No leaks, screen still looking perfect and no loss of flow rate or pressure increase indicated that the test was good to commence.

I knew from previous use that this filter severely impacted flow rate - (by adding excessive restriction) BUT the test results were off the chart, literally

I had to re-scale the chart for the DP PSI and the maximum flow rate achieved with 2 x D5 pumps was abysmal.
You have been warned - it's a very restrictive piece of kit this one - despite the sales pitch from Aqua Computer telling you otherwise " The large surface of the filter mesh results in a very low flow resistance. "
I think there added a few extra words - it should read the filter mesh results in a very low flow

It's not just the mesh though, both taps have a "rather small ID" compared to the ID of a G1/4 fitting.






Well there's one answer as to why my 2 d5's dont seem to flow as much as they should. I know they had said when questioned in this or the aqua forum that it wasn't that restrictive, but this shows otherwise. I could almost use a 3rd pump I do have an mcp50x i could add not sure how much that will help.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,170 Posts
Hey guys, there is a page on this thread discussing the calibration of an MPS400 and I have a question somewhat related to this. I bought an MPS100 without realizing the low flow range that this was intended for and I wanted to know if I could bore a larger hole to make a faux MPS400, assuming this is the only difference. I saw that a user did this on an MPS200 and made it work like an MPS400 so I'm hoping I can do the same thing on an MPS100. Thanks.


I converted an MPS100 using Jakesonfires method. The standard orifice size of the 400 model is around 7mm but if you use a 7mm drill bit you get a bit higher than a 400 size/limit as Fast Fate showed with his. Jakes used a 6.5mm drill bit which give you a bit less than 400Lph max but more accuracy. Its around the equivalent of an MPS 350. I think he posted custom calibrations for 10mm tube that should be quite accurate to use if you can't create your own.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
324 Posts
Can 2 mps flow sensors like a mps 100 for lower flow accuracy, the other a mps 400 for higher flow accuracy be used together, or “combined” for measuring the flow. Also, for over coming the restrictive nature of the aquacomputer water filter would an extra pump be adequate?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,583 Posts
Interesting that the acetal performs better than the nickel or copper. Never would have guessed that.
The acetal is the heatkiller iv basic while the copper and nickel are the heatkiller iv pro. They have different copper bases with a different cooling fin setup.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,451 Posts
The acetal is the heatkiller iv basic while the copper and nickel are the heatkiller iv pro. They have different copper bases with a different cooling fin setup.
Ahh, that's what I suspected. I thought in your tests the Pros outperformed the Basic. That said, I know the difference was negligible and could be explained by thermal paste. Plus the Pros look so sexy :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,170 Posts
Can 2 mps flow sensors like a mps 100 for lower flow accuracy, the other a mps 400 for higher flow accuracy be used together, or “combined” for measuring the flow. Also, for over coming the restrictive nature of the aquacomputer water filter would an extra pump be adequate?
Sure you could do that, but I have found that the 400 model is very accurate down to the minimum flow rate of my loop where my pump is at min speed.

If your loop runs at flow rates that a 100 model is needed to measure then its extremely unlikely that it will be also able to reach flow rates that a 400 model is needed and vice versa. Realistically a loop is either low or high flow and can't be both.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
324 Posts
Sure you could do that, but I have found that the 400 model is very accurate down to the minimum flow rate of my loop where my pump is at min speed.

If your loop runs at flow rates that a 100 model is needed to measure then its extremely unlikely that it will be also able to reach flow rates that a 400 model is needed and vice versa. Realistically a loop is either low or high flow and can't be both.
Well I have 2 pwm d5 pumps and the pumps at 800-900 dosnt even register.. at the highest rpm 4800 or so and it’s .9-1 gpm. Id probably just add another pump instead since there’s a fair amount of restriction going on in this loop.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,170 Posts
Some of the Quick links to testing on the first page seem to be broken. I was looking at pump top tests and didn't get to the right pages.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,170 Posts
Well I have 2 pwm d5 pumps and the pumps at 800-900 dosnt even register.. at the highest rpm 4800 or so and it’s .9-1 gpm. Id probably just add another pump instead since there’s a fair amount of restriction going on in this loop.
Very late reply sorry, but, yeah that flow from two pumps is what I call very high restriction.

Your PWM pumps can run a fair bit slower than mine and my loop tops out at 4.6Lpm with a single pump so very different conditions. In your case I would maybe suggest that the MPS 200 might be all you need. With a custom calibration I'm sure it can measure up to 1Gpm with better accuracy than the 400 model and its min flow rate can also be improved because they are artificially cut off by the stock cal curves at 40Lph. On my MPS400 the stock min flow is 80Lph or just over 1L per min but with proper calibration I have accurate mins much lower.

The sensor detects more than the standard calibration reports. So a 200 model should be capable of much lower than you would realistically want to run in a loop.

Combining two sensors is not inherently a bad idea but using a 100 model to get very low flow accuracy will just limit your max flow rate even further because its internal aperture is very small compared to the other models.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
737 Posts
An informal pump top comparison:

-

valve 100%valve 74%Valve 50%
2511941
2511942
2511943

Flow Control Valve: Deltrol_EN25B_Specs.pdf
Flow_Control_Valve.jpg


Data Set: Pump_Top_Compare.pdf
Edit: notation error in the 'Flow Control Valve Settings' explanation:
  • the 3rd entry reads: "50% Restricted/80% Open "
  • it should read: "50% Restricted/50% Open "
 

Attachments

641 - 660 of 666 Posts
Top