DBBRanger":2qh475iw said:
I'm expecting to add an Aqualarm flow sensor to my 2008 R25 raw water supply line. On the 110HP Yanmar, the supply line goes aft from the strainer and makes a U-turn and then turns to the port to connect to the engine - all with one 1" hose. I would like to use right angle fittings to make it a cleaner install with the sensor - right angle fittings at the strainer to make that U-turn and also then a right angle fitting coming out of the sensor. But I'm wondering if it will add too much flow resistance and thereby decrease the raw water flow too much, i.e. is the flow that sensitive? Aqualarm only says that the sensor should be 1 foot away from any right angled fittings - I can do that. Any thoughts or words of wisdom? How have others plumbed it on an R25?
Hello DBBR,
I would avoid the right-angle elbows. I realize that would look cleaner, but will add significant extra resistance to flow both because of the right-angle and the reduced internal diameter of the fitting (it must fit INSIDE the 1" ID rubber hose you presently have). Isn't resistance to flow proportional to the cube of the radius?
MY observation with my much-smaller Yanmar 3YM engine is that the raw water flow varies not arithmetically (20, 50, 80% increases) but rather exponentially (or nearly so...raw water intake doubles/triples/quadruples with increased throttle settings) which, to me, explains why it's difficult (impossible?) for these mechanical raw water flow sensors to alarm at "low" flow reliably. Mine alarms at NO flow without delay. I've not noted it alarming at low flow but I could be wrong. My point here is that if it alarms at "low" flow...WHAT flow would that be? At idle the "flow" is quite low but at 1800 rpm it's 5-10X higher...so if you have SOME flow at 1800 rpm but less than "idle" flow...well, that's WAY TOO LITTLE flow, and your exhaust is already going to get WAY TOO HOT really fast.
Sorry, I'm not explaining this very clearly. I think the concept of the Aqualarm "alarming" at low flow is not possible. So, to my thinking, the BEST arrangement is to use BOTH the flow alarm AND the exhaust temp alarm. It is the exhaust temp alarm that will let you know when you have LOW flow more reliably than the flow alarm. Again, this is my thinking which could be faulty. I didn't rest well last night, etc... :?
I CAN envision an electronic alarm giving warning of "low" raw water flow but it would need to know the engine's rpm and coolant temp combined into an algorithm to determine if the flow is truly "low" - since low flow is a moving target depending upon the engine's throttle setting. But this becomes unfeasibly complex and probably too expensive if even available.
I still like my Aqualarm - nothing against it. I don't think it will give "low" flow alarm though. (at anything above idle speed, that is).
dave