https://www.igorslab.de/en/aqua-computer…-cant-talk-yet/

Zitat von »sebastian«

https://www.igorslab.de/en/aqua-computer…-cant-talk-yet/

When people are talking about flow meter accuracy I like to steer them to this Igor's Lab Review of the Aquacomputer High Flow verses the Thermaltake TF1 verses the Barrowch FBFT03 verses a Keyence FD-Q10C high precision flow meter. Spoiler Alert - The Aquacomputer High Flow matches the Keyence FD-Q10C high precision flow meter almost perfectly while the Thermaltake and Barrowch were so bad that you might as well not bother looking at them. The Thermaltake readings are consistently way too low while the Barrowch starts out too low then quickly changes to way too high. They are both so far off that the author of the review said, "the deviations of both flow sensors (Thermaltake and Barrowch) are so extreme that they simply should not be used".

The original article is in German and the English translation is a little rough but understandable. The Barrowch FBFT03 shows up in a lot of custom loop builds and the owners sometimes get mad when I show them this article. No one likes to find out the flow meter they bought is totally inaccurate. I would never consider buying a flow meter from anywhere other than Aquacomputer. Kudos on another great product.

Zitat von »Speedy-VI«

[When people are talking about flow meter accuracy I like to steer them to this Igor's Lab Review of the Aquacomputer High Flow verses the Thermaltake TF1 verses the Barrowch FBFT03 verses a Keyence FD-Q10C high precision flow meter. Spoiler Alert - The Aquacomputer High Flow matches the Keyence FD-Q10C high precision flow meter almost perfectly while the Thermaltake and Barrowch were so bad that you might as well not bother looking at them. The Thermaltake readings are consistently way too low while the Barrowch starts out too low then quickly changes to way too high. They are both so far off that the author of the review said, "the deviations of both flow sensors (Thermaltake and Barrowch) are so extreme that they simply should not be used".

The original article is in German and the English translation is a little rough but understandable. The Barrowch FBFT03 shows up in a lot of custom loop builds and the owners sometimes get mad when I show them this article. No one likes to find out the flow meter they bought is totally inaccurate. I would never consider buying a flow meter from anywhere other than Aquacomputer. Kudos on another great product.

Nice. I've both in my loop: HF and High Flow Next. One is directly followig the other (first HFN then HF) with enough tubing in between.
The results you can see in the graph (act values: 70.8l/h for the HF, 75.5l/h for the HFN). Above one is for HF and the below one is for the HFN. Flow ist held at 75l/h. Which one should I trust now more?

Isn't that obvious after Igors Lab's test?

Zitat von »Taubenhaucher«

Isn't that obvious after Igors Lab's test?

Why? I won't believe that AC has released a new sensor which will be much less accurate then an older model?

the high flow NEXT is the tested one ;-)

Zitat von »Taubenhaucher«

the high flow NEXT is the tested one ;-)

YEAHH. I pointed to the wrong test. I mentioned the other one from the text below https://www.igorslab.de/barrowch-fbft03-…wasserkuehlung/

corrected now

Zitat von »mditsch«

(act values: 70.8l/h for the HF, 75.5l/h for the HFN). Above one is for HF and the below one is for the HFN. Flow ist held at 75l/h. Which one should I trust now more?

the NEXT is better. The NEXT sensor corrects the flowwith a no linerar correction in every flow range.
The HFN is very linear, especially in the lower range (<100 l/h) where there are otherwise larger deviations.

Zitat von »sebastian«

Zitat von »mditsch«

(act values: 70.8l/h for the HF, 75.5l/h for the HFN). Above one is for HF and the below one is for the HFN. Flow ist held at 75l/h. Which one should I trust now more?

the NEXT is better. The NEXT sensor corrects the flowwith a no linerar correction in every flow range.
The HFN is very linear, especially in the lower range (<100 l/h) where there are otherwise larger deviations.

but for what I'm wondering: based on the test of the High Flow, in which The HF (without next) was very very close to the reference value is it now too much away from the High Flow Next in my loop. It's always ca 5l/h. That's a little bit confusing me.

To me it looks like the old HF flow measured is temperature-dependent. How else would you explain the decrease in flow as shown on your diagram? You didn't change the pump speed, did you?

Usually, the flow increases with the water temperature, not decrease. And certainly not to this amount.

no I haven't changed anything. The two flowmeters are direclty the one behind the other. the difference between them two are always near 5l/h.