Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 04-20-2013, 07:27 PM   #21
Guru
 
Codger2's Avatar
 
City: San Diego
Country: US
Vessel Name: "Sandpiper"
Vessel Model: 2006 42' Ocean Alexander Sedan
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 5,420
Quote:
Originally Posted by markpierce View Post
Shaw (Captain Quint) burned up the engine after running at excessive RPM, allowing the shark Jaws to catch up and eat both boat and him.
Dah, I am aware of that break down!
I've only seen it about 5 times!
geez!!
II
II
II
V
__________________
Advertisement

__________________
Codger2

My passion for improving my boat(s) exceeds my desire to constantly cruise them.
Codger2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-20-2013, 10:33 PM   #22
Veteran Member
 
millennium's Avatar
 
City: St Augustine
Country: usa
Vessel Model: Mainship390
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 89
I'm beginning to think that's not a real shark.
__________________

millennium is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2013, 10:50 AM   #23
Veteran Member
 
lelievre12's Avatar
 
City: N/A
Country: N/A
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by windmill29130 View Post
lelievre12 don't listen to some of these guys, you are doing the right thing. They are the ones that are burning twice the fuel to get an additional knot or two. The only problem I have with this particular unit is the min flow requirement is 6.6gph, that won't work for most on here.
I think the 6.6GPH is simply the nominal peak flow recommendation. ie. you need an engine that will use at least 6.6gph at WOT in order to use this flow sensor. At lower flow rates, starting from zero the sensor will still give good resolution. In my case, with 315hp engines, the peak flow is easily above he 6.6gph minimum so I can use this sensor. Using a rough rule of thumb of 10hp per GPH this sensor is probably OK for all Diesel engines down to 70hp or so.
lelievre12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2014, 08:57 PM   #24
Veteran Member
 
lelievre12's Avatar
 
City: N/A
Country: N/A
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by lelievre12 View Post
Am planning a NMEA2000 upgrade and first job is to get some basic tank and fuel flow monitoring.

I've looked at Floscan and Maretron but with twin diesels (mine are CAT 3306TA 315HP) you need 4 flow transducers (1 in and 1 out) and with Floscan you have bulky pulse flow regulators as well. Sheesh thats a lot of new hardware in the engine room.

I prefer this neater approach:
250 L/H Differential Fuel Flow Meter [Wired] FUEL-VIEW [DFM-250D] - $532.00 Both inlet and outlet are in the same sensor.

I was thinking to hook it directly up to a:
NoLand Engineering

Any experience of others in the fuel monitoring of legacy (non electronic) diesel engines will be welcome.

OK change of plan.

I just bought 2 of these fuel flow sensors

https://www.aichitokei.co.jp/eng/pro...tream/zat.html

I'll connect them to the pulse monitors on my Seagauge NMEA2000 box from Chetco.

And the price?

$25 each on eBay right now.

New 1 2'' Liquid Fuel Oil Flow Sensor Counter Diesel Gasoline Gear Flow Sensor | eBay


Quality is good (Japanese) and construction is leakproof single piece molding from engineering Noryl.

Will report back........................................
lelievre12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2014, 09:16 PM   #25
Guru
 
Northern Spy's Avatar
 
City: Powell River, BC
Country: Canada
Vessel Name: Northern Spy
Vessel Model: Nordic Tug 26
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,666
Good idea!

But...

...caveat emptor, the e-bay link looks like a Chinese knock-off of a Japanese flowmeter.
Northern Spy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2014, 09:36 PM   #26
Guru
 
mbevins's Avatar
 
City: Windsor
Country: Canada
Vessel Name: Keeper IV
Vessel Model: 44 Viking ACMY
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 1,305
These appear to be two different manufacturers of sensors.
Also I assume the Chetco has the smarts to analyze the data?

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Trawler
__________________
"The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not."

mbevins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-29-2014, 02:59 AM   #27
Guru
 
Xsbank's Avatar
 
City: Pender Harbour, BC
Country: Canada
Vessel Name: Gwaii Haanas
Vessel Model: Vancouver Shipyards Custom Aluminum 52
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 2,447
The eBay one is good up to 10 litres per hour which is about 2 gallons - won't be enough, but a good idea, Floscan is too expensive.
__________________
Don't believe everything that you think.
Xsbank is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-29-2014, 06:23 AM   #28
Veteran Member
 
denloe1's Avatar
 
City: Portland Oregon
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Sapphire
Vessel Model: Grand Banks 46 Classic
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 95
Flow rate limit was 10 lpm not lph. That's 600lph. That would empty my 600 gallons in less than 4 hours. Sounds like 4 of these would get job done for $100
__________________
Dan Enloe
46' Grand Banks
CAT 3208 TAs
Sapphire
denloe1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-29-2014, 07:15 AM   #29
Guru
 
caltexflanc's Avatar
 
City: North Carolina for now
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Small Incentive
Vessel Model: Boston Whaler 130 Sport
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 3,786
That e-Bay unit is Chinese, and shipped from China. Will be interested in how that all works out, so keep us apprised!

You said a twin engine boat? You need to measure both fuel in and fuel returned. That would require 4 if twin engine as you said in a previous post. Then, the software to calculate net use, net GPH at an given moment, and so on.
__________________
George

"There's the Right Way, the Wrong Way, and what some guy says he's gotten away with"
caltexflanc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-29-2014, 10:43 AM   #30
Guru
 
City: Carefree, Arizona
Country: usa
Vessel Name: sunchaser V
Vessel Model: DeFever 48
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 6,361
Here is a turn in the road question for the OP, do you have good tank level measurement so you can insure the flow meters are accurate - or better asked - so you can know how far off they are? More important than knowing estimated fuel flow is knowing actual fuel consumption. Then your estimating sensors can be better calibrated.

Even the best of industrial flow meters have a calibrating schedule and procedure which is normally based upon a known volume drawdown rate.
sunchaser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-29-2014, 10:55 AM   #31
Guru
 
Xsbank's Avatar
 
City: Pender Harbour, BC
Country: Canada
Vessel Name: Gwaii Haanas
Vessel Model: Vancouver Shipyards Custom Aluminum 52
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 2,447
I stand corrected, lpm!
__________________
Don't believe everything that you think.
Xsbank is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-29-2014, 11:50 AM   #32
Guru
 
ranger42c's Avatar
 
City: Maryland
Country: USA
Vessel Model: 42' Sportfish
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 3,157
In the meantime (a digression, not meant to hijack...), I've gained almost a knot at various RPMs simply by changing to (accurate) digital tachs.

The previous analog tachs were "on" at about 2000 RPMs, but not so much apparently at idle, low speeds, high cruise, and near WOT. Nor was there a way to adjust them so they'd be accurate across the full range.

So now I see that what I thought was 6 knots at 800 RPMs is actually 6 knots at 725 RPMs. And what I thought was 20 knots at 2300 RPMs is really 20 knots at 2175 RPMs.

I haven't had time to fully capture and chart the new figures, but in the past I spreadsheeted two-way calm-water speed readings at various RPMs, trimmed each run to the highest speed possible at those given RPMs, and then used the engines' nominal burn rates (from published data) to calculate nominal NMPGs.

Maybe the digital tachs have already saved me enough money to afford proper flow meters.

Or maybe the nominal numbers are close enough so I don't have to prioritize how to run more wires from engine room to flying bridge.

-Chris
__________________
South River, Chesapeake Bay
ranger42c is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-29-2014, 12:38 PM   #33
Veteran Member
 
lelievre12's Avatar
 
City: N/A
Country: N/A
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northern Spy View Post
Good idea!

But...

...caveat emptor, the e-bay link looks like a Chinese knock-off of a Japanese flowmeter.
I think it is Japanese as the item sent is an Aichi unit, "Made in Japan". Photo of ebay unit is attached as was mailed to me.

The OF05ZAT unit has a rating of 10GPH, however WOT on my boat is 18.1GPH each engine. So at WOT I may get a pressure drop across the sensor. I will therefore measure the pressure drop at WOT and report back. However I think it will be OK as the ID of the sensor ports are 1/2" which is more than my main fuel hose and so the I think the 10GPH is a nominal rating only.

I will also buy 4 units as I have two engines, but wanted to check operation with just two sensors on one engine first.
Attached Images
 
lelievre12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-29-2014, 12:46 PM   #34
Guru
 
caltexflanc's Avatar
 
City: North Carolina for now
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Small Incentive
Vessel Model: Boston Whaler 130 Sport
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 3,786
Well, you will find out when you get them, the worst that can happen is you are out 50 bucks.

Is there software in your system that can translate the pulses into gallons and do the various other pieces of math?
__________________
George

"There's the Right Way, the Wrong Way, and what some guy says he's gotten away with"
caltexflanc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-29-2014, 12:49 PM   #35
Veteran Member
 
lelievre12's Avatar
 
City: N/A
Country: N/A
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by sunchaser View Post
Here is a turn in the road question for the OP, do you have good tank level measurement so you can insure the flow meters are accurate - or better asked - so you can know how far off they are? More important than knowing estimated fuel flow is knowing actual fuel consumption. Then your estimating sensors can be better calibrated.

Even the best of industrial flow meters have a calibrating schedule and procedure which is normally based upon a known volume drawdown rate.
I will decant 1 gallon of diesel and place the Racor inlet in the bucket, then measure the consumption on the sensor. That will be a good start. Longer term I will measure consumption between fills and chart. I have good sounding sticks so should get the K factor pretty close. However the Aichi does have a published K factor and from experience, these are normally pretty close.
lelievre12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-29-2014, 01:01 PM   #36
Veteran Member
 
lelievre12's Avatar
 
City: N/A
Country: N/A
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by caltexflanc View Post
Well, you will find out when you get them, the worst that can happen is you are out 50 bucks.

Is there software in your system that can translate the pulses into gallons and do the various other pieces of math?
The Seaguage remote is from Chetco

SeaGaugeā„¢ STANDARD 16 Function Sensor Interface Unit

Seaguage has software to program called VDash. The VDash software allows pulse inputs to be calibrated to whatever K factor is required. The software will also subtract the two sensor pulse inputs. So the return line flow sensor can be subtracted from main input flow sensor. The differential flow rate is then sent to the NMEA2000 backbone to all instruments as GPH for that engine. Seaguage will also keep a running total in its flash memory and this is sent to NMEA2000 as well.

I believe the Actisense EMU1 and also Noland RS11 will do the same thing, but not sure.
lelievre12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2014, 10:46 AM   #37
FF
Guru
 
FF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 16,518
Well, you will find out when you get them, the worst that can happen is you are out 50 bucks.

I would think the worst that could happen is the plastic case or guts dissolve in diesel , and get to your injectors dissolved and plug them with the combustion heat
FF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2014, 12:20 PM   #38
Guru
 
caltexflanc's Avatar
 
City: North Carolina for now
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Small Incentive
Vessel Model: Boston Whaler 130 Sport
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 3,786
Really? Completely dissolve and able to get right past the primary and secondary fuel filters? Wow. I suppose if one were that paranoid (and why not be, given it is coming from China), one would throw it in a jar of diesel first and see.
__________________
George

"There's the Right Way, the Wrong Way, and what some guy says he's gotten away with"
caltexflanc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2014, 12:35 PM   #39
Guru
 
City: North Charleston, SC
Country: USA
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 4,390
At some point you may be spending more money to save fuel than what you save.
rwidman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2015, 01:29 PM   #40
Newbie
 
City: Thessaloniki
Country: Greece
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 1
Hello,

I found this forum by googling "OF05ZAT" since I am using this sensor for a DIY Bluetooth Flowscan (malebuffy.blogspot.com)

Although this thread is quite old, I am posting to warn you about this e-bay Chinese knock off. I contacted Aichi and they sold me that this is a fake sensor. I had weeks of headaches as to why it wasn't working for me. This fake sensor produces 180 Pulses per Liter (I am in Europe) instead of the 2174 in the Datasheet.

A new Aichi Flow sensor costs about 360$ US and not 20-30$ US.

However, I have purchased (from an American ebay seller) 7 used Original OF05ZAT sensors, I think they are 29$ each. They work and produce 2174 Pulses per Liter.

Hope this helps!
__________________

MaleBuffy is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off





All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:50 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2006 - 2012