Results 1 to 8 of 8
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    1,103
    Post Likes

    Most accurate cfm

    Ive run into this before...

    Lets say you have a fan/duct exhaust system with ten grilles. Your fan is centrifugal and installed correctly. Nice straight duct into and out of fan. Lets just assume the duct system is completely sealed and has no leaks.

    You read the grilles with a calibrated hood. Take a traverse in a nice long straight section. Read the inlet/outlet pressure on the fan, and plot flow on a factory curve.

    The three values are different, which do you believe?

    Variable...what if the grilles are 50 cfm 6x6s and you have a 2x2 hood? Does this make the hood readings less reliable?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    kansas
    Posts
    1,283
    Post Likes
    https://hvac-talk.com/vbb/showthread...he-books/page2
    Post 18 starts talking about the same issues. I’m not a tab guy but from what I’ve learned traverse is the most accurate in almost any situation
    Honeywell you can buy better but you cant pay more

    I told my wife when i die to sell my fishing stuff for what its worth not what i told her i paid for it

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Chicago area
    Posts
    7,621
    Post Likes
    Duct traverse is what you would go by. Thats the accepted standard.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    1,103
    Post Likes
    Thread Starter
    Thanks. I don’t understand why the fan curve is not more correct, as long as the fan is installed with straight duct as shown in iom. Have never trusted this value, as you guys state also. But wonder why.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    Louisburg Kansas
    Posts
    3,152
    Post Likes
    The main reason plotting on the fan curve is less accurate than a pitot traverse is the unreliability of measured static pressures. A flow hood reading 50 CFM is nowhere close to their range of peak of accuracy. Flow hoods are also susceptible to side loading of the airflow if the distance between the duct and the grille is short enough to force most of the air out one side of the grille. The hood can't compensate for side loading of the grid but will readout flow based on it's ability to average the velocity pressure and for side loading that isn't good. The pitot traverse is the base line of accuracy because it averages the velocity profile. Readings are taken across the duct and if plotted you can get a good idea of the expected error of the total airflow.
    No man can be both ignorant and free.
    Thomas Jefferson

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    New Mexico
    Posts
    8,865
    Post Likes
    Factory curves are interesting because they don't always represent real world situations. They are made under lab conditions with no return restrictions (ducts) You can't duplicate these conditions in the field.
    T&B reports include them because it's expected. With a hood sometimes something has to be used to cause the hood to measure all the air. Like cardboard covering all but where the grill is. Probably not very accurate because of the hood not a good fit. Maybe a lo flow hood would fit better. Most times I ignore the fan curve and put trust in the traverse in a duct run like that. There are other ways to measure the grills also.
    Give me a relay with big enough contacts, and I'll run the world!

    You can be anything you want......As long as you don't suck at it.

    If a person wants to create a machine that will be more likely to fail...Make it complicated.

    USAF 98 Bomb Wing 1960-66 SMW Lu49

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    New Mexico
    Posts
    8,865
    Post Likes
    The 2x2 hood might not be accurate on air flows that small. Might check the manual. Maybe you could cross check the results with an anemometer or velometer.
    Give me a relay with big enough contacts, and I'll run the world!

    You can be anything you want......As long as you don't suck at it.

    If a person wants to create a machine that will be more likely to fail...Make it complicated.

    USAF 98 Bomb Wing 1960-66 SMW Lu49

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    1,103
    Post Likes
    Thread Starter
    Thanks for all the responses.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •