How accurate is a simple water level?

  • Thread starter Thread starter couldabin
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Water Water level
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the accuracy of a simple water level setup using a bucket and hoses to establish level over distances, specifically addressing the feasibility of achieving a level within 3 cm over 30 meters. Participants explore various factors that may influence accuracy, including hose diameter, water head, and the effects of surface tension and viscosity.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that a water level can be accurate over long distances, as water is incompressible and will find its true level.
  • Concerns are raised about the effects of air in the line and kinks in the hoses, which could impact accuracy.
  • There is discussion about the influence of hose diameter on accuracy, with some arguing that a smaller diameter at the end of the hose may allow for finer measurements.
  • One participant mentions the potential impact of water viscosity and surface tension, questioning whether larger diameters could mitigate inaccuracies.
  • Another participant shares a negative experience with a store-bought water level, citing viscosity and wetting issues that led to significant errors.
  • There is a claim that ensuring both ends of the hose are wetted equally can lead to high accuracy, potentially within a millimeter over the discussed distance.
  • One participant emphasizes the importance of degassing the water to maintain consistent density and accuracy.
  • It is noted that the diameter of the hoses does not affect accuracy as much as the height of the water column does, since pressure is normalized to area.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a mix of views on the factors affecting accuracy, with no clear consensus on the best practices for achieving the desired level of precision. Some agree on the importance of ensuring equal wetting and degassing, while others raise concerns about the effects of hose diameter and viscosity.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight various assumptions regarding the setup, such as the need for clean hoses and the effects of air bubbles, but these factors remain unresolved in terms of their overall impact on accuracy.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to individuals looking to establish level over long distances using simple tools, particularly in gardening, construction, or DIY projects.

couldabin
Messages
10
Reaction score
0
I've used a 5-gallon bucket, filled with water, with two clear plastic hoses plumbed to the bottom to establish level over a distance of about 5 meters. It worked well enough for the circumstances.

Now I'm interested in establishing level over a distance that is closer to 30 meters, and would like to know if the two points are level within 3 cm or so.

Will this simple water level be that accurate? What are the factors that limit/enhance the accuracy? Does the diameter of the hoses affect it? What about the amount of water head (if, for instance, instead of a 5-gallon bucket I were to use a piece of large diameter PVC, 2 meters long)? What about the diameter at the end of each hose -- if the diameter of the last foot of the hose were made much larger, would it improve the accuracy?

TIA
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
couldabin said:
I've used a 5-gallon bucket, filled with water, with two clear plastic hoses plumbed to the bottom to establish level over a distance of about 5 meters. It worked well enough for the circumstances.
Huh. I hadn't thought of puttiong a bucket in the middle. when I leveled my garden, I used only a length of clear hose.

couldabin said:
Now I'm interested in establishing level over a distance that is closer to 30 meters, and would like to know if the two points are level within 3 cm or so.
I can't imagine why it wouldn't be.

couldabin said:
What about the diameter at the end of each hose -- if the diameter of the last foot of the hose were made much larger, would it improve the accuracy?TIA
Seems to me, making the diameter of the end smaller is what you want. That way, a small change is more noticeable, allowing finer measuring.
 
It will be as accurate as you can be in your measurement. On it's own, the water is very hard to compress so over long distances and heights you won't see any real variations.

The diameter of the hoses simply dictate how much it weighs (within reason). The water will always find it's true level. The things to watch out for is to not have air in the line and to not have any pinches/kinks in the line.
 
The one factor I can see wanting to be careful of is water viscosity/surface tension in relation to pipe diameter. I'm nor saying it would be a practical factor, just something that could come into play at the limits of experimentation.
 
Dave, with regard to surface tension, would larger diameter mitigate the inaccuracy?
 
couldabin said:
Dave, with regard to surface tension, would larger diameter mitigate the inaccuracy?
I was thinking you might get some sort of wicking effect, but really I'm just talking through my hat.

Nonetheless, I would imagine you'd want it small but not too small. I think 1/2" would be minimum.
 
I remember trying to use a store-bought water level some years ago (about 10m of clear 1cm tubing, as I remember, and it didn't work for diddly. When I held up the two ends next to each other, the viscosity and wetting at the ends of the water column made a significant error. Not as much as the 3cm the OP is asking about, but more than 1mm, which was way too much for the work I was doing. I ended up using long straightedges and careful level work to transfer the level line a moderate distance. Nowadays, I'd just use a good laser level.
 
Last edited:
I recall reading somewhere that the relationship between the surface area of the primary water supply (my 5-gal bucket in this case) and that of the tube ends has a bearing on the friction/viscosity issues. The greater the difference the less the friction effect. At least, that's what I think I read. Does that make sense?
 
The ends of the hose should be wetted to the same degree provided that the material of the hose at the ends are identical. If one end is wetted (the end you put the water in) and the other end is dry, you could see some error but if both ends have been wetted and are clean, the accuracy is AMAZING... certainly on the order of a mm over that distance. You MUST be sure that the fluid is equally degassed throughout the length of the hose. This is equivalent to saying that the fluid has the same density from one end to the other. Water clouded by entrained air bubbles is slightly less dense than degassed water. Same goes for temperature. Bubbles that adhere to the hose and don't obstruct the flow will not cause an inaccuracy. Free floating bubbles will. Its best to remove them if possible. The use of two different sized hoses at the ends will have no effect on the accuracy. It is the height that is important, not the diameter since the pressure exerted on both ends is normalized to area.

...if the diameter of the last foot of the hose were made much larger, would it improve the accuracy?

It will improve the speed at which the level settles down for a reading.
 
  • #10
Thanks, all, for the input. I think I can put off going high-tech for now and rely on the old bucket.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
5K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 73 ·
3
Replies
73
Views
4K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
11K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
6K
Replies
50
Views
7K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K