Finally tried, honestly dont see a difference to be substancial.
Without the bypass 34.81 seconds to fill 5gl bucket.
Withiut 35.2 seconds.
So in an hour without bypass 517.09gl an hour
With bypass 513.99gl an hour
So i dont see it being worth it.
Now reverse math tells me i putting out 8.6 a minute.
Interesting results. Are you using an undersized injector? What size plumbing before the injector?
I’ve never done a bucket test with my bypass. But with my 5.6 gpm machine, I definitely notice a difference in spraying performance. Rinsing is faster, the shooter tip sprays further and tighter, and pressure is improved. I’m using an undersized injector, though.
I’m planning on going up to 1/2” plumbing for everything before the reel when I setup my new rig. Hopefully I can recover some lost pressure from all the elbows and bends in my layout.
Injector is 2.3
Hose is 1/2 all the way till after that unloadee block, there is another in front by the machine.
As many are aware i dont run SH nor anu chemicals through my reels
I did not test it with my jrod tips.
Just on bucket filling
I got it I did the test with just water I had the 3 way valve to the water side. Figured water should pull better than sh and surfactant anyway and then I wasn’t running chem through the flow meter. So its injector with water pulling through then switching so it bypasses around the injector and thats the numbers. I showed all of it in the origional video but it was over 10 min long so I edited it down.
If you are going to do a flow test when it comes to with or without the injector, you need to have air running through the injector to truly see how much water is restricted. Because with water running through the injector nipple during the test your just adding more water to the current flow. It’s inaccurate
This is 100% accurate other than the injector is sucking water instead of Sh but I would say the difference would be a few 100ths of a gallon. When your using your injector in the field your running fluid through it or your bypassing around it. When you bypass its not active at all or it would still be pulling chemical you see. So this shows the actual difference of running with the injector inline and pulling fluid and then going around it with a normal 3/8” line and no injector via bypass. If I pull air through the injector it will make the injector number go down even more and not be accurate.
So what’s the point of this. I posted years ago that bypassing injector on my machine was worth slightly over a gal per min on my 8gpm machine. That’s the reason the bypasses have been utilized pretty extensively for several years. Just FYI on a 4gpm it’s almost no difference.
the point is that some people agree and some people disagree, some people do bucket test and this is a digital test done right here live time so people can see for themselves. talking about something is one thing but showing people is another and I figured I would share the results at 8 gpm 3000. I would guess the difference on my 5.6 is less and 4 yeah pretty much nothing but the 8 @ 3500 I would think even more. I will build a wye high flow fitting this winter and test again and maybe switch it all over to 1/2" now that I got a baseline. maybe take the bypass completely out as well because I agree with others that the 90’s and bottle neck fittings kill the flow but they also aerate the water to so that hurts your distance out the nozzle.
I am using the DN10 ball valve the same one that most all guys use. The DN10 seems to hold up as we all know and its not introduced to any chemical on a bypass and why change it if we all have replacements and are familiar with it right?