Easy, Cheap, Accurate Level

I have used this long distance leveling method many times over the years...great for fences, slabs, brick courses, decks....

Yes, it is a very ancient method.A local university was laid out using this method back in the 1960's.

Highways also used them in construction.

I used one to lay out the foundation for my house.The mason said that was the most accurate foundation he had ever seen.

I used the 3-4-5 rule for getting it square.Verified with diagonals and it was dead on.

This ratio will always give a 90 degree angle,even if doubled,tripled,etc.For instance 6-8-10,30-40-50.

The Panama Canal used all pneumatic/hydraulic controls until recently.No worry about lighting surges,computer hackers,hard drive failures, power failures,etc. Simply reliable basic physical laws at work.

Some old technologies never die.

In the shipyard, we used that technique quite a bit.

Great idea, no batteries required!

There are a few caveats when using this liquid level.

• If one uses a continuous clear tube so one can sight the level in any part of the tube, you have to be careful to not siphon in or out of the jug too much water.
• Don't spill the water or let the tube accidentally siphon out water
• If the tube end is capped to prevent siphoning, take no level measurements until the hose end is vented and the level has settled. Vent slowly to prevent losing liquid.
• Mark somewhere what level should be. Recheck when needed.

There is a built in error in using this method. The ratio of the diameter of the hose to the bucket. if you always use the same area of the hose, it is very accurate. If you use much less hose for one reading and close to the end of the hose for another, there will be a difference. The other error that come in is not checking for bubbles in the hose. These introduce a big error. I always used automotive windshield washer fluid in mine. It has color to make it easy to see and does not turn sour and get mold in it as fast. I used a hydro level I made for years leveling house trailers and on building projects. -- JHF

The ratio of the diameter of the hose to the bucket. if you always use the same area of the hose, it is very accurate. The diameter of the hose does not matter--it's the height of the fluid in it. The bucket/jug/bottle/whatever, is not needed.

If you use much less hose for one reading and close to the end of the hose for another, there will be a difference. No, the route the hose takes from A to B does not matter. Always use the 2 ends of the hose; let any extra hose flop around on the ground or hang down from a scaffold.

It 'worked' for the Romans...wonder what they used for tube/hoses?

Intestines of some small herbivore?

I still use this method for pre- levelling structures, and verify relative elevations of equipment, up to 10m distance and +/-2mm accuracy. It comes handy specially when electronic or optical devices are not available or can not work due to vibration or weather conditions. Just with hose, no jug.

My dad taught me this trick 40 years ago...amazing how something so simple gives such accurate results!

And the 3-4-5 triangle...couldn't lay out any home project without it. Essential for doing porches, foundations, anything that needs to be square.

The Egyptians, when they wanted to level a site,... to say,... build a pyramid... they would dig a series of trenches, fill it with winter and escalate the site to run parallel to the level of the water in the trench.

There is no truth in the rumour that one can find replacement spill-chuckers on internet auction sites...

Thanks,... I’ll stop looking then.

I've been using this method myself for many years. But without the bucket of course.

Incredibly accurate and ultimately more flexible than laser.

Cheap.? It depends on your definition of cheap I can get a cheap laser level for less than the cost of a good length of clear tubing. Speaking of clear tubing. Tubing 1/2 inch or smaller does not let air bubbles out as easily, but once you get setup doesn't matter.

I don't drink the Kool-Aid. But I do keep some on hand to put into the tube. Easier to get and keep than food coloring drops.

I start by filling my tubes and holding both ends in one hand and letting the hose drag behind me then I mount I'm to a post with an x made from all-purpose screws. Then walk out and mark other level locations as needed being careful to not lose the Kool-Aid. Another x made from a couple screws keeps the other end at the ready. Works great around corners up and down and around hills in bright shining sunlight etc etc.

I was taught this method with only a tube, as others have said. I think the best part of teaching it to me was when we were done. My dad raised his end up high and removed his thumb from the end. Of course he timed it when it was pointing right at me. It wouldn't win any distance contests, but the volume was consistent!

" Accuracy depends only on the operator ".

Given how clumsy and awkward I am trying to stand on a ladder while holding a jug and a hose at the same time marking as many dots as required on a wall,,,

I think I will use the old fashioned beam level since nature only gave me two hands and my species hasn't quite evolved to the level of an octopus.

The jug would presumably be on a separate ladder, shelf, or other support. The level of the fluid in the jug would have to be at the level you want to mark. You would only have to hold one end of the hose. You'd probably need a plug of some kind to avoid losing fluid if you have to move the ladder to a new location for another mark.

In this manner, I'd need two separate, but equal height ladders,,

To use, I carry in one ladder ( from the truck ) , set that up, then go get the second ladder, set that up,,

Climb up the first ladder and put my jug on it, then climb down,,

Climb up the second ladder, holding the tube in one hand and the marker pen in the other all the while doing my best tight rope imitation,,

Meanwhile, joe schmuckaloe across the street, doing the same job as me, using his beam level, gets done in half the time and is at the club sucking down a cold one while I'm still working long past late into the night.

I'm not talking about using two ladders and a jug.

For instance... On one job I had to set two curved staircases down an embankment on either side of a home. the drop in elevation was nearly 10'. the distance between staircases was probably 50' Each step was made from a rough trapezoid of Pennsylvania green rock and weighed many hundreds of pounds.

The first thing I had to get done was build a concrete stair step footing into the embankments.

Using tube levels made this whole process very efficient... and possible.

beam levels were used to set each step into a mush of mortar while the tube level would ensure the desired height of each step overall.

(one post held the marks for all the stairs on either side, and one end of the tube.)

no jughead

Anywhere you can use a beam level use a beam level. anywhere you can you use this. That's the whole point. you don't need to be an octopus

The purpose of the tube is to create a REFERENCE POINT that is level in all places.

For instance,you wish to find a level point of reference on 4 or more support beams.

Place the jug anywhere you like that is a convenient height for you to reach, a ladder, a stair step, a bucket,etc.It does not matter,as long as it remains there while you establish the reference marks.

After setting up the hose as per above instructions, you can establish the same level on all of the posts.

Mark these points,and use a tape or other measuring device to measure up or down as far as you need to to establish a higher or lower level point.

No need to carry a jug up a ladder,or to have 2 ladders.

It doesn't get much simpler than that.

If that is too complicated,hire a contractor.

I've often wondered how accurately you could measure the radius of the earth using technology from the middle ages.

All you need is a very small canal 2 miles long, or, three bowls connected by tubes so that the three surfaces are level. Float three "sighting" sticks: one at either end and one in the middle; the middle one needs a ruler marked on it.

Sight from a pin across the top of the near end to the top of the far end and judge the distance from the top of the middle stick: should be about 8 inches.

You can get pretty sophisticated with the sighting parts without having to resort to lenses.

How did Columbus get it so wrong?

The first accurate measurement of the circumference of the earth was done around 200 BC by Eratosthenes, a Greek mathematician and astronomer - and he did it with a stick. He was living in the Egyptian city of Syene, and noticed that at noon on the summer solstice, he could see the sun reflected in the water at the bottom of the community well. The next year, again on the summer solstice, but further north, in the city of Alexandria, he measured the shadow cast by an upright stick. It was an angle of seven degrees. This is about one fiftieth of a circle, so he reasoned that the circumference of the earth was fifty times the distance between Syene and Alexandria.

This account is paraphrased from Bob MacDonald's book, "Measuring the Earth with a Stick". Bob MacDonald writes that the figure Eratosthenes thus arrived at for the circumference of the earth was "almost bang on".

There is a potential problem with this method - particularly if using just a clear tube with no jug reservoir at one end. If the day is alternately sunny and cloudy, when the sun is out the plastic of the tube becomes warmer and expands, and the water level in the tube will drop due to the increased internal volume of the tube. Conversely, when the sun goes behind a cloud, the water level in the tube rises as the tube cools and shrinks in diameter. This can occur in the time it takes to walk from one end of the tube to the other. I discovered this when laying out footings years ago.

It could happen with the length of garden hose which I've used as the middle tube.. but I've never seen it happen.

Thanks for the heads up.

I've seen user error so many times that I double check all level markings once they are complete. Especially if I'm not the guy that made the marks in the first place.

True, the liquid level will rise and fall, but the level at each end will always be the same. That is, both will rise, or both will fall the same amount.

True, but if you are working alone and make a mark on a vertical at one end of the tube, and then while go are walking to the other end of the tube the sun comes out from behind a cloud, or goes in behind a cloud, the level will have risen or dropped by the time you arrive at the other end of the tube, and the mark you make there will be at a different elevation than your first mark. I learned this from experience.

I have to say I'd like to see this one taken care of on MythBusters. I think we walk faster than a cloud can jump out and make water in in a hose change significant level between point a and point b.

...only because I think of all the times I've been using this method (with perfect success) on hot and sunny days.

Either way when you check it twice (...which is really important when setting footings for example. ) problems will suss themselves out.

Usually when there is a misread the user has inadvetently allowed one or more small bubbles into the tubing. In a small diameter tube they can move very slowly causing misreading. That's one reason I prefer large-diameter hose... And use a good bubble purging method.

Having a long enough tube that all the (bubble free) slack drags around on the ground is far better than having it hang with any taughtness. Any sway or bump in the line will cause a false read.

Keep a bottle of colored water to top off if needed.

If the sun can heat it, or the blocked sun can cool it, significantly in the minute or two required to move to the new location, then you must have been using a very small and/or dark colored tube. For short distances like a few meters or less, I've used clear 3/8 or 1/2 inch Tygon tubing. For longer distances, I use a piece of 5/8 inch garden hose with a Tygon or glass tube sealed to each end, but then I can't see both ends at the same time, and need an assistant to watch the other end.

I've thought of making a simple circuit with two electrodes and an amplifier/oscillator that would make some kind of a sound when the fluid touched the electrodes and not when it lost contact, but I've never actually gotten around to doing it...

Another disadvantage of small tubing is the greater difficulty in seeing the bottom of the meniscus, together with the slower flow rate increasing the settling time after moving to a new location.

To J E in Chicago and dkwarner: You can pooh-pooh my comments all you wish. I know what I experienced. I was using 1/2" clear plastic tubing about 70 feet long. I marked the level at one end, walked to the other, marked the level there, then walked back to the first mark to check it. To my surprise the water level was about an inch off the first mark. Back and forth I went, trying to establish a reliable level, but the water level kept going up and down. I was baffled. The next day I tried again, and everything worked out fine. It was clear and sunny on the second day, whereas it had been mixed sun and cloud on the first. Therefore I came to the conclusion that I have shared with you.

This worked for a job or two before I remembered that not everything is better with lights and buzzers.

Most of the times a problem similar occurred, it was someone foot on the tube!!

Now, as you stated you were alone, that is excluded.

I have seen something similar happen, specially with thin wall tubes, so I do let the tube to accomodate to weather conditions for a while ( while setting up) before measuring with it. Some 30min works for me.

All in all, a bliss.

Thankyou abelmh for your supportive comment. Your advice to allow the tube time to adjust to the ambient temperature is good, but if the ambient temperature is varying, this creates a potential problem. J E in Chicago writes dismissively that for many years he has "been using this method (with perfect success) on hot and sunny days". This misses my point. Provided the ambient temperature is constant there will be no change in the internal volume of the tube. I recall on the day in question, watching the liquid level in the tube rising and falling as the sun moved in and out from behind the clouds, as the temperature went from chilly to warm in moments. With a person at each end of the tube, and the level reference marks made simultaneously, there will be no error, but working alone, there is indeed the possibility of fluid level change corresponding to temperature change in the time it takes to move from one location to another.

Another good reason to use the jug as a reservoir,especially if alone.

I use a gallon milk jug,and 80 feet of 1/4 inch tubing.Any change in tube volume will not matter to the jug water level or the tube.(unless you have a very large tube,and a very small reservoir).

The ID of the tube is about 3/16 inch,and the full length is not always required.

The settling time is a little long on this much hose,but if you block the end with your finger when moving to different points,it doesn't take long to stabilize.

I do not doubt your results,however,all water contains entrained air,and I suspect the change in your level was partially due to entrained air expanding within the tube.

You will not necessarily see bubbles if the air is entrained.

However I would be interested in the results of a micrometer measurement of the OD of the water filled tube in sunlight versus shade.

I am always open for new information.

I too would be interested in sun versus shade tube dimensional change. I still have the tube I used in my garage somewhere, but outside it's 20 C. below zero now. Maybe in the spring I'll bring it out, do a test, and report back. Where I live, sun to shade temperature difference in spring and fall is significant.

Possibly you could fill a short length of the tube with ice water,measure it,then let it warm up to room temperature and measure again?

That way we would not be wondering all winter long.

You imply an interesting question. Does the temperature of the liquid change the height difference between the meniscus and the surface tension wetting point at the wall of the tube?

It might, but since the meniscus is the actual measuring point,it would not matter,but it would be interesting so find out anyway.

I know detergent will affect it by lowering the surface tension,but the meniscus itself will be unchanged.

I don't use detergent because of the possibility of getting sustained bubbles in the tube.

The meniscus is the entire curved surface of the water in the tube. The bottom of the meniscus is the standard measuring point.

Surface tension draws the liquid up the sides of the tube (for combinations of materials where the liquid wets the tube material). The amount of liquid drawn up the sides is highly dependent on the size of the tube. For tubes whose inside diameter is large compared to the height of the side of the meniscus, the amount of liquid drawn up is commonly negligible, but not zero. Any liquid pulled upward by surface tension must have been pulled out of the bottom of the meniscus, but since the meniscus is in fact pulling upward, the level of the bottom of the meniscus may be slightly higher than would be the case for a liquid that did not wet the glass. The meniscus in a glass capillary tube can easily and very rapidly lift a small amount of water several inches.

It is not necessary to add the detergent to the entire volume of water, when using a long tube; the tiniest drop of liquid detergent added at the end of the tube will do the job, and will take quite a while to disperse down the tube. In the absence of surface agitation, no air bubbles will be added.

You are right.I should have specified the bottom of a concave meniscus.

There are certain times when the meniscus can be positive,like when the liquid is rising.I always wait for the meniscus to settle before taking a measurement.

I will always move the tube up and down slightly to get the minimum meniscus.

Certain liquids present a convex meniscus,like mercury on glass.

For practical purposes,such as I am referring to, if you use the same point for all measurements it will not matter.

Question:

If you drill a small hole in the side of the capillary tube to which you are referring,and bring the meniscus to that point,will it continually flow out of the tube?

"If you drill a small hole in the side of the capillary tube to which you are referring, and bring the meniscus to that point, will it continually flow out of the tube?"

I've wondered that myself. I don't think so, but haven't had the means to drill that small hole in glass! The results would undoubtedly depend on the size, shape, and surface properties of the hole. A drilled hole would surely act differently than one produced by heating the side and blowing a hole with nicely rounded edges, or using a laser to erode it.

On the other hand, if some fibers that have greater surface tension or smaller gaps than the capillary tube feed out of the top of the capillary into a fibrous mat (like blotter paper), it will keep a spot moist. I believe that the evaporation of water from the mat provides the energy to lift the water. I see no source of energy to 'pump' the water up to the side hole.

I believe capillary action and surface tension is responsible for the meniscus.Trees use capillary action to lift water hundreds of feet,like in the Redwoods.

If we could find a way to use that principle to pump large quantities of water......!!

check this out: http://www.science4all.org/article/the-amazing-physics-of-water-in-trees/

Re: Using a drop of detergent to break surface tension.

I have always liked the trick of floating a small needle on the water surface in a glass - then just a touch of detergent and the needle sinks. Water strider bugs scoot around held up by surface tension. I have heard if you put a drop of detergent beside one of those bugs, it will sink, but I have never tried it. Seems kind of a mean thing to do.

If there is such a temperature effect it would not account for the magnitude of liquid level changes relating to temperature changes I observed on the day in question. As HiTekRedNek points out, it could have been partially due to (invisible) entrained air expanding within the tube, as well as tube dimensional changes relating to temperature changes. Whatever the cause, I think it's reasonable to conclude that ambient temperature change was the root cause, because as I wrote earlier, on the following day when the sky was clear and the temperature stable, I had no problems.

Unfortunately, a micrometer is only slightly better than a ruler for measuring the diameter of something as soft as flexible clear tubing, to the precision that would be required to notice a difference due to temperature. There would likely be larger changes due to the curvature of the line than due to heat.

Also, the diameter of the tubing would not be a good indicator of the level of the water at the surfaces. Water expands at a rate considerably faster than the tubing, but expansion of the tubing would actually decrease the change in water level due to thermal expansion/contraction.

I tried using a laser level in bright daylight; couldn't see the laser line. The water level did the job.

I have a red laser, and I need the sensor for it on a bright day... I never cared for it,... because you can move the sensor about 1/8” and it still pings.

The green laser is more intense,... this you maybe able to see better.

in the shipyard where you need to mount items on the port and starboard side and a reference line to each other... we used the water level.