Mikey P
Administrator
Because some suppliers have way too many 1.5's in stock to get rid of.
And some girly cleaners have smalll hands.
And some girly cleaners have smalll hands.
2" hose to the wand, more CFM's or Lift?
- Thread starter FastEddie
- Start date
Ken, you are wrong.
I haven't got all day to tell you why, so I'll try and keep it short.
The industry in general has been telling cleaners that you can only move so much cfm through a 1.5" hose, although that is a true statement, the REAL numbers are MUCH higher than what has been preached.
Add to that the "lift factor" if hose A is being powered by 300 cfm and 10"hg, and hose B 300 cfm and 18"hg. Hose B will empty contents quicker, end of story.
More holes in your story: If your whip hose only allows 250cfm, then why when you hook it to 2" hose, do you hear a sudden rush of air INCREASE, and a further rush when you then hook the 2" to 2.5"?
As for your larger blower=larger lift theory, in fact many larger blowers DO NOT run a corresponding higher lift, but have a HUGE vacuum increase even on a 1.5" hose.
In fact many #3 and #4 blowers run at 16"hg, so if the LIFT was the only thing responsible for the increased vacuum, then there would be NO REASON to go with a larger blower, but we all know better.
Same thing goes with the wand/carpet interface "theory", if what you preach about imited airflow was true, then running a hole glide with small holes would be POINTLESS with a large blower, but in REALITY we know better, beauase vacuumtheory is not so easily put into a box of cfm and lift, it's dynamic.
Sometimes you read stuff here, and you just have to stop and use some common sense.
I haven't got all day to tell you why, so I'll try and keep it short.
The industry in general has been telling cleaners that you can only move so much cfm through a 1.5" hose, although that is a true statement, the REAL numbers are MUCH higher than what has been preached.
Add to that the "lift factor" if hose A is being powered by 300 cfm and 10"hg, and hose B 300 cfm and 18"hg. Hose B will empty contents quicker, end of story.
More holes in your story: If your whip hose only allows 250cfm, then why when you hook it to 2" hose, do you hear a sudden rush of air INCREASE, and a further rush when you then hook the 2" to 2.5"?
As for your larger blower=larger lift theory, in fact many larger blowers DO NOT run a corresponding higher lift, but have a HUGE vacuum increase even on a 1.5" hose.
In fact many #3 and #4 blowers run at 16"hg, so if the LIFT was the only thing responsible for the increased vacuum, then there would be NO REASON to go with a larger blower, but we all know better.
Same thing goes with the wand/carpet interface "theory", if what you preach about imited airflow was true, then running a hole glide with small holes would be POINTLESS with a large blower, but in REALITY we know better, beauase vacuumtheory is not so easily put into a box of cfm and lift, it's dynamic.
Sometimes you read stuff here, and you just have to stop and use some common sense.
G
Guest
Guest
tell me why my 1.5 tubed wands "stick" to the carpet better with 2" hose all the way compared to using a whip?
Larry: As a general rule on most carpet, it doesn't. I have measured it both ways, and the effort to move the wand back an forth except for one thing: because the wand is now supporting the much heavier and STIFFER 2" hose behind it, it is not quite as easy to move back and forth as with a whip hose. But if you slow the movement down so that this is not a factor, the effort is the same. Use a 2" tubed wand and there is a difference over the 1.5" wand.
Larry: As a general rule on most carpet, it doesn't. I have measured it both ways, and the effort to move the wand back an forth except for one thing: because the wand is now supporting the much heavier and STIFFER 2" hose behind it, it is not quite as easy to move back and forth as with a whip hose. But if you slow the movement down so that this is not a factor, the effort is the same. Use a 2" tubed wand and there is a difference over the 1.5" wand.
Fon Johnson
Member
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2006
- Messages
- 1,066
It is kind of difficult to put a formula to something as complex as lift and air movement at the carpet with style, technique, wand build, angle, type of carpet, etc. BUT someone will come along and do just that, and tell those who have experienced differences that they are stupid. Not only did I experience quicker dry times, but I noticed a difference in the cleaning as well. This is on a carpet I had cleaned many times when I first lost the whip. I used the same cleaner, same psi, lift etc. as before, and the difference was noticable. If you can hear a difference in pitch at the hose, there has been a change. If the whole "wci" limitation were 100% true, then there would be NO difference in dry times when comparing my 33 to a vortex.
BTW, I have yet to SEE an actual formula. :? I hear about them, but just don't see them. For just one minute, put aside your testing, and explain why many see a difference between using a whip, and going whipless? Please use some reasoning other than we are crazy, stupid, or un-scientific. We have experienced faster dry times, and better cleaning. Those are absolutes that can be visually measured.. If the wand will only flow x amount of air at the wci anyway, why will a vortex dry the carpet in 1/4 of the time as a smaller tm that is producing 16" of lift, and more cfm than is supposed to move at the "cwi" anyway? If you can only move x amount of air, then a larger machine should do no better than a smaller one that produces more than what is possible to move at the "cwi".
I took some physics etc. in college, but I did not study aerodynamics and won't pretend to know ALL of the formulas that affect these theories.
BTW, I have yet to SEE an actual formula. :? I hear about them, but just don't see them. For just one minute, put aside your testing, and explain why many see a difference between using a whip, and going whipless? Please use some reasoning other than we are crazy, stupid, or un-scientific. We have experienced faster dry times, and better cleaning. Those are absolutes that can be visually measured.. If the wand will only flow x amount of air at the wci anyway, why will a vortex dry the carpet in 1/4 of the time as a smaller tm that is producing 16" of lift, and more cfm than is supposed to move at the "cwi" anyway? If you can only move x amount of air, then a larger machine should do no better than a smaller one that produces more than what is possible to move at the "cwi".
I took some physics etc. in college, but I did not study aerodynamics and won't pretend to know ALL of the formulas that affect these theories.
G
Guest
Guest
Ken, you are wrong.
No Greenie, you are the one wrong here, and I will explain why.
I haven't got all day to tell you why, so I'll try and keep it short.
The industry in general has been telling cleaners that you can only move so much cfm through a 1.5" hose, although that is a true statement, the REAL numbers are MUCH higher than what has been preached.
Add to that the "lift factor" if hose A is being powered by 300 cfm and 10"hg, and hose B 300 cfm and 18"hg. Hose B will empty contents quicker, end of story.
NOT END OF STORY! If you understood how airflow worked, you would understand that 300 cfm is 300 cfm, regardless of how it was created. Air does not care if lift of 10"HG or 18"HG created it; as it is a measure of how much air is moving. Air moving is what moves the water out of the carpet. Air movement(cfm) is created by a differential in pressure(lift).You can use different amounts of lift to create the cfm, but 300 cfm is EXACTLY 300 cfm and will of necessity empty both hose A and hose B exactly the same time.
More holes in your story: If your whip hose only allows 250cfm, then why when you hook it to 2" hose, do you hear a sudden rush of air INCREASE, and a further rush when you then hook the 2" to 2.5"?
What holes? lol. You are comparing the flow potential of 1.5" hose(about 250 cfm) against the flow capacity of 2" hose(about 500 cfm). This only matters when the wands are off the carpet of course. The hoses will flow up to their capacities or the capacity of the blower whichever is LESS. In the case of the 4M Sutorbuilt blower, the flow it puts out of around 320 cfm is less than the 500 cfm capacity of the 2" hose, so you get about 320 cfm of airflow with it. n the case of the 1.5" hose, the 250 cfm flow capacity of it is less than the 320 cfm the blower allows so 250 is all you get with it. Anybody with ears can hear the difference that another 70 cfm produces through a wand, so no surprise that those that think that they are going to get that extra airflow if they ditch the whip, are willing to do so. Problem is they wont. As soon as the wand is working on the carpet, the airflow will drop down to under 150 cfms, even with most glides on it. Under those circumstances, even the flow capacity of a short whip hose does not restrict the flow.
As for your larger blower=larger lift theory, in fact many larger blowers DO NOT run a corresponding higher lift, but have a HUGE vacuum increase even on a 1.5" hose.
In fact many #3 and #4 blowers run at 16"hg, so if the LIFT was the only thing responsible for the increased vacuum, then there would be NO REASON to go with a larger blower, but we all know better.
The lift is not the ONLY factor that determines vacuum performance , and I never said it was. The displacement of the blower determines the mean average vacuum level as well. Let me explain that. In any vacuum system, there is a certain level of air that needs to be displaced to create vacuum. The volume of the waste tank is the largest of these areas, but the displacement of the hose and wand is included in this number as well.If the cubic feet of area that this is comprised of was measured out to 50 cubic feet, then to reach 15"HG your blower needs to move 25 cubic feet of air.
Now if the blower is rated at 300 cfm(cubic feet /minute) that means it moves 300/60 = 5 cubic feet/second. Thus it will take about 5 seconds to move 25 cubic feet of air.That is pretty close to what most 4M systems deliver. Not alot of snap when it takes that long to reach maximum lift.
If the blower is rated at 600 cfm however, things are very different. Now the blower can displace the air out of the system twice as fast as before. The waste tank(where most of the air is) is joined to the blower by a larger 3.5" or 4" diameter hose so is not restricted in this. The net result is the vacuum system reachs it maximum lift in only 2.5 seconds instead of 5 seconds. This is what happens when you have a 5.6" blower working in your truck. It has snap. Put your hand on the end of it and the hose will jump. Step the lift of to 18"HG level rather than the 14"HG level and it will jump even more, and that lift will pull the blood thru your skin.So the bigger blowered TM runs a higher mean level vac level due to the displacement of air happening faster than the smaller blowered machine can do it is all. And every time the wands are lifted from the carpet, the larger one recovers to the maximum vacuum level faster as well. That is why it is stronger.
Same thing goes with the wand/carpet interface "theory", if what you preach about imited airflow was true, then running a hole glide with small holes would be POINTLESS with a large blower, but in REALITY we know better, beauase vacuumtheory is not so easily put into a box of cfm and lift, it's dynamic.
A glide with holes is needed MORE with a larger blowered machine than it is with a smaller one. This is because it runs a higher average lift level due to the faster vacuum displacement it runs. If a larger blower is set at the exact same lift(say 14"HG) as a smaller one is, the cleaner using the larger machine will get tired more quickly because the net lift at the wand will be higher than the smaller blowered machine will be so he needs the glide more.
Sometimes you read stuff here, and you just have to stop and use some common sense.
Hey, even I can agree with this last part. LOL
No Greenie, you are the one wrong here, and I will explain why.
I haven't got all day to tell you why, so I'll try and keep it short.
The industry in general has been telling cleaners that you can only move so much cfm through a 1.5" hose, although that is a true statement, the REAL numbers are MUCH higher than what has been preached.
Add to that the "lift factor" if hose A is being powered by 300 cfm and 10"hg, and hose B 300 cfm and 18"hg. Hose B will empty contents quicker, end of story.
NOT END OF STORY! If you understood how airflow worked, you would understand that 300 cfm is 300 cfm, regardless of how it was created. Air does not care if lift of 10"HG or 18"HG created it; as it is a measure of how much air is moving. Air moving is what moves the water out of the carpet. Air movement(cfm) is created by a differential in pressure(lift).You can use different amounts of lift to create the cfm, but 300 cfm is EXACTLY 300 cfm and will of necessity empty both hose A and hose B exactly the same time.
More holes in your story: If your whip hose only allows 250cfm, then why when you hook it to 2" hose, do you hear a sudden rush of air INCREASE, and a further rush when you then hook the 2" to 2.5"?
What holes? lol. You are comparing the flow potential of 1.5" hose(about 250 cfm) against the flow capacity of 2" hose(about 500 cfm). This only matters when the wands are off the carpet of course. The hoses will flow up to their capacities or the capacity of the blower whichever is LESS. In the case of the 4M Sutorbuilt blower, the flow it puts out of around 320 cfm is less than the 500 cfm capacity of the 2" hose, so you get about 320 cfm of airflow with it. n the case of the 1.5" hose, the 250 cfm flow capacity of it is less than the 320 cfm the blower allows so 250 is all you get with it. Anybody with ears can hear the difference that another 70 cfm produces through a wand, so no surprise that those that think that they are going to get that extra airflow if they ditch the whip, are willing to do so. Problem is they wont. As soon as the wand is working on the carpet, the airflow will drop down to under 150 cfms, even with most glides on it. Under those circumstances, even the flow capacity of a short whip hose does not restrict the flow.
As for your larger blower=larger lift theory, in fact many larger blowers DO NOT run a corresponding higher lift, but have a HUGE vacuum increase even on a 1.5" hose.
In fact many #3 and #4 blowers run at 16"hg, so if the LIFT was the only thing responsible for the increased vacuum, then there would be NO REASON to go with a larger blower, but we all know better.
The lift is not the ONLY factor that determines vacuum performance , and I never said it was. The displacement of the blower determines the mean average vacuum level as well. Let me explain that. In any vacuum system, there is a certain level of air that needs to be displaced to create vacuum. The volume of the waste tank is the largest of these areas, but the displacement of the hose and wand is included in this number as well.If the cubic feet of area that this is comprised of was measured out to 50 cubic feet, then to reach 15"HG your blower needs to move 25 cubic feet of air.
Now if the blower is rated at 300 cfm(cubic feet /minute) that means it moves 300/60 = 5 cubic feet/second. Thus it will take about 5 seconds to move 25 cubic feet of air.That is pretty close to what most 4M systems deliver. Not alot of snap when it takes that long to reach maximum lift.
If the blower is rated at 600 cfm however, things are very different. Now the blower can displace the air out of the system twice as fast as before. The waste tank(where most of the air is) is joined to the blower by a larger 3.5" or 4" diameter hose so is not restricted in this. The net result is the vacuum system reachs it maximum lift in only 2.5 seconds instead of 5 seconds. This is what happens when you have a 5.6" blower working in your truck. It has snap. Put your hand on the end of it and the hose will jump. Step the lift of to 18"HG level rather than the 14"HG level and it will jump even more, and that lift will pull the blood thru your skin.So the bigger blowered TM runs a higher mean level vac level due to the displacement of air happening faster than the smaller blowered machine can do it is all. And every time the wands are lifted from the carpet, the larger one recovers to the maximum vacuum level faster as well. That is why it is stronger.
Same thing goes with the wand/carpet interface "theory", if what you preach about imited airflow was true, then running a hole glide with small holes would be POINTLESS with a large blower, but in REALITY we know better, beauase vacuumtheory is not so easily put into a box of cfm and lift, it's dynamic.
A glide with holes is needed MORE with a larger blowered machine than it is with a smaller one. This is because it runs a higher average lift level due to the faster vacuum displacement it runs. If a larger blower is set at the exact same lift(say 14"HG) as a smaller one is, the cleaner using the larger machine will get tired more quickly because the net lift at the wand will be higher than the smaller blowered machine will be so he needs the glide more.
Sometimes you read stuff here, and you just have to stop and use some common sense.
Hey, even I can agree with this last part. LOL
Fon Johnson
Member
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2006
- Messages
- 1,066
I thought that maybe Ken was getting it, until I read his last paragraph..
G
Guest
Guest
Damn Greenie, you know I taught you everything you know about airflow, but I did not teach you everything I know about it! When I first met you 3 years back you had not even seen a Titanium wand, never mind knowing about the advantages of using one.I understand that when you are busy selling stuff, you dont always have the time to understand how it works.
Jim Martin
Supportive Member
G
Guest
Guest
Me too, eh?
G
Guest
Guest
You are right about that Jimmy. I will never challenge Greenie on a cleaning windows debate. I don't know shit on that subject. lol
Fon Johnson
Member
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2006
- Messages
- 1,066
I'm waiting on answers, but it does not look like they are coming..
What's that saying.. something about dazzling and baffling? How does that go?
What's that saying.. something about dazzling and baffling? How does that go?
G
Guest
Guest
What kind of answers are you looking for Fon? There are all kind of formulas that I could put up here for you or anyone else to see, but if cleaners do not get the theory about how things work, they will not understand the mathmatical formula. So what is the point?
Best thing for any carpet cleaner to do that is serious about understanding airflow in truckmounts is to buy an anemometer to do their own readings from. That way, every change made in either glides, wands, and hose can be measured for it's effects.
I will be bringing mine with me when I go to all future conventions and Fests. That way you guys will see with your own eyes the way that airflow really works. It will convince some that changes need to be made on their equipment, while others that see will see that the equipment upgrades being contemplated never needed to be made in the first place.
Best thing for any carpet cleaner to do that is serious about understanding airflow in truckmounts is to buy an anemometer to do their own readings from. That way, every change made in either glides, wands, and hose can be measured for it's effects.
I will be bringing mine with me when I go to all future conventions and Fests. That way you guys will see with your own eyes the way that airflow really works. It will convince some that changes need to be made on their equipment, while others that see will see that the equipment upgrades being contemplated never needed to be made in the first place.
Fon Johnson
Member
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2006
- Messages
- 1,066
Ken Harris said:
ASSumptions..
G
Guest
Guest
Well, please enlighten us then.................
Jim Martin
Supportive Member
Fon I think it is
If you can't dazel them with excellence then
baffel them with Bull shit............
If you can't dazel them with excellence then
baffel them with Bull shit............
G
Guest
Guest
Most creative thinkers can do either Jim, but on this board I stick to doing the former rather than the latter.
Larry Cobb
Member
Fon;
I will repeat part of a post I made on another topic:
The general formula would take into account all of the above restrictions.
The sum of all of the #2 to #6 above lift restrictions would determine how much lift was left @ the carpet-wand interface to generate CFM thru the carpet.
Greenie guessed 200 CFM with a glided 14" x 2" wand.
Larry Cobb
I will repeat part of a post I made on another topic:
The general formula would take into account all of the above restrictions.
The sum of all of the #2 to #6 above lift restrictions would determine how much lift was left @ the carpet-wand interface to generate CFM thru the carpet.
Greenie guessed 200 CFM with a glided 14" x 2" wand.
Larry Cobb
Fon Johnson
Member
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2006
- Messages
- 1,066
Thanks, Larry. I appreciate your input, and I understand the aerodynamics of system functionality. The question is given the much talked about "wci" limit, why would a larger system reduce further dry times over what my 33 provides.. My system with a 33 blower meets or exceeds what is even "possible" at the "wci". We keep hearing that not using the whip, etc. has no plausible effect on cleaning or drying times due to the "wci" restrictions. On the other hand, despite being told such things make no difference, many report changes. You would think there were some sort of conspiracy to get people to get rid of the whip. LOL
8)
8)
Man, you guys are confusing. I was just about to order an adapter so I could get rid of my whip, now I just don't know. Guess I'll have to order it and see for myself. I have a 33 blower and just want to get the most I can out of it.
G
Guest
Guest
Nobody has mentioned hoss friction loss of different diameter hoses.
Something to think about
Something to think about
C
Carpet Dude
Guest
let's cut threw this mustard STUFF........
I use 1.5 wand from cmp attached to it a 25ft 2" flex hose then the normal 2" hoses to the tm tank. No problem slinging either of my cmp wands....I find that Joe Joe Cool's 2" to 1.5" adapter CUFF for the hose to the 1.5" wand works well.
I have been using this for about 4 months with no problem. And the lift and cfm's....out of this word........SO MARTY PLEASURE YOURSELF WITH THAT 47 YOU'RE THINKING OF GETTING CAUSE IT WILL MAKE YOU NODE YOUR HEAD AS TO WHY YOU EVER TOYED AROUND WITH A BOOSTER VAC....YET ALONE THE WHIMPY HAMBURGAR TM OF YOURS.
I use 1.5 wand from cmp attached to it a 25ft 2" flex hose then the normal 2" hoses to the tm tank. No problem slinging either of my cmp wands....I find that Joe Joe Cool's 2" to 1.5" adapter CUFF for the hose to the 1.5" wand works well.
I have been using this for about 4 months with no problem. And the lift and cfm's....out of this word........SO MARTY PLEASURE YOURSELF WITH THAT 47 YOU'RE THINKING OF GETTING CAUSE IT WILL MAKE YOU NODE YOUR HEAD AS TO WHY YOU EVER TOYED AROUND WITH A BOOSTER VAC....YET ALONE THE WHIMPY HAMBURGAR TM OF YOURS.
Dolly Llama
Number 5
Joey Johnston said:
Joey, all you need is a 2" to 1.5 hose cuff.
Just about any supplier worth their salt should have one.
Unscrew the 2" cuff on your 2" hose and screw on the new reducer cuff.
BTW, If you've never screwed a cuff on or off, they're left hand threads.
Clock wise loosens them.
If it's glued on, just cut it behind the cuff.
Give it a try, you'll only be out a few bucks if you don't like it or notice any difference
I never ran a 33 blower, but regardless of Ken's claims, I can tell the difference with my 45 and the 47 I had before that.
and no, it wasn't because of the weight of the hose.
..L.T.A.
..L.T.A.
G
Guest
Guest
I don't know if this article would help
It was published in Cleanfax a while ago. What I have found is that it is the combination.
http://www.cleanfax.com/article.asp?indexid=6632732
It was published in Cleanfax a while ago. What I have found is that it is the combination.
http://www.cleanfax.com/article.asp?indexid=6632732
C
Carpet Dude
Guest
Joe Joe davis has the best 2"-1.5" adapter.....will not come off the wand handle but stays perfectly tamed in it's place.......but that's only if you have a good sucking machine.
Ron Werner
Member
Say, is anyone a subscriber to ICS website. I've an article, Myths, Fables & Facts About Vacuum Systems written by Steve Brandt, Hydra Master Corp in the section Keeping Pace with Cleaning, July 1989 Vol.27, No.7.
This is the best I've read on the topic, including all that I've read on this posting. If someone can find that and post it, great. I'll see if I can get it into some form that I can post here. I just have it on photocopy, need a good OCR software.
The airflow is important, need lots of it and right from the floor through to the exhaust. But all kinds of airflow and no lift is useless, its the balance, cause 20"Hg is useless with no airflow.
Getting the water off the carpet is more a function of the air velocity at the WCI. Again, thats why the green glides work so well, all that airflow has to go through those itty bitty little holes and the air is screaming. Look at the HM Drimaster Rotary, same thing. Thats why the stair tool or hand tools scream so much and leave the carpet much drier than the floor wand.
If all you have is a 33, open the air path all the way to the floor, put a glide or a lip on your wand, something to decrease but not impede the airflow at the WCI, rev up your blower, and you WILL suck the water off the carpet. AS long as you aren't one of these speed cleaners (1 hour house packages) or air wanders :wink: You might not have the power for a 2.5" or 3" hose, but you'll see an improvement.
This is the best I've read on the topic, including all that I've read on this posting. If someone can find that and post it, great. I'll see if I can get it into some form that I can post here. I just have it on photocopy, need a good OCR software.
The airflow is important, need lots of it and right from the floor through to the exhaust. But all kinds of airflow and no lift is useless, its the balance, cause 20"Hg is useless with no airflow.
Getting the water off the carpet is more a function of the air velocity at the WCI. Again, thats why the green glides work so well, all that airflow has to go through those itty bitty little holes and the air is screaming. Look at the HM Drimaster Rotary, same thing. Thats why the stair tool or hand tools scream so much and leave the carpet much drier than the floor wand.
If all you have is a 33, open the air path all the way to the floor, put a glide or a lip on your wand, something to decrease but not impede the airflow at the WCI, rev up your blower, and you WILL suck the water off the carpet. AS long as you aren't one of these speed cleaners (1 hour house packages) or air wanders :wink: You might not have the power for a 2.5" or 3" hose, but you'll see an improvement.
As a final note, Ken said (several times) you will only have 100-150 cfm at the wand carpet interface, and that would be with a glide.
Larry's actual test showed 225 cfm with a Hybrid GreenGlide on a 14" wide wand with a 1.75" vac tube and 2" vac hose.
Bottom line, big blowers make a difference, but big HOSE makes all the difference.
Larry's actual test showed 225 cfm with a Hybrid GreenGlide on a 14" wide wand with a 1.75" vac tube and 2" vac hose.
Bottom line, big blowers make a difference, but big HOSE makes all the difference.
B&BGaryC
Member
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2007
- Messages
- 4,667
- Name
- B&BGaryC
Can't you just get a cuff that instantly turns a 2" to a 1.5" connect? then you have a 2 inch long whip right?
