Fast Foamer info

[Mikey P]

Home - Foaming Floors

foamingfloors.com

They get that softer bristles are better..

 

[Nate The Great]

Von who?!?

Wher's CleanWork's brother Mardie?!?

 

[BIG WOOD]

I’ve seen how well those perform. I’d have one if they weren’t so expensive.

 

[Kenny Hayes]

What the h e double l are you talking about? Mr 2 Giant truckmount person and you gonna quibble over the price of a foaming crb??? You’re one rung below Damon!

 

[Cleanworks]

The biggest problem I see with a CRB system is that even with trays, you eventually get so much debris buildup, it starts spitting it out. How often do you have to clean the brushes and the chassis?

 

[Kenny Hayes]

Wait, you’ve never used em? Serious question for once?

 

[BIG WOOD]

Foaming is superior over chemical spray. You know that if we didn’t lose suction in our hoses that our treatment would be foaming.

And crb brushes don’t violate a warranty on new carpet. So you’d get more contracts. And the trays are better than washing 50 bonnet pads for big commercial jobs. I know more about LMC than most of you think.

 

[BIG WOOD]

What the h e double l are you talking about? Mr 2 Giant truckmount person and you gonna quibble over the price of a foaming crb??? You’re one rung below Damon!

I get much more for what I’ve spent on my new Everest vs a foaming crb. They’re around $10k if not more now. I know they spent allot of time and money testing so I understand. I just hope the cost drops some

 

[Kenny Hayes]

Ok, you got me there!!!! I certainly wasn’t expecting anything like that. You know where they can stick that foam. I bought a Bane

 

[Cleanworks]

Foaming is superior over chemical spray. You know that if we didn’t lose suction in our hoses that our treatment would be foaming.

And crb brushes don’t violate a warranty on new carpet. So you’d get more contracts. And the trays are better than washing 50 bonnet pads for big commercial jobs. I know more about LMC than most of you think.

Von Schrader has been selling foaming machines with cylindrical brushes for years.

 

[Dr. Kleen]

Von Schrader has been selling foaming machines with cylindrical brushes for years.

I remember using one of those in the 80’s. Incorrectly of course; my boss at the time had me use it to scrub the carpets before we saturated them with warm tap water & “extraction cleaner” using a fiberglass portable!!

 

[Cleanworks]

I remember using one of those in the 80’s. Incorrectly of course; my boss at the time had me use it to scrub the carpets before we saturated them with warm tap water & “extraction cleaner” using a fiberglass portable!!

I used to own one of their old black machines as well as the upholstery machine. They weren't grounded and I got tired of being shocked by them. They worked well though on commercial. A little cumbersome for residential.

 

[Luky]

The biggest problem I see with a CRB system is that even with trays, you eventually get so much debris buildup, it starts spitting it out. How often do you have to clean the brushes and the chassis?

I have Brush Pro 20 and 17. The renovators on both CRBs are deep enough to contain all the debris collected ( 10-12 areas). If I experience a heavily soiled carpet, I keep renovators off for a few minutes so customers can see what's lurking in their carpet. The lecture pays off because a seemingly clean and well-vacuumed carpet will produce a lot of clumps of hair, dust, and smaller particles. Most of the time, the customer disbelieves in the mess that would stay on the carpet if it hadn't been worked over with CRB. I try to clean brushes every day; an easy and effective way is the pet's hair metal rake.

 

[Luky]

That's what it looks like without renovators.

 

[Willy P]

I used a fork to clean my brushes. Slow but worked well.

 

[icleancarpetz]

Oh my god…all these years ive been jeopardizing my health and others using pump up sprayer and/or 2 gallon onboard sprayer with my Whittacker machine and the cases of Crystal Dry that never run out like the the five loaves and the two fish that fed great multitudes.

Dang it!

 

[Mikey P]

Von Schrader has been selling foaming machines with cylindrical brushes for years.

who knew

https://statevacuum.com/product/von-scrhader-lmx-low-moisture-carpet-extraction-system/

 

[Mikey P]

Weight – 54 lbs with handle (46 lbs without handle

 

[Russ Roberts]

You guys don't know me, but as someone who has used a fast foamer, several times at churches, cube farms, carpeted worked out tracks full of drink spills, doctors offices etc, (my buddy Steve Brown is the one who has been doing all the testing with the carpet mills for Fast Foamer), this is going to hit you diaper spinners hard.

We did a side by side comparison in my garage with mill test sample carpets, and the results were the practically the same between a 570 running 9.5 flow and 450 psi with 2 dry strokes and the fast foamer with pet vac, and scrubbing it in both directions twice.

I'll see if I can get Steve in here so he can explain the difference, but just know a lot of this is probably going to go over most guys heads but it's undeniable it rivals HWE as long as grease isn't involved but who wants to clean restaurants anyway?! This system is targeted at commercial, not residential, and for the people who are worried about the lil dingleberries (carpet balls that fall out of the trays here and there), you gotta move the cord every hundred feet so pick up the one or two that MAY have come out and typically the brushes and the CRB overall stay cleaner.

 

[Mikey P]

You guys don't know me, but as someone who has used a fast foamer, several times at churches, cube farms, carpeted worked out tracks full of drink spills, doctors offices etc, (my buddy Steve Brown is the one who has been doing all the testing with the carpet mills for Fast Foamer), this is going to hit you diaper spinners hard.

We did a side by side comparison in my garage with mill test sample carpets, and the results were the practically the same between a 570 running 9.5 flow and 450 psi with 2 dry strokes and the fast foamer with pet vac, and scrubbing it in both directions twice.

I'll see if I can get Steve in here so he can explain the difference, but just know a lot of this is probably going to go over most guys heads but it's undeniable it rivals HWE as long as grease isn't involved but who wants to clean restaurants anyway?! This system is targeted at commercial, not residential, and for the people who are worried about the lil dingleberries (carpet balls that fall out of the trays here and there), you gotta move the cord every hundred feet so pick up the one or two that MAY have come out and typically the brushes and the CRB overall stay cleaner.

Can you explain what "practically the same" is based on?


Ease of use?
Time spent ?
ATP testing?
Dry time?

Or just visual appearance?


How about corners, edges, under furniture, narrow areas, stair risers and bullnoses?

Heavy grease?
Urine?


You know, all the same areas and situations that present challenges for all vlm methods ..


Thanks for chiming in!

 

[Stevie B]

I get much more for what I’ve spent on my new Everest vs a foaming crb. They’re around $10k if not more now. I know they spent allot of time and money testing so I understand. I just hope the cost drops some

If anything price may go up, LOL. Kidding. We want to bring the cost down and value up. When you understand this system, you'll know if it's for you or your business model immediately, or if you want to break into other markets where the prohibited bonnet (pad) method is still being used. The Fast Foamer does not replace WRE. However, this doesn't automatically mean or imply that WRE is superior. We can continue the conversation later. Feel free to email me with any questions, not just about the Fast Foamer system. The industry is about to get an AWAKENING like never before.

 

[Mikey P]

If anything price may go up, LOL. Kidding. We want to bring the cost down and value up. When you understand this system, you'll know if it's for you or your business model immediately, or if you want to break into other markets where the prohibited bonnet (pad) method is still being used. The Fast Foamer does not replace WRE. However, this doesn't automatically mean or imply that WRE is superior. We can continue the conversation later. Feel free to email me with any questions, not just about the Fast Foamer system. The industry is about to get an AWAKENING like never before.

WRE?

What's that?

 

[Stevie B]

Ok, you got me there!!!! I certainly wasn’t expecting anything like that. You know where they can stick that foam. I bought a Bane

Von Schrader has been selling foaming machines with cylindrical brushes for years.

Not this foam and not from a CRB. This system is the epitome of synergy.

 

[Cleanworks]

Not this foam and not from a CRB. This system is the epitome of synergy.

I'm curious as to how the system produces foam. The Von Schrader system utilizes the vacuum motor exhaust to aerate the foam, blowing a very dry foam out of the machine where is is scrubbed in by the cylindrical brush then vacuumed up.

 

[Cleanworks]

I'm curious as to how the system produces foam. The Von Schrader system utilizes the vacuum motor exhaust to aerate the foam, blowing a very dry foam out of the machine where is is scrubbed in by the cylindrical brush then vacuumed up.

I watched your videos, I see you use an air compressor. Very interesting.

 

[Stevie B]

I have Brush Pro 20 and 17. The renovators on both CRBs are deep enough to contain all the debris collected ( 10-12 areas). If I experience a heavily soiled carpet, I keep renovators off for a few minutes so customers can see what's lurking in their carpet. The lecture pays off because a seemingly clean and well-vacuumed carpet will produce a lot of clumps of hair, dust, and smaller particles. Most of the time, the customer disbelieves in the mess that would stay on the carpet if it hadn't been worked over with CRB. I try to clean brushes every day; an easy and effective way is the pet's hair metal rake.

Great point! Vacuuming is only really effective on 40-50% of the dry insoluble soils (proper descriptors: fine, lightweight, but does include others). Not 80% or 100% of the 85%, like some may claim. I hear many in the industry, including manufacturer reps, misunderstand and explain this incorrectly. The maximum is 60%. The remaining dry insoluble soils (descriptors: heavy, coarse) are "entangled, trapped, and embedded" within the "effective pile." This accounts for 30-40% of the 85% dry insoluble component.

Carpet Cleaner Industries/Carpet Cleaner America posted that it can be upwards of 80%. This is why, regardless of whether water rinse extraction is used or not, mechanical intervention is required for proper cleaning to occur. Here's how it works: When we talk about "mechanical agitation," there is only one— the CRB machine. Specifically, the epitome is the CCI/CCA TM series. Not that others can't work as effectively, but this is the benchmark. This is the standard other manufacturers need to strive for or exceed.

For proper cleaning to occur beyond vacuuming (vacuuming itself is "proper" due to the "fluid" it uses to separate and extract soils), it requires one of the following:

• Vacuuming + CRB with chemical (mechanical agitation & extraction) Dry Compound and Encapsulation Extraction.
• OR Vacuuming + CRB with chemical (mechanical agitation & extraction) + WRE.

Note: A mechanical CRB can be used dry, but under the hierarchy of intervention—and the rules that govern effectiveness, efficiency, and maximizing/minimizing—extracting the "entangled, trapped, and embedded" dry soils is more effective and efficient when performed during the soil suspension phase.

The CRB does what rotary machines can't. The CRB not only provides optimal mechanical agitation, but it also mechanically extracts the entangled, trapped, and embedded dry insoluble soils that vacuuming and WRE CANNOT REMOVE! To some degree, maybe, but let’s not be silly—we focus on effectiveness and efficiency while maximizing results and minimizing effort.

Again, I'm not here to debate, only educate. So, even if "pile lifting" were performed weekly and WRE is for soluble soils, the CRB is still required for proper agitation (distributing chemistry and disrupting soils).

Now, someone might say, "My truck mount this and my truck mount that," but you'll lose when it comes to proper cleaning. Now, is this wrong per se? Well, if you know it and choose not to use it because you believe efficiency is gained without losing effectiveness, that’s your choice—but at least you now know and understand it.

Note: It’s how one has been taught to use the “mechanisms of effective soil suspension” aka TACT or CHAT. This called “true synergy” maximizing all, while “adaptive synergy” aka “adaptive cleaning” is where we allow chemical and dwell to passively work for us.

So, when a cleaner like me comes into contact with your customer or client, and you explain your case, but I demonstrate how I can incorporate a CRB into WRE without losing efficiency (without increasing costs or reducing profits, depending on how you look at it) and increase effectiveness by showing them the 30-40% of dry soils that remain when you clean… yet you told them it didn’t matter because of your "truck mount" system—how do you think that's going to work out. This doesn’t confirm a cleaner is “wrong”, however adding more value is “right” for everyone. More value for the client and more profit for the cleaner.

Again, I’m not here to attack anyone specifically or personally—just the misinformation and manipulation surrounding the "system". We don’t need to argue about methods or systems. WRE has its place. I love truck mounts. I’m very familiar.

Shit, you don’t think I hear "Tim the Tool Man Taylor" in my head and want to start grunting, barking, and howling? LOL! I’m all about it. Restaurants, residential, apartments—anywhere the power of heat, pressure, and flow is needed—I’m all about it.

But when you truly understand everything, most people will be like, "Damn. I could have been focused more on profit and growing my business rather than being confused and distracted by what is "best".
The "best" to you and me may be different.

A statement on the CRI's website is FALSE:
"What vacuuming and spot cleaning miss, extraction cleaning should fix."

 

[Mikey P]

I appeared to be being ignored

 

[Mikey P]

If you're anywhere near Indiana or would like to set up Reg and Dane at carpet Cleaner America you can come demo this process when we clean the Ronald McDonald House in Indianapolis in a couple of weeks.

Because of the other vendors paying to support this event there would be a fee involved but let me know if you'd like to discuss this

 

[Stevie B]

I'm curious as to how the system produces foam. The Von Schrader system utilizes the vacuum motor exhaust to aerate the foam, blowing a very dry foam out of the machine where is is scrubbed in by the cylindrical brush then vacuumed up.

The system uses a proprietary continuous compressor that runs on less than 2 amps at about 30 PSI—very low. The compressor functions similarly to a turbocharger, in that it has a dual function. It drives a pneumatic-powered Flojet pump, eliminating the need for additional power consumption to pump the solution to the CRB, while also using airflow to generate foam.

The foam is generated at the CRB, increasing both effectiveness (foam integrity) and efficiency (lower power consumption). We don’t want to pump foam through a 1/8" tube; we want it on demand, with as little degradation (bubble coalescing and drainage) as possible. Creating bubbles is easy—we’ve all done it as kids.

But it’s not just about those components. When it comes to foam, just like cleaning, the concept is simple—but as soon as we explain it, we lose the audience. There is timing (sequencing) and balancing between mechanical and chemical factors. We know that "more is not always better." The encapsulant has been specifically formulated to create a more stable foam (surfactants and polymers achieve this).

Now, in the traditional sense, wet foams (or unstable foams) clean better—like car wash foam or hard surface cleaning—because there is more movement, which increases chemical activity. High-energy foams (95% air) are difficult to manipulate because they are so dry and dense, loaded with exponential energy on a molecular level—something most people (myself included) can barely comprehend. Foam created during agitation on, say, a resilient surface, is often better or best.

So, I know people may start scratching their heads: "If wet foams clean better…?" TRADITIONALLY!
This is what makes the Fast Foamer system so powerful—it has harnessed this exponential energy through the design I mentioned above.

The very stable foam is loaded at the optimal point on the CRB brushes, and when the HEF is introduced to a porous medium (carpet aka fiber matrix), the energy is transferred to the carpet, and soils are essentially sheared and blown off the fiber as the bubbles collapse—instantly separating, suspending, and encapsulating.

This High-Energy Foam is comprised of a polyhedral micro-bubble matrix (bubble sizes ranging from less than 1/10mm to about 4/10mm) capable of imbibition.

What is imbibition?

It means the foam is so dry and has so much surface energy that it can pull used liquid motor oil into the liquid of the foam. I have video evidence of this. The motor oil disperses throughout the liquid channels and nodes of the foam, as well as encapsulating smaller micron dry insoluble particulates.

For anyone who doesn’t believe it—look up fracking and imbibition. This method is used to extract oil and gas, and when it drains into a liquid, it is then extracted and separated. The "suspension concept" is the same.

Now, combine imbibition with bubble coalescing, capillary action, and drainage—there is significantly more movement with foam than with a liquid.

We’ll do more science later and talk about "solvent sheathing" as it relates to liquid systems.

---

​

Think of it like this:

• HWE = [water + heat + surfactant] = solvent power (effective on heavy organic soiling).
• High-Energy Foam = [water + surfactant/polymer + air] = mechanical and surface expansion power.

What happens when we heat water? It changes state—but there is no real movement without the CRB. However, if we modify the water (like a car battery holding a charge), it can now hold air, which is energy. Couple this with a CRB, and you have optimal synergy within the system.

Now, imagine if we could modify water to hold the heat of the preconditioner for 15-20 minutes or longer.

Why don’t TM guys work on that?

A gel-type preconditioner that breaks down into a liquid as the heat dissipates (transferring into the carpet). Instead of the industry attacking the Fast Foamer, why not learn from it?

This tells us where TM systems’ power lies—at the head of the wand with "instant" heat.

But wait—I thought heat was supposed to be used prior, during the soil suspension phase for dissolving and emulsifying, not during the extraction phase?

We’re getting closer to pulling back the curtain.

---

​

If you took two ounces of HEF and a liquid counterpart (heated) and applied them to a petri dish:

• The HEF would take 3-4 hours to coalesce and drain down to a liquid.
• The liquid counterpart would lose its heat within minutes.

They don’t cancel each other out—they complement each other.

We can’t add heat to foam because it will destabilize it, and WRE doesn’t want foam for the same reason—it reduces efficiency in their eyes.

Organic soils require more moisture for emulsification.

We want to be both effective and efficient—maximizing while minimizing.

HEF is effective, but compared to WRE (which melts/dissolves soil by changing its state of matter), we need moisture and heat!

---

​

See? I'm not the bad guy, LOL!
Well… not until someone wants to challenge the use of a CRB or proper sequencing.

Water pressure alone is not sufficient agitation for the effective separation of soils.

I haven’t seen or tested Von’s foam, but I don’t believe it’s a true dry foam (90-95% air) or has the same polyhedral bubble matrix, based on the volume of water used to create the foam and clean the specified square footage noted by them. I’ve broken this all down and will share it at some point.

We've got bigger fish to fry.

This isn’t just about foam—it’s about holding the Carpet & Rug Institute accountable for advocating improper product care and ensuring the IICRC removes the WRE bias from the S/R100.

There is corruption from WRE bias—primarily from TM advocates—plaguing our industry. This goes back a long way to the bane-clene days 1970's.

Residential needs to be separated from commercial—commercial requires more mechanical intervention than just heat and water.

We also need to separate commercial exceptions like restaurants from the vast majority of the commercial market.

Apologies for showing up and throwing up, but if you know me…

The flip side is: Would you rather I keep my knowledge to myself and use it to manipulate?

 

[Stevie B]

If you're anywhere near Indiana or would like to set up Reg and Dane at carpet Cleaner America you can come demo this process when we clean the Ronald McDonald House in Indianapolis in a couple of weeks.

Because of the other vendors paying to support this event there would be a fee involved but let me know if you'd like to discuss this

Absolutely. Reach out via email with details and we can coordinate. Reg and Dane are very familiar with this system, particularly the CRB side. However, I believe I can shed more light on what the CRB truly is and how it fits into the hierarchy of intervention.