For those of you wondering about 3/8 hose and flow

[KBRENNY]

I put 100 ft of 3/8 inch thermoplastic hose on my reel today that is followed by 150 ft of 1/4 inch thermoplastic.

I did not do this because of flow to one wand but wanted to make sure I had enough flow if I run two wands.

I would run my hoses out as usual and then where the 1/4 inch ends and the 3/8 begins there is a t with another quick connect to hook up another hose.



For larger jobs I would just have one 3/8 hose going into the building and then it would split into two 1/4 inch lines.

I tested my flow before the 3/8 install and at 550 psi I got 4.0 GPM at the TM, then I put a male quick connect in the end of the 250 ft of 1/4 inch and got 2.8 GPM, then hooked up the wand with 5 #2 jets and got 1.8 GPM.

After the 3/8 hose install I tested at 550 PSI still the same 4.0 GPM at the TM, but an increase to 3.4 GPM at the end of 100 ft of 3/8 connected to 150 ft of 1/4 with a male quick connect inserted in the end of hose, and got 2.0 GPM from the same 5 #2 jet wand.

GPM to wand before: 2.8 after: 3.4
GPM at 5 #2 jets before: 1.8 after: 2.0

Just thought some of you who were wondering about the flow rate difference in 3/8 vs 1/4 would like to know as real numbers.

 

[Greenie]

Thanks for that valuable field testing.

Goes to show there are quite a few variables.

It would be interesting to load up some #3 jets and run it as a comparison.

 

[Steve Smith]

Kenny

What brand and model of 3/8" thermoplastic hose are you using.

Do you know what the max temperature rating is?

Interesting test results.

My opinion, if a person needs 250' of hose at least 200' from the truck should be 3/8".

If it where me, I would only use 3/8" from the truckmount to the cleaning tool no matter how long the setup was.

 

[KBRENNY]

I believe it is synflex hose, it says 225 deg at 2270 psi on the outer jacket. I have never had any problem running 1/4 but I never had a TM that I could dual wand with before also. I was only concerned about getting enough water to the split to 2 1/4 hoses to run two wands.

Another thing I forgot to mention is that the 3/8 thermoplastic hose is like the 2.5 vac hose when it comes to space on the reel. It would be close to fit 200 ft of 3/8 on the reel. The 100 ft section of 3/8 took as much space as about 150 or more ft of 1/4.

 

[Kevin B]

What size blower and pump you running? I may consider going 3/8". I could have a Y from the two 1/4" outputs to a 3/8" hose that would run the rest of the way. Changing the plumbing to 3/8" at the truck would be a nice winter project.

 

[-JB-]

kool

 

[KBRENNY]

I have a roots 56 dsl blower, and a Hypro 2500 psi 4.8 gpm pump. When I built the machine I had all the hoses done in 3/8 on the machine and to the hose reel knowing this would be my next move. One thing to consider is that any 1/4 QC that is located after the 3/8" hose will be your major restriction. This is why the split I placed in my line was left on the line. The only way around this was to use 3/8 QC on everything and they are not as available. Plus I have not seen the protected ones like I run on the very end of the hose in 3/8.

 

[Greenie]

I get this question fairly regularly, usually from Steam Way guys, but occasionally from V/AT guys too.

They want to know if 3/8" will move more water, not to the wand but to the carpet?

This was my take on it, although explaining it generally met with some resistance:

The big hose was theoretically more efficient, I mean 3/8" can potentially move twice the volume of 1/4", but we have to look at the big picture.

Most wands have a much smaller diameter solution line on the wand it's self, some as small as 1/8".

To add to that you have to look at the jet orifice size it's self, if you have a 4 jet wand and those jets only have tiny holes in them the size of a safety pin, the area of 4 safety pins is just not that big.

There is a limit, I don't care if you hook a fire hose to it, you are only getting so much through those 4 pin holes.

Kevin's numbers seem to support my theory of the wand bottle neck:

GPM to wand before adding 100' of 3/8" = 2.8gpm
After adding the 3/8" = 3.4gpm

That is 3.4gpm coming out of an open 1/4" hose

Flow with 5 #2 jets before 3/8" add on = 1.8gpm
Flow after = 2.0gpm


2/10ths of a gallon was the only change!

You could accomplish that same difference in many ways, turn up the pressure a bit, or bump your jet size one level etc...

Now this whole deal could be quite a bit different with some bigger jets, but I must say 2 gallons per minute is moving quite a bit of water for carpet cleaning or is it carpet washing?

 

[KBRENNY]

I wonder what my numbers would have been if I was running #3 jets? Maybe I should hook up my 5000 psi 5.0 GPM diesel fired pressure washer behind my van and use it as my solution / chemical pump and just use the TM for vacuum and recovery?

 

[Steve Smith]

Greenie,

You say:
"The big hose was theoretically more efficient"
Steamway guy says:
The big hose (3/8") IS more efficient, there is no theory about it, it can be proven

You say:
"They want to know if 3/8" will move more water, not to the wand but to the carpet?"
Steamway guy says:
It's obvious 3/8" will move more water to any cleaning tool (upholstery tool, wand, tile cleaning tool, pressure washing gun) ESPECIALLY as the length of hose needed to reach that cleaning tool increases.

You say:
"Kevin's numbers seem to support my theory of the wand bottle neck:"
Steamway guy says:
Kevin's numbers seem to support my theory of friction lose with 1/4" hose.
Kevin needs to test 250' of all 3/8" hose from the truckmount to the wand.

Steamway guys question to Greenie: Have you ever cleaned, or worked with a cleaner, or tested flow, using only 3/8" hose.

Thanks, "Steamway guy" (actually we would use 3/8" hose no matter what truckmount we use).

 

[Greenie]

Steve,

You will have to read my post again.

I am not arguing the efficiency of larger 3/8 " hose, I am pointing out that when used in our application of carpet cleaning with a carpet wand not a pressure washing wand the increase in net flow with a high flow wand was Minimal.

It would be almost nonexistent with an average 04-06 flow wand.


Steve if you are going to quote me, at least read what I'm saying:

"They want to know if 3/8" will move more water, not to the wand but to the carpet.

Nobody said anything about getting water to the tool, because quite frankly it matters not what you get to the tool, only what reaches the carpet.

That is as silly as bragging about a machine that reached 290º at the machine, but flowed so little it was luke warm at the carpet, it all looks good on paper, but we don't clean paper.

Did you not look at Kevin's numbers, he was only producing a net flow increase of 2/10ths of a gallon!
That is a huge piece of data.
And that was with his high flow wand, if he was using a SteamWay wand (06 flow) as an example it wouldn't even be a topic tonight.

I didn't say anything about pressure drop in this post, besides pressure drop can be made up for, it wouldn't even be a factor for the average guy pulling 125' of hose.

I'm not here to defend this or attack that, but I will point out an observation, and apply some logic.

And yes I have cleaned with heavy 3/8" hose hooked to a SteamWay wand, it is with this experience that I know it simply wasn't worth it. If it gave an honest advantage I would have 1000 carpet cleaners giving it a try.

Have you performed a bucket test to see what you are actually getting in real life for net flow, or are you just using the big hose because it is more efficient on paper?

Have you run 1/2 of your long hose run with 1/4" and compared it?

What was your flow difference in the bucket test?

Hopefully it was more than 2/10ths of a gallon.

 

[Farenheit251]

I have a 14" cmp with 5 03 jets. The spray flutters on the 2 outside jets at 400 psi. Not sure if it is the smaller cat pump or a restriction in the system. New machine will have a Cat 5 size pump-hoping it will cure the flutter.

 

[Steve Smith]

Greenie,

If a person only needs 50 to 100 feet of hose to reach where they are cleaning I have no problem with them using 1/4" pressure hose.

I said: "Kevin needs to test 250' of all 3/8" hose from the truckmount to the wand."
Kevin never tested using only 250' of all 3/8" hose.


Let's try this one question at a time.

If you needed over 150 feet of hose to reach where you were cleaning would 3/8" hose give you a increase in flow and pressure compared to 1/4" hose?

 

[KBRENNY]

I don't think Greenie is debating that 3/8 hose will flow more than 1/4. He is saying that by the time the flow goes through the quick connector, valve, typical 1/8 supply line to the jets from the valve, the jets manifold, and then the jets. there is so much restriction that the 1/4 inch hose is not the restriction to the system.

What you get for flow going into the wand is decreased substantialy by all the restrictions between the end of the hose and the carpet.

I did not mention this in my test results but Greenie knows that I replaced my 1/8 hose going from my valve to my jet manifold with a 1/4 inch line. If i did my test with the old 1/8 inch hose there would probably be even less difference in flow rate in the before and after test.

I did not go 3/8 to improve flow to my wand. I did it for the sole purpose of being able to hook two 1/4 inch lines on the end of my 3/8 when I dual wand. I will now have 100 ft of 3/8 and 150 ft of 1/4 on my reel and 100 ft of 1/4 I will keep on the truck for dual wanding jobs. This is instead of having two runs of 250' of 1/4 line.

I pressure washed before I cleaned carpet and while i started cleaning carpet for a couple of years. I found with a large pressure washer the best flow improvement was when I went to a single hose with no connections (crimped on ends) between the reel and the wand and no quick connects. the ends that are crimped on a 3/8 hose wil typicaly have an i.d. of 1/4 so they can be a restriction also. There was also a major flow difference in the wand guns. A good one would provide much more flow than a cheaper one, possibly due to better internal flow engineering.

If you think flow is important with carpet cleaning then imagine the role it plays in pressure washing.

I am starting to consider myself a pressure washer that just pressure washes carpet and sucks up the dirty water!

If I could avoid runnig the 3/8 line I would have. While 3/8 can flow more water, if the same ammount of water is going to travel through that 3/8 hose it is going to move slower and have more time to cool down. If you gave me a choice between 235 deg 1.5 GPM at the carpet and 180 deg 2.0 GPM at the carpet, I am going to choose the hotter water at less flow everytime.

 

[Steve Smith]

Kevin,

I understand the "bottleneck" the plumbing of the wand provides.

But for someone to not take into account the HUGE "bottleneck" the 1/4" hose provides on setups over 150 feet before it even gets to the wand "bottleneck" is absurd.


You also stated: "If you gave me a choice between 235 deg 1.5 GPM at the carpet and 180 deg 2.0 GPM at the carpet, I am going to choose the hotter water at less flow everytime."

You do realize that statement completely contradicts what Shawn York said the other night?

I guess that is why you and Greenie are butting heads with me, since I agree with Shawn York.

Although wouldn't it be great to have both high flow and high temperature thanks to 3/8" hose and a fuel oil burner. :wink:

 

[KBRENNY]

The flow theory is great and works even better when you are cleaning residential. I clean more commercial and of that mostly resaurants, I can tell a huge difference when my temp drops. There is nothing like heat and a good pre spray on a greasy CGD. I dont think the temp is as imortant with soil and dirt as they dont need as much heat to be released. I like everything full throttle and would run 300 deg 3 GPM at the carpet if it were not so difficult to achieve and recover.

 

[Greenie]

Kevin,

I understand the "bottleneck" the plumbing of the wand provides.

Steve, we are not butting heads, we just aren't communicating clearly, somewhere you aren't hearing my words, or I ain't hearing yours.

The thing I don't think you fully grasp is the carpet wand has a very small solution line.

You can hook a fire hose to your wand, it still will only flow at the restricted rate that the little wand solution line will permit.

It doesn't matter how big the hose is, the wand solution line determines how much passes, and how much does not.

Kevin's numbers were pretty impressive, but he still had a limit, and he replaced his 1/8" wand line with a 1/4" line, it would have been much less of a net difference if he kept the line stock.

Do you not agree?

If you have a fire hose tapering down to a drinking straw, what makes you think the water is flowing any faster or any more heat is being communicated in the process?

I do agree that if a guy was running a super long hose run of 250'+ the 3/8" would hold a net higher pressure, and could in theory move more water per second (if the wand and jets were adequately sized).

But ... it has absolutely nothing to do with the average guy scenario I laid out earlier as an example ie: 125' hose run single wand 1/4" line.

In fact you even agreed a hose run like that wasn't worth running the 3/8 for the average guy, so where do we disagree?

Bucket test your wand on your next 200+ hose run, and report back the gpm if you would.

 

[boazcan]

I ran bucket test and was surprised at how little water that I am getting to the carpet.

50' 3/8" starter going to 200' 1/4", greenhorn, 03 jets, 600 psi



1.3 gpm


Is this where it should be?

 

[Ron Werner]

The only 3/8 soln line I've used was Neptune. The little bit of increase in water flow/heat would not be enough to entice me to go back to it.
1/ its more expensive and not as readily available
2/ QD are more expensive and not as readily available
3/ Its really heavy and a bugger to work with. I've tried the 1/4 orange Parflex, its a bit of a pain to, is the 3/8 even more stiff to work with??

 

[KBRENNY]

3/8 is slightly stiffer and a little harder to work with but not as much as I expected.