Mikey P
Administrator
What would be more of an air flow benefit, to run two sections of 2.5 hoses off my Lunchpail waste tank to the pool filter or run more 2.5 closer to the door?
Les and Greenie.. (stay out of this Jeremy)
- Thread starter Mikey P
- Start date
joe harper
Member
Two.....10ft section off the unit....
Connect the Two 10fter's...to your 2.5 "Y"...
Five foot section...to the Filter.....
25ft of "Left-over" hose....off the other end of the Filter...
Leave the two 10 footers....attached to the "Y"..& store in the van...
you are welcome !!!!
Jeremy.. :!:
Connect the Two 10fter's...to your 2.5 "Y"...
Five foot section...to the Filter.....
25ft of "Left-over" hose....off the other end of the Filter...
Leave the two 10 footers....attached to the "Y"..& store in the van...
you are welcome !!!!
Jeremy.. :!:
Carpet Cleaning Fool
Member
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2008
- Messages
- 1,496
- Name
- George Valliant
Is your lunchpail so gutless it actually makes a difference?
Here's an idea...
Always aim your hose runs downhill!!! Should improve your vacuum 50%... shiteatinggrin
Here's an idea...
Always aim your hose runs downhill!!! Should improve your vacuum 50%... shiteatinggrin
Mikey P
Administrator
George.
you're a dick.
you're a dick.
George is right, it won't make much of a difference in day to day residential cleaning.
Now, that said....there is always a thing or two to consider
What some newbies might not understand, is only 1/2 of the question is being posed here. As usual the devil is in the details.
On Single wand with an avg. blower making 300+ cfm, it doesn't much matter if you have two 2" hoses feeding a single 2.5" hose or two 2.5" hoses, because BOTH offer decreased resistance to the avail. airflow in transit.
But here is the kicker.
Both are being CHOKED by a single 2" wand, and single 2" lead hose. So we have a "diminished returns" in effect here. So there is potentially only so much gain, we could couple 4 hoses to a super manifold, and again if it's a single 50' length of 2" feeding a wand as a Lead hose, there is the bottle neck within the system.
Although it is true that taking a given volume of water within an airstream and splitting it into two airstreams of the same area, the % of liquid to air is reduced in each stream therefore making the net airflow more efficient and helping to clear the single hose more efficiently, the same "could" be accomplished with a single larger diameter hose.
If anything, using two lines and TWO filters will have a positive effect because you are splitting your filtration and filter holding capacity, and just the sheer fact that 2 filters with twice the filter area perform better 1/2 full than 1 filter at 100% of capacity.
So no, 2 - 2.5" hoses are not warranted for most guys. But two 2" hoses and high filters may be.
Now, that said....there is always a thing or two to consider
What some newbies might not understand, is only 1/2 of the question is being posed here. As usual the devil is in the details.
On Single wand with an avg. blower making 300+ cfm, it doesn't much matter if you have two 2" hoses feeding a single 2.5" hose or two 2.5" hoses, because BOTH offer decreased resistance to the avail. airflow in transit.
But here is the kicker.
Both are being CHOKED by a single 2" wand, and single 2" lead hose. So we have a "diminished returns" in effect here. So there is potentially only so much gain, we could couple 4 hoses to a super manifold, and again if it's a single 50' length of 2" feeding a wand as a Lead hose, there is the bottle neck within the system.
Although it is true that taking a given volume of water within an airstream and splitting it into two airstreams of the same area, the % of liquid to air is reduced in each stream therefore making the net airflow more efficient and helping to clear the single hose more efficiently, the same "could" be accomplished with a single larger diameter hose.
If anything, using two lines and TWO filters will have a positive effect because you are splitting your filtration and filter holding capacity, and just the sheer fact that 2 filters with twice the filter area perform better 1/2 full than 1 filter at 100% of capacity.
So no, 2 - 2.5" hoses are not warranted for most guys. But two 2" hoses and high filters may be.
daniel@procarpet
Member
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2008
- Messages
- 3,797
I like Jim Martins philosophy and that is what I do. Two 25' sections of 2 inch with a filter on each connected to a "y" and two inch to the wand. I don't see how it would benefit having one 50' section of 2.5 after the "y" or atleast not enough difference to warrant lugging 2.5 around. Maybe it makes more sense to have 2.5 come off the machine, but I like haivng two filters. I sometimes run 50' before the "y".
Jim Martin
Supportive Member
best set up you can have......open it up...let it breath and give it hell........
daniel@procarpet
Member
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2008
- Messages
- 3,797
Jim the top photo looks like two 2.5's to one 2.5. The other photo is obviously two 2" hoses to one 2". Where do you get that drill bit and connectors for the filters. I need to do that to mine.
Jim Martin
Supportive Member
danielc said:
all my hoses are nothing but 2 inch....send me a PM or e-mail of what it is your looking for and I can hook you up.............
steve frasier
Supportive Member
what about 200' hose runs with a #4 blower
Were you at the MikeFest where Cu displayed his new Judson Reactor?
I mention that because it's a stock #4 blower, not a 47 or larger, but a good old fashioned 45 like on the TNT.
It was set up on display Next to the new White Magic HV1200 which has a #5 blower operating at 18+" of lift, everyone knew what the rah rah was about, and expected a good showing form the new High Lift machine, so when they grabbed the Greenhorn wand out front of the WM unit, they weren't surprised at the strong vacuum.
Only problem was, the wand wasn't hooked to it. It was hooked to 400' of vac hose (350' of that being 2.5" vac hose) from the Reactor that ran AROUND the building, and around the WM unit.
Once pointed out...several commented....wow, that is honestly impressive. I owe a bit of that to the Bayco valve installed on the Reactor, it kept the lift optimized where the sheer "drag" from all the hose would have caused a conventional spring vac relief to leak prematurely.
Notice Mike's unit, and the new stealth C-4 both have a Bayco valve.
I mention that because it's a stock #4 blower, not a 47 or larger, but a good old fashioned 45 like on the TNT.
It was set up on display Next to the new White Magic HV1200 which has a #5 blower operating at 18+" of lift, everyone knew what the rah rah was about, and expected a good showing form the new High Lift machine, so when they grabbed the Greenhorn wand out front of the WM unit, they weren't surprised at the strong vacuum.
Only problem was, the wand wasn't hooked to it. It was hooked to 400' of vac hose (350' of that being 2.5" vac hose) from the Reactor that ran AROUND the building, and around the WM unit.
Once pointed out...several commented....wow, that is honestly impressive. I owe a bit of that to the Bayco valve installed on the Reactor, it kept the lift optimized where the sheer "drag" from all the hose would have caused a conventional spring vac relief to leak prematurely.
Notice Mike's unit, and the new stealth C-4 both have a Bayco valve.
Ron Werner
Member
like Greenie said, it would have more to do with the surface area of the filters. Have one large filter or two smaller ones, increases your airflow since they aren't getting plugged as much.
