Wanders: Jet/Glide impact %

[FastEddie]

Would you think that if your jets are aimed too close to the glide, you are really creating more of a sheeting action, having most of the flow wasted and directed straight in to the glide, instead of flowing deeper thru the fibers?

I personally would rather have more impact on the carpet fibers instead, for a more thorough flush.

Jet angles really makes me think about how some wands leave the carpets dryer, but how about cleaner?

 

[Guest]

I personally would rather have more impact on the carpet fibers instead, for a more thorough flush!
Me too!

 

[Mikey P]

Run 012 + @ 600 psi and it dont really matter.

 

[Ron Lippold]

24 flow 700psi

 

[Greenie]

Would you think that if your jets are aimed too close to the glide, you are really creating more of a sheeting action, having most of the flow wasted and directed straight in to the glide, instead of flowing deeper thru the fibers?

How would the flow be wasted?

If you are putting out a sheet of water that is 1.5 gpm...it's still 1.5 gpm.

What you would be "wasting" is impact or strike pressure, and that can be a love hate relationship, depending on the fiber density of the textile you are cleaning.

I absolutely positive more guys will get into trouble with low flow jets.

These guys are victims of the Stanley Steemer disease. The boss gives them tiny jets, they guys struggle to clean effectively with them, so they turn to their only option....Turn UP the Pressure for more water flow.

Now they are pressure washing the carpet or more appropriately the backing but getting only moderate return on their investment in actual rinsing of the face fibers. They will have extended dry times, and problems arise later with wicking and fiber distortion.

If they had just double the flow of their jets, there would be no need to increase pressure, as they would be rinsing the face fibers more efficiently as well as transferring more thermal energy in the process without wetting the backing.

Now with all that being said, with proper jet angle, you can clean at higher pressures without over penetration, and with proper jet spacing you won't get fiber distortion either.

 

[truckmount girl]

48 flow @2,000psi!!!! No, seriously...the idea is to have the spray point toward the lips of the wand. On CGD it should strike ideally at 60% on the carpet 40% on the glide. On a cut pile it would be striking fully on the carpet. This is an area with a lot of misunderstanding and misconceptions.

Some wands cannot be adjusted and, as much as possible, the glides on these wands are modified to allow for and correct flaws of wand design.

The old-fashioned notion of jets pointing straight down at the carpet is counter to efficiency of cleaning and extraction. Pushing the dirt and water deeper into the carpet (or even the backing) is placing them where it is more difficult for the wand to remove them, though it "looks" better for the time being. It is much more efficient to push the dirt and water to the lips of the wand where they can be more easily extracted.

HOWEVER there are limits to this. A horizontal spray pattern, though easy to extract, would not penetrate the fibers to remove deeply embedded soils efficiently, so there is an ideal angle. 60-40 on the wand lips or glide on commercial pile seems to be the most efficient spot, and this angle, though appearing different on cut piles works for them as well...spraying through the fibers toward the lips of the wand.

Take care,
Lisa

 

[FastEddie]

Greenie, I was thinking that if the jets are directed too much at the glide, you would be flowing mostly over the surface of the fibers and straight into the glide.

I actually had adjusted my Ti wand just for CGD to just skim the glide, exactly like Lisa described. So if someone adjusts there spray angle exactly like that but on cut pile, wouldn't the flow be directed up too high at the fibers?

 

[truckmount girl]

Eddie,

Yes, if they adjusted it on cut pile instead of CGD it would be too high. that is why we recommend adjusting on CGD.

Take care,
Lisa

 

[floorguy]

mine hit about 1/2" behind the glide...but i think they "angle" more, because of the "custom" bracket we put on...

and its what 1.5" off the carpet is all...huge difference in the amount of moisture that gets in the air

 

[Rex Tyus]

I keep mine the same on CGD as cut pile. I don't care for the solution striking the glide itself. The solution hits the fiber just ahead of the glide. My psi is set between 400 to 500. Depending on the pile density. Even on floor mats the backing is not violated. There is plenty of penetration to the base of the fiber.

Any one that says the angle doesn't clean as good as the straight down backing soaking jetting, has not cleaned with both and is only speculating, or lacks the intellectual capacity to know the difference.

 

[DevilDog]

NO GREENIE...you are WRONG!

The water should NOT be hitting the glide AT ALL. No ridiculous sheeting action at all.

Period.

Because when the water hits the glide, even a little, it reduces the flow to the carpet.

We are CLEANING CARPET...not the damn glide.

DevilDog

 

[tman7]

I though that the whole point of having angled jets was so that you could use a higher psi, thereby not blasting straight into the backing. Anyway you can adjust the greenhorns head so that it barely hits the glide.

 

[truckmount girl]

Todd,

The water only touches the glide/lips on CGD, on cut pile it strikes behind the glide/lips. Any water hitting the glide/lips is still flowing through the carpet before sucking into the slot/glide because the wand is in full contact with the carpet. It cannot flow around the glide and into the slot without going through the carpet first.

Some wands cannot be adjusted, so on these wands, we must do the best we can to come as close to that as possible.

By moving the angle of the jets, you can now safely flow more water and higher pressures without fear of under-drying the carpets, leaving pressure distortion marks, or wetting the backing, getting a better one pass clean.

Take care,
Lisa

 

[Larry Cobb]

Eddie;

Angles do influence the "Impact" of the jets.

Assuming = GPM, pointing the jets straight down will have more impact and clean the carpet better. More chance of streaking at this angle.

The real question is how much more GPM does it take at an angle, to equal the original GPM pointed straight down ??

Once you achieve equal cleaning with more GPM, does it dry faster?

That is the REAL test.

Larry Cobb

 

[truckmount girl]

Larry,

Yes, because the water is being directed where it needs to go (the wand lips) not deeper into the carpet and possibly the backing where removal is more difficult and less efficient.

I would also argue your assumption that direct impact from above, at the same flow and pressure is cleaning better than at an angle to the fiber. Direct impact from above is simply pushing the water and soil deeper (where you might not see them as well), not removing them better. ALSO impact directly on the tip of the fiber makes the fiber much more susceptible to damage from pressure marking/tip blooming, and also greatly increases your chances of wetting the backing.

Take care,
Lisa

 

[Rex Tyus]

Eddie, Larry means well he really does. He just misunderstands the results of many of the test he runs.

Jets at a 90 degree angle will penetrate the backing at a ridiculously low psi. Not only that, as Lisa said more of the soil load is available to be forced into the backing with jets at 90 deg.

I can't believe this is even being debated. This has all been tested in the field. It is absurd to argue 90 deg over 45 degree jetting.

 

[Greenie]

I'm not lieing Todd.

Get a piece of cut pile nylon, the thicker the better, put some padding under it to simulate, put a wand on the edge of it and make a wet pass backwards and observe the solution from the side as it penetrates the fiber and passes over and through them and up into the vacuum slot.

We could use a Les Jones visual graphic demo on this one right about now.

Larry,
If the volume was increased by 25% to get the same impact would you be content with that as an answer?
It's just a guess, but an educated one.
I'm happy with 25% more flow to get the same impact, we'll just get better rinsing and thermal transfer of energy, and if it's drier it's a double win, and if we clean faster and have better production, it's a triple win.

Was there supposed to be a negative here somewhere?

 

[Mikey P]

Larry must have a boat full of non adjustable wands to sell and Todd knew it all before the Maqnifolded wand was ever invented.


Hitting the Glide does wonders.


Or I have been doing it wrong for the last 4 years.

 

[DevilDog]

LOL! I didn't say you were lying. I said you were wrong.

Ok, let me say it this way. I do NOT want the water from my jets hitting my glide.

Period.

I want EVERY water molecule to hit the carpet.

There is no doubt that when the water hits the glide and creates a "sheeting" action probably 25 to 30% of that water does NOT get to the carpet properly.

I do not want that.

Now if the rest of you want that...we have no argument. I don't.

Maybe I'll have to buy the Greenhorn wand or whatever it is called and I will be proven wrong.

I just don't see how limiting flow to what I am attempting to clean is a good idea.

Now, if the jets are angled to impact the carpet right behind the glide without hitting it....fine. No problem there.

I just want every bit of water I am using to hit the CARPET.

DevilDog

P.S.- Maybe the disagreement is semantics. I don't know.

 

[bob vawter]

Todd is way out in front on this one you guys...he may well be the runt of the litter......but he does know his "sheet"....

It was jus a while back that i eluded to the fact that the jet angle was so important and that i could show yous all how to set up a correctly jetted wand...but NO ONE seemed interested.......SOOOO, you all deserve what ever the Dawg dishes out to ya!

 

[Rex Tyus]

Todd,

I have the 2 Greenhorns. I don't like the solution to strike the glide either. I made a simple tweak to remedy that. The jets are angled to a point that it doesn't matter anyway. I generally don't clean over 500 psi. But I have gone as high as 600 with out violating the backing even with the spray pattern hitting the carpet fibers directly.

 

[Leslie Judson Jones]

We could use a Les Jones visual graphic demo on this one right about now.

I CONCUR !
LES

 

[bob vawter]

What NEXT a Tampon insertion manual......?

I gots yor back on THIS one Dawg....in a purley non-homo way of course!

 

[Blue Monarch]

I broke my own rule and read one of toads posts. Sorry. My advise to him...

go buy a shitload of aw29's, don't modify, and you'll be set for life.

 

[Larry Cobb]

Mikey;

You've been doing it wrong for 4 years !

I strongly suggest that everybody will get better cleaning with ALL of the water hitting the carpet (I agree with Rex ??).

We distribute both angled-jet and conventional jet wands.

We do use fewer jets than some of the other wands (2 jets on 12" and 4 jets on 14").

We clean many carpets @ 550 PSI and I don't see the back wet with either jet angle.

Larry Cobb

 

[DevilDog]

Hey Dirk,

You did yourself a great favor...now what you need to do is pull your head out of your ass and actually THINK for yourself instead of being a follower.

Anyone who thinks losing 25 to 30% of the water flow is a good idea has some serious issues.

Some of us ACTUALLY think for ourselves....that is why we LEAD. Others like you can't think much and that is why you FOLLOW.

It is hilarious to read post about guys talking about their MASSIVE flow and heat to the carpet...yet they can't figure out that they are not getting nearly the flow to the carpet if their jets are angled to provide a SHEETING action.

Hey Dirk, good for you. You are cleaning the back of your glide. Wooohoooooo!

The water needs to hit the carpet...that is what we are cleaning. To think that it is ok to lose up to a 1/3rd of your water flow by allowing a SHEETING action is comical.

But, I have always said...some get it, some don't...and some don't care to get it. Sounds like you are the latter Lil Kirk.

DevilDog

P.S.- You wanna play ball Kirk? Let me know.

 

[bob vawter]

Well it looks like it's up ta Larry Cobb...the Dawg, and the ol' Coot ta teach yous youngin's.....sumthin'!

 

[DevilDog]

Well you know Bob, they say you can take a horse to water but ya can't mak'em drink.

Sorta shocking to see so many guys that think of themselves as smart just follow the party line. It is actually very interesting to be honest.

We'll get our message across and help some of the guys and gals become better cleaners.

When you get that flow and heat where it is supposed to go the results are....well you know.

DevilDog

 

[tim]

cleanoff at Mikeyfest?

How about you guys settle this ridiculous squabble at Mikeyfest? Bring an Greenhorn and a wand of your choice from Cobb or whoever, hook them to the same truckmount and hose. Clean the same peice of carpet just different sections with the same pressure, prespray, wet and dry passes. See which one cleans better and drys faster. We can debate pressurewashing vs. flushing all day and not have an answer. How about a side by side comparison? Seems like that may settle the dispute without name calling and "I know everything" attitude. The time anyone thinks they have learned it all, it tells me how much they really know. I'm just here to learn how to give my clients cleaner, drier carpet faster.

 

[Rex Tyus]

Larry Cobb said

(I agree with Rex ??).

Holy shit! I never thought I would read that. :shock: