Water injected blowers

[Out of Character - 0]

What's the deal, is there something wrong with doing it, does it hurt the blower?
Why don't we see it more often?
Can you safely get more cfms or just lift?

Just wondering what you guys know about it?

 

[Greenie]

Before too many reply, I just thought I'd clarify, I know most realize the difference between water cooled and water injected, but some might not.

Injected is a fine mist of water sprayed directly into the incoming airflow, this spray cools teh air and is mostly consumed from the heat of the blower.
Water cooled uses a water jacket (special blower case) and a coolant and pump and radiator just like an engine.

It is possible to have both in the same.

I personally don't think running a blower at 18"+hg is necessary anymore with the prominant use of larger vacuum hoses and better plumbed units etc...

Off my box now.

 

[Duane Oxley]

I personally don't think running a blower at 18"+hg is necessary anymore with the prominant use of larger vacuum hoses and better plumbed units etc...

Off my box now.

Not necessarily so, Greenie. The longer the hose run, the more lift you need. And it's not "just" that simple. If there are coils along the way (live vacuum reel, coils on the ground as you back out of a job...), available lift is consumed at a surprising rate.

Many systems available today have built- in restriction to airflow, by the way that they're designed. It's not adjustable. So, starting out with as much as is available, lift- wise is a good idea.

I haven't measured the actual restriction, but I'd guess that a 50 ft. section of 2" vac hose consumes 1.5 to 2" of available lift. So, if you're running 200 feet from the truck, you have 4 sections. That's about 6" to 8" consumed, if I'm right about the consumption...

And that's not taking into account the lift consumed by the system itself. (Check the vacuum gauge with the system running and nothing connected, to see.) I haven't seen a system yet (other than ones I design), that consumes less than 3" of lift.

So, take that 3" start- off figure, and add 6" to it and what do you get...? 6" remaining, if you're vacuum relief is set at 15".

... And that's not taking into account any back- pressure that the blower has to overcome in the silencer...

 

[Ron Werner]

I'd have to test it again but I don't think the numbers work that way. Rev'd up with the wand attached, 150ft out, 100 of which is 2.5", the vac guage reads 9"Hg.
Once that glided tool gets put on, the vac #'s get skewed

 

[Greenie]

Duane,
I stand by my comments.

I was directly referring to using 2.5" vac hose, not restrictive 2" in my example.

2.5" has an amzingly low level of restriction, demonstrated at Mikey's Fest among other places, we had 350' of the big hose out on Cu's Judson #4 blower Reactor, and a 50' leader of 2" for a total of 400', you would be hard pressed to tell it wasn't 100' of hose on a typical demo. In fact quite a few thought it was 100' of hose running off the White Magic HV1200 that was parked right next to it (as the hose ran around the building). :shock:

Try that with 400' of 2".

 

[Duane Oxley]

Greenie:

With space at a premium, storage- wise, even though 2.5" hose has about 50% more airflow and much less restriction, as you cited, I don't see it becoming "the standard" and replacing 2" anytime in the forseeable future.

But even so, the more lift, the better. Whether you need it to get through resistance or not, IMO.

 

[Farenheit251]

I think Duane's views on 2.5 hose are skewed by living in Marietta. Guys there make ridiculous hose runs even to clean residential. Other areas like Orlando I go months without using over 150 feet except for large commercial which I prepare for.

As for the water injection the Tuthill rep I talked with said he was amazed more cleaners didn't use it. The problem you will run into is those extra inches eat up horsepower real quick. Off the shelf machines aren't going to have the extra power to run at what you need and your coupling/belts might not fare well either.

 

[Rex Tyus]

Greenie:

With space at a premium, storage- wise, even though 2.5" hose has about 50% more airflow and much less restriction, as you cited, I don't see it becoming "the standard" and replacing 2" anytime in the forseeable future.

But even so, the more lift, the better. Whether you need it to get through resistance or not, IMO.

I can see 2.5" hose becoming the standard long before I see water cooled 22 "hg blowers becoming the standard.

As far as "the more the better", the term "diminishing return" comes to mind.
I must say I usually avoid posting anything directed at Duane cause he always responds with way more than I am going to read, I just had to chime in this time though.

 

[TimP]

The way I see it....you may increase the lift....but if you don't have to why?

The reason being when you increase lift you decrease CFM. I'd rather have the cfm and it don't take much lift to move moisture away from carpet.....work smarter not harder. Why suck harder through a tiny hose when you can do it with ease with a big hose.


Just the way I see it.

 

[Greenie]

9 out of 10 of our customers only use 150' of hose any given week, so far storage has not been a major issue, everyone has room for 100' of 2.5 if you ask me, no one said to put 300' of the big hose on the truck.

Super high lift blowers, especially water injected or water cooled are just not necessary with a low cost alternative liek larger vacuum hose avail.

 

[Out of Character - 0]

I'd have no reservations about running 22hg @ 600 cfm & 3gal per minute, my boys will just get bigger arms.

I usually fish with explosives. 8)