What removes more water and dries carpet faster, vacuums in parallel or series?

[ruff]

After reading about it I am still confused (not that it takes that much to confuse me.)

Running a portable what will leave the carpet with less water and or make it dry faster, running the vacuum motors in series or parallel?

I do know that for water damage you want them in series as it has more water lift. However, people also claim that when cleaning carpet airflow (which you'll get more of running in parallel) is what really dries carpet.

Anybody actually done any tests in the field to see which will leave the carpet with less water and make it dry faster? (Assuming that initially if leaving it with less water it will actually dry faster.)

 

[J Scott W]

There are lost of tests on this both in the field and in labs. The answer will vary depending upon the orifice size (how big is the opening where the wand meets the carpet. That is the main variable. The specific vacuum motors being used, size of the hose and the length of the hose run will also be factors.

For most wands, 2" hose and runs of under 100', air parallel will usually get the carpet the direst.

 

[Lee Stockwell]

For standing water series works best.

For real-world carpet cleaning parallel works best. (woosh!)

 

[ruff]

Thank you Scott and Lee.
Scott, what you're describing pretty much fits what most of us do in the field. Much appreciated.

Parallel it is.

 

[Lefty724]

Yup I agree. Parallel all day.

Series has more lift but I don't like the puking hose after I'm done lol.

 

[Larry Cobb]

Ofer;

We built some of the first multi-vac extractors on the market.

We started with modified Dual 3-stage vac extractors.

Then we built extractors with Quad 2-stage vac motors.

Next came machines with Triple 3-stage vac motors.

Finally we built the 1st Dual 8.4" vac extractor (in series)

This is a page on our website showing the extractors tested performance:

http://www.cobbcarpet.com/zen/index.php?main_page=document_general_info&cPath=63&products_id=5110

All of my testing at the wand, has shown that Dual Series Vacs will outperform Parallel connections for extraction.

My recent article on hi-perf portable extractors has some graphs from Lamb Electric engineers showing the same conclusion:

http://mikeysboard.com/forum/showthread.php?270341-What-Makes-Hi-Performance-Portable-Extractors

Larry

 

[ruff]

Just when I thought things were settled and the answer was clear...........thank you Larry .

What I am interested in is more of what Scott was referring to:
1) Assuming most of us use a 2" vacuum hose attached to a portable with a 2" opening. 2) using a vacuum hose at a length of about 50 feet (occasionally 75 feet). 3) Lets assume a 12" wand.

In these circumstances, if we use the same powerful vacuum motors that will not require more than two circuits. Which will get the carpet to dry faster, vacuums in parallel or series?

A) Not which will lift more water, but which will end up with the carpet drying faster.

B) Staying with same criteria as described above- The second question is: Which two motors will achieve faster drying time?

Thanks

 

[Lefty724]

Also to add, if you are going to be using a RE tool like rotovac or hoss, series would be better since the tool never leaves the carpet.
For regular wanding I like and prefer parallel.

I have no testing or data to back this up, just my opinions.

 

[ruff]

That's an interesting point you're making.
Curious though: Is the opinion based on checking that the carpet actually dries faster? Anything else?

 

[Lee Stockwell]

Ofer;

We built some of the first multi-vac extractors on the market.

We started with modified Dual 3-stage vac extractors.

Then we built extractors with Quad 2-stage vac motors.

Next came machines with Triple 3-stage vac motors.

Finally we built the 1st Dual 8.4" vac extractor (in series)

This is a page on our website showing the extractors tested performance:

http://www.cobbcarpet.com/zen/index.php?main_page=document_general_info&cPath=63&products_id=5110

All of my testing at the wand, has shown that Dual Series Vacs will outperform Parallel connections for extraction.

My recent article on hi-perf portable extractors has some graphs from Lamb Electric engineers showing the same conclusion:

http://mikeysboard.com/forum/showthread.php?270341-What-Makes-Hi-Performance-Portable-Extractors

Larry

How long have you been selling multi vacuum portables Larry? My first one was built by the Kent brothers from Clovis CA in 1973. It had series configuration.

With a drag tool series was acceptable. With a wand it was not. They later made a valve to switch for different conditions. The second motor runs very hot in series.

I used a bunch of Lamb Infinatek vacs about 2000 that had the tapered first stage fans. I had to replace them because the switched reluctance style motor and its circuit board were too heat sensitive, even with cooling fan, to be used in a hot truck in summer.

The conclusions you've drawn are not sufficiently supported by the data you've referenced.

Using just a vacuum gauge to assess airflow and cleaning ability is akin to just using a thermometer to determing relative humidity.

Thanks,
Lee

 

[ruff]

So, what's the verdict?