Surface Cleaner Arm, NOZZLE TILT

[Scott Stone 604]

I am not going to pretend like I understand what that is talking about. I do remember when my Mom was cooking with a pressure cooker. If you remember those htings, it would heat up and there was a gasket ot hold the pressure in. What I always thought was interesting is that as the pressure was being released, the steam would dissipate immediately. I would imagine that is similar to the process in a pressure cleaning system. The heater coil and the hose would be just like the pressure cooker. It is a containment vessel that controls the heat and pressure of the water. As soon as it is released from the hose, the pressurized water, no matter what type of nozzle is being used, is going to vaporize. Yes, it will be hot, but there is one thing that you will notice that Jim has never claimed in all his statements about his equipment. He always talks about the oil removal abilities, but he never talks about the dirt and sludge that his pressure washer removes. That is why he has to use a fire hose to rinse, because his hot steam cannot remove dirt, it does note emulsify it so that it can be washed away.

Instead, he rinses it down with a fire hose. I guess it works for him, but I don;t think that his using thousands of gallons of water is more effective then what I can do using 500 gallons. I also think that his garage does not become any cleaner than using standard, industry accepted and acknowledged cleaning techniques.

[Ron Musgraves 240]

All that doesnt change the demo you also saw in Las Vegas right over the same Path with a 200 degree 3500 landa unit that cleaned right over the path Jim did?

Explain how it cleaned it better right over the top of 300 degrees it was. Pressure I have no idea...?? But it was not as good with regular old dust. Oil I'm sure Heat has a factor on.

We use steam to remove gum at low pressure faster than 3500 200 degree water. Because the 300 degrees melts the gum quickly.

Excess use of energy and water in Jim proccess is ok with me. Of course I'm going to be eviro safer at the end of the day. Less emissions, Less fuel, Less water,

Nigel I have a respect for you and Jim, Jim uses fire hoses and I also once used them. Jim has talked with me about this early on when he was drilling me about my precedures. I adopted the fire hose from New contructions clean ups. Now that I understand the value of water savings and contaminants I realize the increase of speed by using fire hoses is not worth the amount of water I'm poluting to complete a job even if its slower. ( the buildings I do cannot have fire equipment tampering) Safety is just another reason.

My chemicals are far superior than the average guy. They are drinkable and safe, they are my own as you know so others dont bother asking. I can clean without heat if needed. We use heat because it speeds the proccess and reduces labor costs.

I have been refining this proccess for over 25 years.

I can tell you this, Scott Stone is my freind. Some may say Jim is the Garage Guru, Jim has a method I frankly respect but highly disagree with the method because of the waste. We can claim we are eviro contractors at those ratios of water usage or emissions. In a Sales sistuation I will tear it up!! I can tell you that Scott has taken it much further than Jim when it comes to inovation. Unlike Jim Scott keeps very silent about the accomplishments and advancements he has made. Scotts actually the reason some of these manufactures are building some of the larger and riding equipment out there. He is very modest about this also.

I on the other hand if I had accomplished some of the things Scott has, might be worse than Jim about telling the world about them.

Nigel, its good seeing you and always good debating with you. Theres just simply no argument about the theory, even Jim talks less about heat over 300 since that Vegas round. The new thing is large filters not required if you use the proper closed loop and clean responsibly.

Have a good year my freind!!

Understanding what is occuring with Jim's technique and temperatures, maybe even more complaicted, after reading this wikipedia page.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isenthalpic

An isenthalpic process or isoenthalpic process is a process that proceeds without any change in enthalpy, H; or specific enthalpy, h.[1]

In a steady-state, steady-flow process, significant changes in pressure and temperature can occur to the fluid and yet the process will be isenthalpic if there is no transfer of heat to or from the surroundings, no work done on or by the surroundings, and no change in the kinetic energy of the fluid.[2] (If a steady-state, steady-flow process is analysed using a control volume everything outside the control volume is considered to be the surroundings.[3])

The throttling process is a good example of an isenthalpic process. Consider the lifting of a relief valve or safety valve on a pressure vessel. The specific enthalpy of the fluid inside the pressure vessel is the same as the specific enthalpy of the fluid as it escapes from the valve.[2] With a knowledge of the specific enthalpy of the fluid, and the pressure outside the pressure vessel, it is possible to determine the temperature and speed of the escaping fluid

If indeed it is an isenthalpic process as water exits the zero degree nozzle, the enthalpy of water in the hose at 300F is then equal to the enthalpy of water/steam exiting the zero nozzle (before impacting the surface), that energy is significantly higher than a pressure washer at 200F. (water enthalpy is ~ 50% more ...... @ 300F = 634KJ/kg vs 200F = 411KJ/kg).

[810F250 14]

I would like everyone to know that I am individual that likes to understand a the Engineering Function and Design some mechanical systems. In this thread/discussion this is what I am attempting to understand (like the few other threads I have started).

Here we go.

Scott, I want to Know when your going to let the cat out of the bag on your riding self contained garage cleaning vehicle?

This is not a Joke, Scotts has actual vehicles he uses. He may get upset about me annoucing that but I really think its time you show the world Scott.

Is it called the STONE RIDER!!!

Jim and some others might think I'm joking about this but I'm not. Scotts light years ahead of most in this business, I suspect he will stay the front runner as secret as he keeps his technology.

Jim I love ya big guy, I saw that with my own eyes. Vapor will not clean as effective as the proper heat and pressure combo.

Thats leads me to this question for Nigel and Jerry, what is that right pressure combo water volume?

I would love to see the "Stone Rider" as well Scott, it is not a matter of you proving to the rest of us what equipment you have, but to understand how this piece of equipment has helped you and your company achieve garage cleaning success.

I have seen a couple weeks ago a brushless hard surface cleaning rider capable of filtration on the go that could revolutionize large area hard surface cleaning (not the cyclone). Even Kathy at Parker West has a new larger sized rider developed. Its the way bigger pw companies are headed.

Ron," what is the right pressure combo water volume", it depends on a great deal of factors:

As I have learned from these boards, and put into some practice , it depends on what you are cleaning, if filtration is required, end use tool/technique needed, budget and some other items I may have not included.

I am not going to pretend like I understand what that is talking about. I do remember when my Mom was cooking with a pressure cooker. If you remember those htings, it would heat up and there was a gasket ot hold the pressure in. What I always thought was interesting is that as the pressure was being released, the steam would dissipate immediately. I would imagine that is similar to the process in a pressure cleaning system. The heater coil and the hose would be just like the pressure cooker. It is a containment vessel that controls the heat and pressure of the water. As soon as it is released from the hose, the pressurized water, no matter what type of nozzle is being used, is going to vaporize. Yes, it will be hot, but there is one thing that you will notice that Jim has never claimed in all his statements about his equipment. He always talks about the oil removal abilities, but he never talks about the dirt and sludge that his pressure washer removes. That is why he has to use a fire hose to rinse, because his hot steam cannot remove dirt, it does note emulsify it so that it can be washed away.

Instead, he rinses it down with a fire hose. I guess it works for him, but I don;t think that his using thousands of gallons of water is more effective then what I can do using 500 gallons. I also think that his garage does not become any cleaner than using standard, industry accepted and acknowledged cleaning techniques.

Scott, I like the "pressure cooker" analogy it has some factors that can be referenced in our application but it has one factor that is not occurring in the boiler and hose of a pw system. The air space in the "pressure cooker" the pw boiler and hose does not have an air space. But anyway lets break it down:

Heat is supplied to the "pressure cooker", the heat energy is transfered to the cooker and the water, the water molecules become excited and then break the the surface the water, the air space above the cooker is now being filled with water vapor, the water vapor now has no where to go (because the cooker is closed and the weight is on the nozzle) the pressure is now increasing as more vapor is released from the liquid into the space above it.

This is where we use science to advance man, a property of water is;..... as the pressure is increased on/over water (and heat is continued to be supplied ) this action raises the "normal" boiling point of water beyond 212F. ("normal" being the boiling temp at atmospheric pressure, 14.7 psi)

The engineers of the "pressure cooker" have come up with a safe working pressure based on the a number of factors, there is a zero degree nozzle on the dome of the pressure cooker, a weight is designed to fit over the nozzle to block the orifice, when the pressure builds to a particular level the weight is tilted or slightly lifted and releases some pressure until it re-seats on the nozzle.

The better pressure cookers raises the pressure in the cooker to about 15 psi above "normal" which would allow man to boil water at approximately 252F, hence allowing us to cook (breakdown) food (organics) faster. (in the pressure cooker two phases of water exist : liquid and vapor)

Now look at the similarities of what is occurring in the pw boiler and hose. The burner supplies the heat to the coil, the coil heats up and transfers its heat to the water (but there is no space of air in the coil or the hose after it is filled) the pressure in the pw is way beyond the cooker anywhere between 2000 to 4000 psi so this means that we can also take advantage of the properties of water and heat it above 212F.

Think about this: What would happen if we filled the pressure cooker continuously with water from a pressure pump capable of 6 gpm at 3500 psi so that there is no air space in the pressure cooker it is always full of water while it is still being heated by the stove, the pressure cooker cover nozzle has no weight on it so water escapes from the pressure cooker as soon as is is pushed through the pressure cooker via the pump , as the stove heats the water in the pressure cooker the temp rises, the pressure in the cooker would be dependent on the size of the nozzle in the pressure cooker cover, nevertheless the water would be able to increase beyond the "normal" boiling temp of 212F because the pressure would be higher than "normal" (atmospheric),

....... lets say we get it to 300F, what is happening at the pressure cooker nozzle now?

Is it all steam?

We know it would be all steam in a regular pressure cooker because there is no water directly under the cover of the pressure cooker nozzle only water vapor. We have to turn to science again to tell use what behavior is exhibited outside the nozzle in pressure cooker with pump scenario.

This is what we know, the pressure outside the nozzle is "normal" atmospheric pressure, and that water in the pressure cooker cannot be created nor destroyed, so that means the water outside the pressure cooker has to be in one of water's forms or a combination of forms. (that is: solid, liquid, vapor or gas)

Which is it?

So lets say we have a big boiler and we achieve 300F in the pw system, we already know that 252F in the pressure cooker cooks,melts,breakdown,remove oils from meats much faster (up to 1/3 the time), so these high temperatures should do the same for hydrocarbons in the concrete.

But how can we get these temperatures (300F) to exist outside in the "normal" atmosphere, what does the properties of water say can this be done?

Does this mean that the fluid exiting the zero degree nozzle is 100% steam? What is its temperature? What is the effect on the impact force?

I have asked these questions of engineers and awaiting their responses. This is one of the great things about these forums and the internet.

All that doesnt change the demo you also saw in Las Vegas right over the same Path with a 200 degree 3500 landa unit that cleaned right over the path Jim did?

Explain how it cleaned it better right over the top of 300 degrees it was. Pressure I have no idea...?? But it was not as good with regular old dust. Oil I'm sure Heat has a factor on.

We use steam to remove gum at low pressure faster than 3500 200 degree water. Because the 300 degrees melts the gum quickly.

Excess use of energy and water in Jim proccess is ok with me. Of course I'm going to be eviro safer at the end of the day. Less emissions, Less fuel, Less water,

Nigel I have a respect for you and Jim, Jim uses fire hoses and I also once used them. Jim has talked with me about this early on when he was drilling me about my precedures. I adopted the fire hose from New contructions clean ups. Now that I understand the value of water savings and contaminants I realize the increase of speed by using fire hoses is not worth the amount of water I'm poluting to complete a job even if its slower. ( the buildings I do cannot have fire equipment tampering) Safety is just another reason.

My chemicals are far superior than the average guy. They are drinkable and safe, they are my own as you know so others dont bother asking. I can clean without heat if needed. We use heat because it speeds the proccess and reduces labor costs.

I have been refining this proccess for over 25 years.

I can tell you this, Scott Stone is my freind. Some may say Jim is the Garage Guru, Jim has a method I frankly respect but highly disagree with the method because of the waste. We can claim we are eviro contractors at those ratios of water usage or emissions. In a Sales sistuation I will tear it up!! I can tell you that Scott has taken it much further than Jim when it comes to inovation. Unlike Jim Scott keeps very silent about the accomplishments and advancements he has made. Scotts actually the reason some of these manufactures are building some of the larger and riding equipment out there. He is very modest about this also.

I on the other hand if I had accomplished some of the things Scott has, might be worse than Jim about telling the world about them.

Nigel, its good seeing you and always good debating with you. Theres just simply no argument about the theory, even Jim talks less about heat over 300 since that Vegas round. The new thing is large filters not required if you use the proper closed loop and clean responsibly.

Have a good year my freind!!

Good to hear from you too Ron.

I have asked an engineer at Sioux pressure washers yesterday about the 300F and awaiting what other engineers have to say about it and what phases the fluid would be when leaving the nozzle etc. We will all see the answers, if not I will meet with a professor at the local university and ask them to explain what maybe taking place, I want us all to understand.

About large filters, I think it up to your budget and how often it would have to be serviced during operation, the bigger it is and the better design the more loading capacity it has.

I agree Scott does not express his accomplishments as Jim does, but that just a way they are both different.

Jim has shared his experiences with a fire hose use and its advantages and disadvantages and explains this to us and his clients, he and his clients make a decision if its use is warranted on a particular garage.

Ron you have given to this industry a great deal in your 25 years and I thank you for this.

About Vegas demo cleaning , (dont laugh) I do not recall that Tony's Landa unit offered a superior cleaning over an area in which Jim's unit cleaned. I know that Tony's waterjet surface cleaner worked like a charm on the stencils, but Tony's unit had more difficulty at removing the Vegas baked gum than Jim's unit (Jim never hooked his unit to any surface cleaner). Its a pity that the personal/industry relationships that were built at that round table are dissolved.

I learned a great deal thus far, and i am still learning.

Edited January 20, 2011 by 810F250

[Scott Stone 604]

You will notice that I have never disputed that high heat is effective at removing oils. In fact, your treatise has said the same thing I have said before. The problem is my customers want the grime dirt and sludge removed. Steam cannot remove those things because it has reached a point of entropy that the water does not have the specific mass to remove the solids. So, when a person goes in with a fire hose, except for the grease spots, he is basically rinsing down the garage using huge amounts of water. In all honesty, the fire hose is faster then a garden hose because of the voljme of water. Why a pressure washer is faster is because the pressure accelerates the erosion. Imagine how fast the Grand Canyon could have been formed if the water had more then static pressure behind it.

As for the Vegas demo, you are likely the only person that remembers it happening that way. I have a bunch of people, including Jim that have told me the same thing that Ron said here. They were all independent of each other, so I would like to think it was not a grand conspiracy.

[Jim Gamble 20]

3 Years ago when I mentioned EPA and the CWA on past posts on ***, Ron, you never came across as a Green Movement sorta of guy in any of those replies....WOW. Glad to see it.

I wasn't going to reply to this thread.

Frankly I am just getting tired of this and in the future, I will try not to waste my energy. I have to plan our trip to the Orient with the family and our friends.

Nigel I have a respect for you and Jim, Jim uses fire hoses and I also once used them. Jim has talked with me about this early on when he was drilling me about my precedures. I adopted the fire hose from New contructions clean ups. Now that I understand the value of water savings and contaminants I realize the increase of speed by using fire hoses is not worth the amount of water I'm poluting to complete a job even if its slower. ( the buildings I do cannot have fire equipment tampering) Safety is just another reason.!!

Ron, I have been cleaning Parking Structures years longer then you or Scott. Your own words.

In my 21 years experience, we first tried rinsing with the wands. 3 at 8 GPM. Because we clean so deep and the substance is so much, it would take 3 guys over an hour to rinse 1/4 of the floor to our standards. Thats walls, columns, railings, corners, cracks, removal of detergent until no subs are present from pressurized water hitting the area where the oil stain was, etc. ( This is to prevent slippage, Heavy metals, dirt and the attraction of future oil to the residue of the soap).

Using a fire hose takes approximately 20 minutes and does a far better rinsing job because the volume of water will emulsify larger, heavier particles then a thin spray would.

So lets do the math....

(3) washers @ 8 GPM = 24* GPM X 50 minutes= 1,200 gallons. Fire hose at < 80 psi is approx 70 GPM X 20= 1400 GPM. So by washing with a fire hose, it is actually saving time, not to mention all of that fuel ( Approx $50 with another 10% for wear & tear costs) and air pollution. ( All for what... 200 gallons of water? People with Swimming pools waste more than that in energy costs, maintenance and evaporation / splashing etc. (If wasted water is a big concern, may I suggest that those individuals take a bath to cool down).

*If you have smaller GPM Pressure washer, the time will increase to rinse properly to our standards, thus the end result would be about the same if not more.

The reason why most frown on this is because they do not have the filtering capabilities of handling so much water all at once. We do. As far as it being illegal to tap into a fire hydrant to supply water, that is what permits are for. We NEVER tap into the fire "sprinkler" system. Enough said about the water issue and I will not respond further on this issue since it will only create drama.

2. We have 4,000 LBS ride on vacuum systems as well, powder by water cooled Kubota 4 cylinder Turbo Diesels. The build costs was the price of some homes. We did plan on sharing / showing our units on these BBS just like we started to with building our 40 GPM Filtration Units. But a " VERY" select few unfortunately created so many problems and drama, that I decided to stop posting on that as well.

This is really a shame. So many contractors would of been able to build their own units on a smaller scale for .40 or less on the dollar. Taking all of our research and development costs, using that information, and build themselves a unit without the learning curve. This really hurt the industry in my opinion. If someone instructed me with the knowledge I have today, I would of been retired at the age of 39 instead of being semi retired at 47.

[Ron Musgraves 240]

About Vegas demo cleaning , (dont laugh) I do not recall that Tony's Landa unit offered a superior cleaning over an area in which Jim's unit cleaned. I know that Tony's waterjet surface cleaner worked like a charm on the stencils, but Tony's unit had more difficulty at removing the Vegas baked gum than Jim's unit (Jim never hooked his unit to any surface cleaner). Its a pity that the personal/industry relationships that were built at that round table are dissolved.

Bingo!!!! gum and oil will always remove faster with Heat. Funny we use Sioux Steam units to remove gum on larger projects. The first pressure washer steam unit I ever used was a sioux.

No one is saying Ron or Scott is better than Jim, his way of business is better or worse. Its very possible he removes oil better than I do. I just can and will never advocate large uses of water.

Everyone here thinks opionions are based on how much you like or dislike a person. I use water at 300 degrees, have since 1984 I like Scott Stone but likewise if he thought I was telling you some BS he would call me on it. I would do the same and we both have corrected and proven each other wrong or right in the ten years we have known each other. Jim knows the truth about hos own methods, thats why his focus off heat has faded. NOW he wants to recycle all the drinking water in SF while cleaning Garages. JOKING Haha

The point above is I have been proven wrong and when I'm proven wrong. I simply learn and move forward with my new knowledge. I hope you have not wasted much time on this because its the correct combinations not more of both.

Imagine when I first started we only had 4 gallon a minute 2000psi was top of the line. We used the steam cleaners to remove gum always, because the BTU's only heated the water in the 4gpm 2000psi unit to about 150.

I forgot to tell you I have a 10,000 PSI cold water unit that pushes 12 gallons a minute. The water is 140 to 160 depending on the day and how cold the water if when we start. Yes thats a cold unit with powered by a diesel motor. NEVER USE IT!!! To dangerous, to much water and just to large for anything I have. Bought it for fleets washing Ariel cranes 20 years ago. Still starts and runs......I keep it as a collectable to my own Shrine. reminds me of dumb things I have done when young and foolish thinking bigger the better.

Good Luck Nigel

Yes, my equipment is very simple. Very durable and tough. Its realiable and well maintained. I made all these super rig mistakes...had the triple rig being pulled by a tractor. SO large you couldnt get it into the garage, we ran 500 feet of hose from the exterior. NEVER AGAIN!!!

Everyone saw two of my trailers phoenix, they all look like identical twins. The same down to fittings ,hose, lights, ect. very simple...employees dont need to be trained on how a different looking one runs or operates because they are all the same except the numbers on the sides.

[Ron Musgraves 240]

This is really a shame. So many contractors would of been able to build their own units on a smaller scale for .40 or less on the dollar. Taking all of our research and development costs, using that information, and build themselves a unit without the learning curve. This really hurt the industry in my opinion. If someone instructed me with the knowledge I have today, I would of been retired at the age of 39 instead of being semi retired at 47.

No one is stopping you from sharing the info with all these guys so they can become millionaires.

Please Jim we are all off Topic on this Subject.

I personally dont want poor Nigel being lead down the wrong road. Higher emissions more energy using more water is not the future in eviro cleaning. Its simple!!

You will never sell that to me or any of my customers. Tapering with Fire protections systems is my garages will not Fly.

I have to be a little funny on this one , Customer talking: "So Ron, you want to take my fire protection system down for 15 minutes while you roll in my building with disel fuel gasoline and other corrosive chemicals". HUMMMMM

STOP PLEASE JIM hahahahahahahahah

[Ron Musgraves 240]

Using a fire hose takes approximately 20 minutes and does a far better rinsing job because the volume of water will emulsify larger, heavier particles then a thin spray would

Jim, I cannot take a fire protection system down to clean a garage. In the past I have even made these mistakes you continue to make. Public safety os a huge priority for my business, cleaning a Garage will never hurt anyone I clean for. Its wrong to use these systems and my methods may take longer as you are suggesting but safety is first always.

[Ron Musgraves 240]

Ron, I have been cleaning Parking Structures years longer then you or Scott. Your own words.

Thats a True Statement, but in 6th grade or 5th my science teacher Mr Garission explained Solids , liguid and Gas. When you introducing extream heat to water it turns into gas. When that water hits the outside temp of the vessel (HOSE) its traveling in thats when it turns to steam. Steam is a much lower PSI than water below 300.

Has anyone ever put purified water into a electric coffee pot and tried to use it? Try it and tell me what happens to water with no metal in it. Learned that about the age of 9 years old.

Back on target....

Nigel,

Correct pressure and temp is very important. More heat and less pressure works well for gun and oil. More volume and pressure will always make you faster on verticle surfaces of course. I preffer low volumes at higher PSI on horizontal surfaces. Less water means less mess, less contaminants, less liabilty, less everything. I like controling the water rather than the water control me. Of course in a garage pick water and hazzards up. (proper disposal is always a must)

I preffer cleanng this way because I sell more frequent cleaning even on garages. Build up is not there so larger water volume is not needed to be effective.

This does not mean if you can run a 22gpm unit and do a garage faster and for money your wrong. Hats off to you!!!

Its just not my way!!

NOTE: I never reclaim a sidewalk on private property. Unless water will violate the CWA

Edited January 20, 2011 by Ron Musgraves

[Ron Musgraves 240]

3 Years ago when I mentioned EPA and the CWA on past posts on ***, Ron, you never came across as a Green Movement sorta of guy in any of those replies....WOW. Glad to see it.

LOL, Jim I have been capturing water for as long as I have been a Washer. My first large jobs I decon for Eviro Co, we live in seminconductor valley in the 80 and early 90. While washing in pads we had other jobs throughout the factory. This is where I learned about water!! 23 years ago.

Three engineers : My brother, Peggy Stapleton, Ronda Tibbs. All on my facebook and please do not bother them Jim. All Chemical and eviro engineers...with PE

The clean Water Act was all about no off property discharge. Nothing could go off site unless it was cleaned or drummed. I got the opourtunity to work with people who really understood the laws. 70 % of my knowledge was developed on these projects. Washing mostly Cranes and drill rigs.

While Fleetwashing we always captured treated and disposed of the water.

The suggestion I'm not and EPA guy is a bit of and insult since my lifes work is all about the industry and clean water. I can say this because its a Fact, Robert Hinderliter told me he has learned a thing or two from speaking with me about the CWA. I'm sure that through some insight many other distributors who sell equipment have taken more practicle approaches to responsible cleaning and selling of equipment. So actually chuckling with your response about you didnt know. I guess all those calls we have had didnt registar in your head Jim that I will and never will by your heat pressure combo or use of fire protection.

I want to say in past threads I have advocated fire house use, I was wrong. ( In Gargage cleaning) New Construction is a different animal.

[Ron Musgraves 240]

I would love to see the "Stone Rider" as well Scott, it is not a matter of you proving to the rest of us what equipment you have, but to understand how this piece of equipment has helped you and your company achieve garage cleaning success.

I dont think we are going to see it anytime soon. I will have to follow Scott one night and get the photos from a Distance. I may be wrong, I hope he brings it out in SEPT

[Scott Stone 604]

BSA ha ha ha!

[810F250 14]

I have only one input thus far, Sioux, have not heard for another forum in which I posted, I guess I would have to go back to school for this one.

[tonyshelton 112]

About Vegas demo cleaning , (dont laugh) I do not recall that Tony's Landa unit offered a superior cleaning over an area in which Jim's unit cleaned. I know that Tony's waterjet surface cleaner worked like a charm on the stencils, but Tony's unit had more difficulty at removing the Vegas baked gum than Jim's unit (Jim never hooked his unit to any surface cleaner). Its a pity that the personal/industry relationships that were built at that round table are dissolved.

I learned a great deal thus far, and i am still learning.

Nigel, You are my friend and I respect you and you knowledge. But I think you have had so many conversations with Jim about heat that you've forgotten what really happened that day.

You, Tom and I were standing around in bewilderment as to why Jim's machine was taking so long to get up the gum. We came to the general consensus that the problem was the fan was blowing out and not providing enough impact.

If you will remember the final conclusion that you and Tom came to was that the optimum temperature for removing gum was around 225-230. While that is a little higher than most of us use, it's not 300 degrees.

I can't say anything about how 300 degrees does on grease and oil. I've never seen it. But I have seen it on gum and there are lots of people who were there who saw it too.

Here is a video of you cleaning gum with Jim's machine. I can't see any speed advantage, can you?

Here are you guys talking to Jim. Why is he defensive here? That's because he knew it wasn't getting up the gum faster. He even admitted later that he had never come across gum as baked in as we have here in Las Vegas. You can clearly see Chris Chappell popping gum like a maniac with our machine in the background on the same concrete slab.

I think time has made memories change. Here's a little more of our machine cleaning. I'm not saying we've got any kind of super machine it's just a normal Landa skid. I just don't see how anyone can claim that the 300 degrees made the gum come up any faster.

[810F250 14]

Nigel, You are my friend and I respect you and you knowledge. But I think you have had so many conversations with Jim about heat that you've forgotten what really happened that day.

You, Tom and I were standing around in bewilderment as to why Jim's machine was taking so long to get up the gum. We came to the general consensus that the problem was the fan was blowing out and not providing enough impact.

If you will remember the final conclusion that you and Tom came to was that the optimum temperature for removing gum was around 225-230. While that is a little higher than most of us use, it's not 300 degrees.

I can't say anything about how 300 degrees does on grease and oil. I've never seen it. But I have seen it on gum and there are lots of people who were there who saw it too.

Here is a video of you cleaning gum with Jim's machine. I can't see any speed advantage, can you?

Here are you guys talking to Jim. Why is he defensive here? That's because he knew it wasn't getting up the gum faster. He even admitted later that he had never come across gum as baked in as we have here in Las Vegas. You can clearly see Chris Chappell popping gum like a maniac with our machine in the background on the same concrete slab.

I think time has made memories change. Here's a little more of our machine cleaning. I'm not saying we've got any kind of super machine it's just a normal Landa skid. I just don't see how anyone can claim that the 300 degrees made the gum come up any faster.

Tony, whats up? Hope all is well.

Darn......The length of time I took to remove that gum I would still be there (2 years later).....

However Tony (calm tone, setting the mood of my thoughts&written word, :) ), I did not use or focus on your machine's use other than when the waterjet sounded super sonic on the stencils.

I agree that impact is important for removing gum.

300 degrees and a standard expanding nozzle application used at removing gum at the Vegas Round Table in retrospect was not an optimal method for the gum conditions. (video proves this)

You hear.....Jim G, Tom and I was attempting to determine what would speed the process.

I really cant tell how many pieces of gum Chris C removed in other video clip (not sure if it was more than one, Chis C could tell us, I know he used both rig guns) but without a shadow of a doubt, I can clearly see that it took some doing for me to remove one piece of dried/rigid gum.

Vegas Round was a great experience, because of this I have learned to adjust a number of inputs when performing gum removal.

p.s. Jim and I do talk a great deal about pw, my wife looks at the caller id and says "its Mr 300 calling"

Edited January 28, 2011 by 810F250

[tonyshelton 112]

That is the kind of gum we have to deal with everytime we do a city other local government job. Surprisingly it only takes a month or two in the heat here to turn into that stuff.

Like you, I agree that the gum removal technique that day was NOT the best technique for that gum. We've gone to doing a prepass with the propane scraper on all city sidewalks and places like the DMV where we did the demo.

I wasn't comparing our machine to Jim's as if ours can even pale in comparison to his. His machine is awesome. I was comparing temps only and mentioned that it was our machine only because our machine is common in the industry.

I'm sure Jim's turbo twisters would eat our lunch on a sidewalk. But I'm not 100% convinced it's the 300 degrees that is making the difference.

When you grab a hot handle of a frying pan you instantly get relief as soon as you pull your hand away. Why? Because heat dissapates quickly.

When going over concrete the length of time the spray is in contact with the surface is very short. That 300 degree intial impact (and I have a feeling that impact is reduced because of the steam factor) fades QUICKLY and the concrete begins it's fast return to room temperature.

Is it possible that 100 more degrees makes that much difference in those few seconds? Hot water sprayd for a period of time cleans dishes, but a quick spray of hot water wouldn't do much.

You and I know a contractor who never uses hot water on concrete because the chems do all the work before the SC even gets there. I can't help but wonder how much of Jim's high quality work is more the result of a little higher impact (4000 vs 3000-3500) combined with his chem?

We need some experiments to settle this.

[810F250 14]

That is the kind of gum we have to deal with everytime we do a city other local government job. Surprisingly it only takes a month or two in the heat here to turn into that stuff.

I hear that!

Like you, I agree that the gum removal technique that day was NOT the best technique for that gum. We've gone to doing a prepass with the propane scraper on all city sidewalks and places like the DMV where we did the demo.

Sounds like a lot of work, a chem app followed by your machine should do the trick.

I wasn't comparing our machine to Jim's as if ours can even pale in comparison to his. His machine is awesome. I was comparing temps only and mentioned that it was our machine only because our machine is common in the industry.

OK

I'm sure Jim's turbo twisters would eat our lunch on a sidewalk. But I'm not 100% convinced it's the 300 degrees that is making the difference.

Actually I dont think the turbo twister is best suited for sidewalks, I think 300F on oil is a wining combo, the engineer at Sioux actually said 325F is better.

When you grab a hot handle of a frying pan you instantly get relief as soon as you pull your hand away. Why? Because heat dissapates quickly.

When going over concrete the length of time the spray is in contact with the surface is very short. That 300 degree intial impact (and I have a feeling that impact is reduced because of the steam factor) fades QUICKLY and the concrete begins it's fast return to room temperature.

The Sioux engineer thinks that the zero degree pattern and the surface cleaner dome combo is what is trapping the heat somewhat to increase the temp of the covered area.

Is it possible that 100 more degrees makes that much difference in those few seconds? Hot water sprayd for a period of time cleans dishes, but a quick spray of hot water wouldn't do much.

You and I know a contractor who never uses hot water on concrete because the chems do all the work before the SC even gets there. I can't help but wonder how much of Jim's high quality work is more the result of a little higher impact (4000 vs 3000-3500) combined with his chem?

According to Jim G when over 275F he reduces the pressure.

We need some experiments to settle this. I am all for this, know a good PI

.....

[810F250 14]

Courtesy of Jim Gamble of Crystal Cleaning Company LLC.

Parking Garage cleaning with >300F in a modified turbo twister. (sorry for the poor video quality)

A motorized surface cleaner is the way to go for speed.

[tonyshelton 112]

Nigel, this is the first prototype of what we use. Now, we could prep that entire DMV in two hrs and clean it in another hour. We perfected this after we had to do 4 miles of city sidwalks full of the same gum.

HINT: the burnt gum has to go somewhere (not on the sidewalk) that's how we evolved the concept.

Btw, how did you embed that video? I can't get it to work.

Edited January 29, 2011 by tonyshelton

[810F250 14]

Nigel, this is the first prototype of what we use. Now, we could prep that entire DMV in two hrs and clean it in another hour. We perfected this after we had to do 4 miles of city sidwalks full of the same gum.

HINT: the burnt gum has to go somewhere (not on the sidewalk) that's how we evolved the concept.

Btw, how did you embed that video? I can't get it to work.

Nice, I remember you having that tool at Vegas. The embed is icon

Edited January 29, 2011 by 810F250

[Jim Gamble 20]

You and I know a contractor who never uses hot water on concrete because the chems do all the work before the SC even gets there. I can't help but wonder how much of Jim's high quality work is more the result of a little higher impact (4000 vs 3000-3500) combined with his chem?

We need some experiments to settle this.

Hi Tony. Glad to see you. Hope everything is well.

Tony, you make some good points. It is hard to say in words what we do.

I do now this. I have submitted Videos of my Sub using 4,000 PSI @ 200 degrees 580,000 BTU boiler vs our 4,000 PSI 300+ Degrees at 1.1 million BTU's. Though I believe that the chemical does do a great deal of working to the finish product, I believe after seeing our crew apply the detergent in the same manor, our contractor cleaned the row using 0 degree tips as we did ( Turbos was not used for this experiment), this shows how higher temperatures can possibly penetrate the oil thus lifting and removing the oil and most stains from the concrete.

I am not a scientist, but I did ask a Student from Stanford to ask her Physics Professor if 300 degrees would be " More Effective" in removing oil from concrete when applied as we described. I explained that we needed to know this before we decided to build our equipment. I wanted to know if the extra effort and costs would be beneficial in removing oil from concrete.

based on his input, we went ahead and built it. We also had 2 Hydraulic Engineers help design the Hydraulics. One from Stanford, the other from England. I forgot the name of his University.

The point here is that we did not assume anything. We asked professors and other individuals who had more knowledge then the average professional on how to achieve oil removal.

[Jim Gamble 20]

Here is the video of 200 VS 300 degrees using the same GPM / Pressure and same surface cleaners

[Jim Gamble 20]

<iframe title="YouTube video player" class="youtube-player" type="text/html" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/SGV4gwtlClc" frameborder="0" allowFullScreen></iframe>

[Jim Gamble 20]

Here is the video. I am unable to embed the video as Nigel describes above. so here is the link

[Jim Gamble 20]