should i buy the x-jet????????

[Paul B. 523]

The curious thing with venturi effect is that there are a lot of things that will impact it such as altitude, water temperature, friction.

The other item we didn't mention is that when a ball valve is used, it also impacts the flow rate, but now I'm talking small changes that may or may not make a difference in this business, however, if you were to add a similar kind of restrictor/disturbance causing piece into a venturi system used lets say for fuel injection, it would make a major impact.

[One Tough Pressure 580]

Originally posted by Paul B.

As for the 3/4" vs 5/8" garden hose: at 40 PSI a 5/8" ID hose will

give you approx. 11 GPM, whereas a 3/4" hose will provide you approx. 17 GPM. If you have a 7 GPM machine and maintain 40PSI water pressure, you will see no difference in your machine performance with either hose. As orifices and pressures change, that is when you start seeing output or input changes.

Paul,

Would you then agree that 3/4" hose is overkill for the typical 5gpm machine?

[Paul B. 523]

If all else is kept simple, I would say that 3/4" hose is more than what you need for a 5GPM machine.

That's a qualified YES.

[One Tough Pressure 580]

And finally someone else agrees with me. I have been saying this for quite some time and everyone always wants to bicker about it.

[beyoungsr 14]

OTP,

Why don't you set up a poll and ask everybody what size supply line they use!

[One Tough Pressure 580]

Seems as though people are quick to vote, but do not answer the why part. Just because a lot of people may use 3/4" over 5/8", does not have me convinced that it is better. They use it because others said it was better, and then pass it along to others.

My trailer came with 3/4" supply line, but there are many places where the fittings and the filter only have 1/2" orifices. Since many hose bibbs are 1/2" and 1/4", I do not feel that 3/4" is worth the hassle. I actually plan to ditch my 3/4" hose when it croaks, and put more pressure hose on that reel. I will then use 5/8" supply line, that is kept in the truck.

[ron p 500]

it all depends on the langth of hose and if your connecting to a wash unit or a tank.

Even if the supply head has a 1/2 inc opening you may still need a 3/4 inc hose.

Why? simple, the longer the hose the more friction loss you get. Water rubbing againt the wall's of the hose. That 1/2 inc spigot has water pressure. Every ft of hose after the spigot will slow the flow.

The tank will fill more slowly and a wash unit can suck a hose shut if the run is to long.

Im a vol fireman and know about this stuff.

A pumper can suck a hose dry if not near a main. Sometimes you need multiable pumper's to pump to one pumper to get the flow needed. If the truck is too far from the hydrant you need 2 pumper's.

If you take a 5 gal bucket and drill two 1/2 holes in the bottom and take another 5 gal bucket and drill one 1 inc hole in the bottom, which one will empty faster?

the 1 inc, by a large margin. far less friction.

[One Tough Pressure 580]

Very interesting topic indeed. I have never run more than 100 feet of supply hose to my unit, as I have 350' of pressure hose if needed. In general, I do not fill on site and work off of my tank, but of course that is not always possible, but since I recycle water, I can make it last longer than most people.

In wash down situations, I have used both 3/4", and 5/8" hose for 200 + feet and have not noticed a difference between the two. I even went so far as to ditch my 3/4" line for that purpose and stick with the 5/8" as it is lighter to drag around.

[ron p 500]

dont you have problem's with your downstreamer at 350 ft of pressure hose?

What is your pressure loss?

once again these problem's stem from friction loss.

[ron p 500]

i wonder if they can make a super large X-JET to shoot FOAM to put out oil fire's and plane crash's? Mount it to a deck gun on a firetruck. SUPER SHOOTER.

[One Tough Pressure 580]

When I use my downstreamer, I place it just before the gun. I do need to drag around a bucket, but it is not really a problem, as I do not use it very often. I have not put a gauge on when I have run long hose lines. I have 350' if needed, but have only used 250'. Pressure loss what not a problem, as I generally do not run more than 2000 psi, so with the loss from 3500, it is not a big deal.

They do have pumps that are made for home firefighting and also have a foamer for it. It is really cool looking, I will have to find the link for you.

[One Tough Pressure 580]

Can not find the link right now, but here is a file photo. It is for 3/4" lines.

[Paul B. 523]

At 5GPM, the pressure loss in a 3/8" hose is about 125PSI per 100ft. For 350 ft of hose, that would be about 440PSI. Each fitting is about 7-10PSI (some fittings are more others are less restrictive so tha loss could be a bit higher). With long high pressure hose you also need to change nozzle selections if you wanted to wash at for example 1000PSI, as your original nozzle selected for 50 ft of hose will now only produce you about 560PSI. Etc., ...etc.

I didn't want to get into fluid dynamics (it's my weak area) but here it goes:

You will have flow rate changes also as your hose length changes. A 350 ft 5/8" hose will drop to about 6GPM (from 11GPM) as you have pressure loss.

Where you get into major problems is if the water is gravity fed vs. forced pressure and you start out with less than 40PSI. The opening has to be large enough to completely fill the hose, otherwise your sucking air into your pump (the dreaded cavitation problem).

I hope this made some sense, but the bottom line is that increasing the hose length will decrease pressure and flow rate. So if you needed to go over 350ft length, to say 500ft you would have to go to 3/4" ID hose. Also if you went to a 6 or 7GPM machine, you would most like need to change to a larger ID hose.

[offduty 25]

Nice to see someones knows about friction loss. Remember though that fire pumps cannot suck water, centrifigul versus non.

[ron p 500]

what about DRAFTING from a river 12 ft down from the pump?

[offduty 25]

Drafting is not sucking. To draft you have to lower the atmospheric pressure (14.7 at sea level) to displace the air and allow the water to take its place. The reason fire pumps have primers is because the pump itself cannot pump air, which is necessary to suck water. Like siphoning gas with a hose.

[ron p 500]

this is why im a blackcoat and not a truckie.

[offduty 25]

Wasn't trying to bust on you. I've been driving fire engines since '89. If I knew as much about pressurewashing as I did hydraulics I would probably be rich by now. lol.

[Guest Sopowerclean]

Ron P

My chief was describing a nozzle for a deck gun that he plans on ordering that injects the foam at the nozzle. The way he was describingb it sounds like a big x-jet

Lawrence Carter

[One Tough Pressure 580]

Going thru my stockpile, here is another photo of the foamer.

[Mike Williamson 198]

Wow, sorry I missed this thread earlier, and glad you brought it back up, Alan!

Ronp: Yes, friction loss is a small factor in the reason why one 1" hole in a bucket drains faster than two 1/2" holes...but the primary reason is that a 1" hole has twice the area as two 1/2" holes. Pi(r*r)... 3.14*1*1=3.14" 3.14*.5*.5=1.57

[One Tough Pressure 580]

http://www.homefirefightingsystems.com/foam.html

[Henry B. 4]

What I did with my rig was I added two 30 gallon tanks on the back of my rig. One with house wash mix and the other with a deck wash mix. By running a downstreamer on each gun line.(I have a two gun rig) I can just drop in the feed hose into the tank, put on my x-jet and it draws my soap. When I don't need soap anymore I can either disconnect the hose or put on another tip (modified zero degree drilled out) this tip puts out alot of volume but just barely small enough in size so it wont pull soap. I use the same method for decks. Now I just back up to a house start up my rig and run my line out and soap, dwell then rinse. If I need to add bleach to my premixed chemical I add it with the xjet draw line. This mixes up both chemicals and shoots it up about 35'. These tanks also counter balance the weight on the front end of the trailer and make it VERY easy to move around.

Here is a link to pictures of my equipment.

http://www.henryshousework.com/html/power_washing_equipment.html

Henry

Originally posted by ron p

why wont someone just build what everyone want's?

A duel hose.

One R-1 pressure hose with a light weight 3/8th's hose attached.

Make it 200 ft long and have a shur-flo 12 volt pump that push's the chem to the injector?

You can build this set-up for about $150 plus the cost of the pressure hose. $75 at e-spec.

HOUSEWASHING SYSTEM.

Second thing

get rid of the stupid proportioner's and have get rid of the $2 shut-off valve and put a DEMA valve on it.

The valve will open to diffent degree's and meter the flow.

Third is getting rid of the hanging supply line and pipe it in like a weird duel lance.

One pipe running to the back of the x-jet and the other to the bottom supply.

Both go back to the gun and the 2 lines connect where the reg wand connect's.

This is all called 2-STEPPING EQUIPMENT[you will need to modify it a little] but is all stock stuff.

Where their is a will, their is a way.

[One Tough Pressure 580]

Ron,

Have you considered trying to find someone to fine tune your idea and then you can market it?

[timhays 14]

dual hose reels can be purchased from Hannay reel company,if i were to use this setup it would be with an AG sprayer tank setup with its own pump and motor not a shurflo,also i cannot see the time efficiency over an x jet type setup.

how much is the time actually mixing chems and hooking up to the x jet worth that yousave the weight of the hose added expense of the reels and time spent managing the monstrosity?

you still have to unhook from the device you use to apply chemicals and hook up to the extension wand....

also the chemicals we use for housewash and concrete cleaning and brick washing will destroy the reel hose and the device pumping it very shortly,i dont see any savings or benefit.......

yes it is a good gimmick for those who spend most of there time dreaming of ways to make things more complicated but for the realist i cant picture it working better than an x jet type of injector.

please prove it is faster and more economical than an x jet type injector thats what i want to see.