Time to Buy New Nozzles......

[e33]

Ok, first im gonna make you chuckle, then im going ot be serious.

My fd uses 200' 1.75" preconnects. They currently have Akron Turbojets on them which are 30-60-95-125 GPM. Wrong nozzles for this size hose!!! But cant seem to convince the boys of this.

Im researching the possibility of switching to TFT Automatics. Anyone use them and how do you like them? I have really been looking at the technical info that TFT offers and asking around to see what the opinion is. I like the whole slide valve idea, the flush feature, the "nozzleman flow control" and the design. So i guess im looking for opinions of TFT mainly, or any other nozzles you use..AUTOMATIC only...I want to get rid of the selectable galllonage ones...the guys cant pump them right and theyre not giving us enough water when we need it.....thanks in advance.

I like the looks of the TFT handline series, but also considering the mid-matic series...lemme know guys.

DEALERS---- http://www.firehouse.com/interactive/boards/smile.gif I'm possibly looking for demo nozzles, any brand of auto to try (TFT especially)...In Central New Jersey.

[This message has been edited by e33 (edited July 31, 1999).]

[Dalmation90]

Our first off 1.75" line has a TFT MidForce dual pressure (100psi std. or turn a widget in the nozzle for 30-70psi ops) with a 70-200gpm range...I like it and I'm a Rockwood Nozzle snob http://www.firehouse.com/interactive/boards/smile.gif

My biggest suggestion is to get a seperate shutoff...so if you want to change the nozzle, you can without having to shut the line down.

I also am not a fan of pistol grips...but that's another discussion! (Well, Ok, I can go either way...they're easier to hold, but you tend not to work the nozzle as aggresively then)

Matt

[FyredUp]

e33,

The TFT 50-350 is a fine nozzle. It does exactly what it is designed to do. We had them and what we found out was you can pump whatever you want to it and the guys at the end will gate it down until it is easy to hold. Unfortunately, we found that most of the time that gated flow was 100 gpm or less.

So, we began a search for answers on what we should do. We observed other departments in our area and over and over we saw any time the flow was 150 gpm or more the nozzle was gated down. So the ability to flow a high gpm and actually doing it were 2 different things. We too borrowed nozzles, thought of going strictly smoothbore, ruled that out, looked at the dual flow nozzle, ruled that out. We borrowed lowpressure nozzles from our Elkhart rep and played with those (No I am not a salesman, nor do I work for Elkhart). What we finally settled on was the 200 gpm at 75 psi nozzle backed with a 1 1/4 smoothbore. We use 2 inch hose. We underpump initially to flow about 150 at about 50 psi and can go up as needed to 200 gpm or to the smooth bore. I'm not saying this is everyone's answer but it works for us. The biggest thing we notice is there is no more gating the nozzle back.

Having said all that your hardest sell is gonna be to the troops who are comfortable with the feel of 125 gpm. Now boost that flow and the accompanying back pressure and I can here the howling all ready.

Good luck.

[K A]

---Unfortunately, we found that most of the time they gated the flow ---

How do you trust the guys to drive the fire trucks??

Why not go a fog or smooth bore without a shut off? They can't gate it. Why not go 20 psi nozzle pressure? It has to be easier to hold than 75 psi fog or 50 psi smooth bore.

That 75 psi tip takes an incredible 10 pounds reaction off the firefighter, man that is a lot. When your engineer screws up the engine presure with the smooth bore in use by lets say 20 psi guess what, you get an additional 47 pounds against the nozzleman. That is twice what the old TFT's reaction was.

Seems strange to me but if your guys can't hold 76 pounds reaction without gating down how dou you expet them to use the 1 1/4" smooth bore at 117 lbs reaction without gating back???

You could of saved a fortune simply sending your nozzles back to TFT instead of buying new nozzles and have them adjust the spring to 50, 60 or 75 psi. At 50 psi you'd have the same reach and flow and reaction as the smooth bore, you'd flow more than your current fog tip at less reaction.

--Having said all that your hardest sell is gonna be to the troops who are comfortable with the feel of 125 gpm. Now boost that flow and the accompanying back pressure and I can here the howling all ready--

125 gpm 100 psi equals 63 pounds 150 gpm at 50 psi np TFT equals 54, 180 = 63. The fact there are more 100 psi nozzles in use by a 100 to 1 ratio over smooth bores and low pressure tips, I just bet the key is to learn how to hold a fire hose correctly, not change out perfectly good nozzles fr 10 pounds of relief and a much greater kinking problem. At 102 psi pump pressure to flow 150 gpm you will have lots of kinking and water shut off problems. You'll still be gating back but instead of the firefighters doing it for you the hose will be doing it automatically.

The nice thing about 2 inch hose though, if you park two block or three blocks away from the fire by accident you can still sustain a 150 gpm stream out to 1250 feet.

It is not nearly as limiting as 1 3/4" hose with its rediculous 650 feet which limits you to one and a half blocks. The 2 inch will require bigger hose crews or simply wear the crew ut quicker for no increase in flow and a dramatic increase in kinking. Seems like a decision against firefighters.

When someone gets hurt one day with then new Non-NFPA compliant nozzle, how will the department protect it self from lawsuit????

[FyredUp]

KA,

I will respond to you this way.

1) I did not say everyone should do what we do. Only that it works for us.

2) The observations we made as to gating the nozzle included several neighboring departments.

3) Why must you attack anyone who has an idea different than yours? I said nothing negative about anyone, any idea expressed, or any product, including TFT nozzles.

4) We have not experienced any problems with kinking in our choice of hose.

5) Grow up. You will never come close to convincing me of any of your ideas if your response is to attack me or my ideas or my FD. I would prefer if that is your way to communicate that you not respond to me any further.

[K A]

Sorry, Just stated a few facts. Buying new $600 nozzles to replace perfectly good $600 dollar nozzles seems a waste when all that is needed is learning to hold the hose.

-I did not say everyone should do what we do.--

nor did I

---The observations we made as to gating the nozzle included several neighboring departments---

My observations are based on similar things

--We have not experienced any problems with kinking in our choice of hose--

You will

[Ledbelly]

Our Op Chief bought enough TFTs for every engine to have one...as a trial. Everyone, including myself, loves them... to the point that there is often a race to pull the line with the TFT and leave the other guy holding the "bag". They're easy to maintain and we have less problems with them. We've recently gone with the clip-on foam "tubes" for the TFTs also.
Count my vote for TFT....

BTW-Don't get into it with KA, you ain't nevah gonna win...
Corollary: There's 2 theories to arguin with KA, neither one works.

[This message has been edited by Ledbelly (edited August 01, 1999).]

[Bobaff]

e33,

I have been using the TFT 50-350 nozzle almost all of my career. I LOVE THEM! The pisol grip design is wonderful for holding onto that hose and cutting down (if only a little bit) on the nozzle reaction pressure.
You are still getting the same reaction but the pistol grip just makes it seem more tolerable. The slide valve is great for letting your guys get what they want. You can give a little water or alot whatever the nozzleman decides, works wonders for those quick bursts, you can almost eliminate the newbies causing water hammer on the pump (ALMOST). I also like the grip for adjusting between straight and fog, nice and solid.

As far as not being able to work the nozzle very aggressively, that is true. However, if you are flowing a good solid PSI of say 150 and that hose is stiff as a board then you can whip the hect out of it. (not that you really need to run 150 always)

I would also like to agree with ledbelly about the clip on foam tubes, a very good idea if you use foam sometimes.

FyredUp: I must say those Elkhart sound pretty tempting, do they have a certian model that I can refer to?

K A : --"Why not go a fog or smooth bore without a shut off? They can't gate it"--

I have no clue why you would not want your people to be able to gate their own nozzle. It's good for safety (say if the line got loose, it happens!), It's a good way to conserve water and lessen water damage. Quite frankly I can't imagine not having a gate on my nozzle. I don't like always waiting until I am right on top of the fire to call for water.

Stay Safe, Stay Low and stay away from all that GLOWS!!!

Bobaff

[Paul Grimwood]

You are right E33 on the initial point you make - the model of Turbojet your department is using is not at all suited to 1.75 hoselines! Put them on 1.5 hose and they will be fine where 125 gpm is the maximum practical flow in this size hose.

I his own way, KA makes a lot of valid points
and I agree with him that a crew of two firefighters should be capable of working effectively on an interior line with a 76 pound raection force. In my own experience the 'average' sized firefighter (they are getting lighter)! should be able to work with 60 pounds reaction and a three-man crew could advance against 95 pounds of reaction. These are 'workable' reactions forces enabling effective advancement and interior operations.

With a 2 man crew the optimum interior attack line would flow around 150 gpm through 2 inch hose. All of the TFT nozzles are excellent tools and present the firefighter with a versatile straight stream and an extremely effective fog pattern that optimises droplet suspension in the overhead for gas-phase cooling applications. If you run a 100 psi nozzle as opposed to 75 psi this effect is maximised.

TFT nozzles are high-quality, durable, maintenance free tools that every firefighter should have the opportunity to try out. They are popular right around the world - not just USA! The follow-up support and training offered by TFT technicians is second to none. No I am not a TFT saleman!!!
Just an inner-city firefighter who has used TFTs over many years with a great amount of satisfaction.



------------------
www.firetactics.com (http://www.firetactics.com)

[BIG PAULIE]

Ok where do I start. Lets talk about KA. Are his coments strong. Yes . Does the man or women know what he or she is talking about. Hell yes. What KA is saying is that you should not have to limit yourself or protect your self from getting beat up by the fire stream you are producing by purchasing a nozzle that has restrictions. In my opinion low pressure nozzles will do that to you. It's all in the nozzle handling techniques that are applied. The TFT 50-350 gpm nozzle gives you maximum flow at your diposal( the person at the nozzle) If you don't need it don't flow it. That is the beauty of the TFT.

FDNY uses a 15/16 smooth bore for their 1-3/4" attack line. It is my understandinf that they go in with a flow of 180 gpm at a 50 psi tip pressure. They are ready for war. Do they always need the 180 for interior work? No but they can't determine that untill they get inside. Know if they choose to gat their 15/16" down the stream falls apart. It looks like a open butt hydrant flowing. This may or may not work for fire fighting. Use the same flow wit ha TFT and you will get the same use Big water when you need it, gated back when you don't. The three differences will be
1. fog if you need it
2.. higher nozzle pressure which makes a higher nozzle reaction
3. a good stream in the gated down mode.

I have said it before and I will say it again. It is all in the handling. I am a 5'7" firefighter and I don't wiegh much. If I can take a 1-3/4" handle flowing 200 gpm by myself in the interior attack mode of operation easily then anyone can. I have some literature that I will send anyone that will explain how this can be done Just e-mail me.

Finally take KA with a grain of salt. He really has a lot to offer.

[Halligan84]

The secret to the higher flow lines is all in the handling, I agree with Paulie. The auto/combo nozzles do give you some different options, but the problem with firefighters gating them back improperly or under pumping them is VERY real from my observations of both of the departments I'm affiliated with and as a fire academy instructor.(standing by to be attacked by KA for being a moron) If your buying a $600 nozzle because you want to flow 200 gpm, then make sure you set minimum engine pressures to get those flows and make sure your firefighters know that they need to go full flow straight stream when making attack and gate down after knock down. Many departments have returned to smooth bores for initial attack to combat some of these problems, they do limit your options, but I know I have the flow we want and can still back it up with an auto nozzle. The complaints about kinking are much like the complaints about excessive nozzle reaction aren't they? It's all in the handling.

[Nozzle]

I'll be carefull here as obviously I have a vested interest in the whole thread but I do need to clarify a point about this nozzle reaction issue. All too often the "reaction" tests are done standing up in an open field with no fire in front. A few things are wrong with this being the right place to evaluate the reaction that can be held comfortably.

1. There is no fire, there is no emergency, there is no adrenalin.

2. You are usually standing up in this test and that is not how fires are fought.

3. You are in the open with nothing to brace against.

4. You end up doing it a long time so that everybody can have a look and that is not what we do on agressive interior attack.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, Nozzle pressure is VELOCITY, velocity is reach, action, impact. Imagine the talk about the locker room if a police officer told all his buddies that he was taking the powder out of his cartridges so that there would be less kick, less reaction etc. He would be laughed out of town as he is directly giving up his STOPPING power by lowering the powder he has lowered his VELOCITY.

We need to train people how to hold lines. How to open it all the way when they can, when they are backed up, when they are hitting heavy volumes of fire and how to throttle back when they are on a roof, temporarily holding it by themself, on ice, or any other reason of hundreds where we find ourself unable to hold as much as we could under ideal conditions.

The whole purpose of automatic nozzles was to allow the pump operator to set a maximum pressure set by SOP to deliver the MAXIMUM flow that the department desires. Then the guy in there with the view of what is going on, with his butt in the hot spot, can decide how much to flow based on conditions. The people that say that he should not be allowed to make that decision need to look at how they are training their people.

[ricky]

I'm with nozzle on this one. I want my firemen to have the largest amount of water possible at their disposal. If they can't use it correctly then we have a training problem. We use TFT and Akron automatics on everything we do and are able to deliver in excess of 250 GPM on our 200' 1 3/4" preconnects with relative ease. If the nozzleman doesn't need it he has the option of gating it down. He is the one that determines what he needs not command or the pump operator. Our department has been using the "BIG" automatics for over 15 years and we are a firm believer in them. Also saw the Vindicator nozzle demo a couple of months ago and I like some of their engineering ideas but am not sold on the fact that they cannot deliver any thing but a straight stream of sorts. They definatly can deliver the flow at a low pressure but I've got all of these 300K fire trucks around to make pressure so that I can get the flows we need and still have the ability to make a fog pattern.

------------------

[ricky]

Nozzle
I almost forgot - we need to talk about a 250 GPM "bubble cup" nozzle for attack lines. You build it and we will come.

[K A]

--The complaints about kinking are much like the complaints about excessive nozzle reaction aren't they? It's all in the handling.--

A pump pressure of 102 psi for 150 gpm with 2 inch hose is a sure kink wouldn't you think???

Clip on foam tip works well at 200 to 250 gpm.

[Mike C]

100 psi pump pressure?

Kink city!!!! Your pump relief valve cannot protect you at that pressure.

[Halligan84]

--The complaints about kinking are much like the complaints about excessive nozzle reaction aren't they? It's all in the handling.--
A pump pressure of 102 psi for 150 gpm with 2 inch hose is a sure kink wouldn't you
think???

True enough... I don't see the sense in dragging the extra weight of 2 inch for 150 GPM either.

[S. Cook]

I know this thread is for new nozzles, but to touch on the handling aspect it's taken, Nozzle and Ricky hit it right on the nose. If you have a handling problem flowing the proper flows, you might have a training problem.

We have a ~135# female that can handle the tip of a 1-3/4" with an Akron SM-30 automatic by herself using a technique that Big Paulie can give you the info on (as is typical, help is always needed to move the line forward).

It's all in the handling.

[FyredUp]

Bobaff,

The nozzle we use is a B-275GAT shut off with a 4000-24 combination tip.

The smooth bore is a 1 1/4 inch.

We like it. It works for us.

[FyredUp]

I just went back and read all of the posts. You guys win. You have driven someone with a different idea from the forum again. I wanted to discuss different ways of doing things. I attacked no one or anyones ideas. I even said TFT makes a fine product. It just didn't work here for us. I realize KA is going to attack me again for saying that. Fine I quit listening to him after the first shot he fired at me.

BIG PAULIE,

I don't care if KA has valid points if the only way he can express them is to say everyone else is wrong and or a moron.

It is no wonder we can't get anything done on the national front, either funding or improvements to codes or the NFA. The politicians just sit back and watch us kill ourselves. We have met the enemy and he is us.

[Mike C]

FyredUp

{to say everyone else is wrong and or a moron}

Lighten up dude, No one but you used those terms. 100 psi EP line is going to kink, the line will be harder to move, it is easier to convert nozzles and cheaper than buying new ones, at some point firefighters need to learn how to hold a hose, if a crew can't hold 76 pounds how they going to hold 107 lbs with a smooth bore without gating, standing a holding is different that kneeling and spraying, big drops make steam too, going from 150 to 325 gpm is quite a step, some manufacturer's lie about their firction loss(A LOT), where does the fog tip go when the SB is used, ladders are big and heavy...should we get ride of them and get smaller ones that feel better or are they part of the job? all valid questions...

Offer something don't be defensive.

[captlen]

Fisrt off, my department use's TFT's, speaking for my self love them, one of the best thing my department did. We use the 50 to350 gpm for 1 3/4 hose, and we use the 10 to 125 gpm for 1 1/2 hose. both work great. We have had no mait. problems. My dept. does have trouble advancing the 1 3/4 line flowing 150 gpm. Most of the we just have two people on the line.

After reading all the replys I agree trainging is also a big problem. I am also an instructor at our county's fire acd. and hose handleing is a big problem, we need to get back and retraning our people on the basics. Good luck with project. It sounds like my firehouse, if so you will need it

[FyredUp]

Gentlemen,

Let me leave you with this final comment.

We have not experienced a kinking problem at 150 gpm. Our flows work for us. At 325 we are not in an advancing mode. Rather we are making hits, shutting down and advancing.

I am glad what you do works for you. I did not ever say that any of you were wrong or that you should do what we do.

As far as nozzle choices, I believe everyone should borrow the nozzles they are intertested in and try them themselves. With no sales people, or people from other departments involved, in fact no outside influence at all. Get a flow meter and try them out. Drag hoselines around to see what happens. If you do that you can say you made the right choice for you.

All of you stay safe.

[bgilmore07]

My momma always said, "live on the edge"... I haven't been attacked in a while, and felt the need for self-abuse:

My department has been a staunch supporter of the variable gallonage fog nozzle (Akron, if you want to name names) for a billion years (horse-drawn days). They spout the devout belief that TFT's will give you a "perfect stream" regardless of your actual gallonage. In other words, if your operator is screwing up, the poor bastards at the end of the hoseline will never know, until they fry or get flashed over. To continue the "training should fix the problem and we shouldn't have to stupid-proof our equipment" theory- What is the downside to using the nozzles you have? I know that a lot of people swear by the TFT's, and they will put out as much fire as any other PROPERLY-USED nozzle. Your current nozzles will be just as effective if you set psi for your lines (preconnects or hand-jacks), give the operators a card or mark the gauge, and practice a few times a year to keep them smart enough to perform properly. I personnaly would like to know that the operator is doing his/her job from the look of the stream (something easily seen in the chaotic fire environment), then getting my butt kicked when I use an inadequate gallonage to put the fire out, while it laughs at me.

I will be trying to replace our older nozzles with break-aparts which can convert to smoothbore, but other thatn that, I don't see the need to reinvent the wheel, er um, nozzle.

[Mike C]

.....a "perfect stream" regardless of your actual gallonage. In other words, if your operator is screwing up, the poor bastards at the end of the hoseline will never know, until they fry or get flashed over.........

I'm kinda new at this fire thing and yes TFT's make a pretty good stream but maybe it is just me but everytime I flow water out of a hose I feel something called nozzle reaction. When the reaction is low the nozzle isn't flowing much, when the flow is high I feel more reaction when it is too high I feel lots of reaction.

Whether it be on the street, kneeling, in the smoke or dark, I can feel the flow. I know when it is correct, when it is too high and too low. But heck maybe there isn't nozzle reaction everywhere. Could be the water.

[e33]

To all those who posted constructive replies, I greatly appreciate the input and am glad to see constructive feedback. To those who still love to bicker and piddle on each others feet....what can I say. As far as the most recent comments, think of it this way. You have water coming from the nozzle, if the fire isnt darkening down...you arent flowing enough water..Period. And if we are having problems with punp discharge pressures..well..thats a whole seperate issue. Lets not stray off the topic. If your MPO's cant get the right pressures and flows from the pump..and your engine crews cant chase kinks...then y bother? So lets keep the issues seperate here, OK. Thanks again for the help folks

[KEA]

To Paul Grimwood

// TFT nozzles are high-quality, durable, maintenance free tools //

I may be wrong but the information I have from TFT states: "It is recommended by Task Force Tips, Inc. that a flow test be done once a year. In additon, it is also recommednded that field maintenance be performed a minimum of every six months.

I agree with you that they are a durable quality nozzle but they are not maintenance free.

[Paul Grimwood]

Quite right KEA - follow manufacturer's guidelines at all times.

I guess I was relating modern day nozzles to those of many years ago that required maintenance weekly!

But no - even modern equipment requires maintenance and you are right to point it out!

------------------
www.firetactics.com (http://www.firetactics.com)

[FRED]

Something you might want to know about automatics. My Dept. had them and we tested some them after a few years of service and found due to deposits on the internal components they didn't flow anywhere near the rated flow. So we got rid of them.

[K A]

---found due to deposits on the internal components they didn't flow anywhere near the rated flow. So we got rid of them.---


That is why you are suppose Read, Understand and Follow the directions that came with the nozzles when you bought them. If you've lost them dial the manufacturer and they'll send more. Then do what ever is required in the literature, normally something real conmplex like squirting Break Free into the nozzle opening anf closing the shut off and turning the shaper from fog to SS. Doing so, you don't have build up in the nozzle. It the above is too complex for the engine company crew hand them over to the ladder crew, they can figure it out. You can send the nozzle back to the manufacturer even after years of neglect and they'll make them new. Or you could throw away perfectly good unmaintained nozzles and buy new ones and throw them away too because the firefighters can't or won't take proper care of their life saving equipment. Can you imagine what the air packs are like if the same department treats them like they treat their nozzles?

[FRED]

-Read Directions from ...-
We did and were flow testing them because we were looking at getting new nozzles. All of our nozzles are service tested every year. We found that with as much use as they get we would have to take the nozzles out of service and have replacement nozzles while we cleaned what we could and send the other components in to Elkhart to be properly cleaned at our cost.
The Nozzles were designed to always provide a good stream regarless of the flow. We decided we didn't care if we had a good stream but wether we were flowing enough water, so we got constant flow 100 psi 200 gpm nozzles which gave us what we wanted. So we knew what we were flowing reardless. And most importantly we wouldn't waste time or money constantly maintaining nozzles. So we got differnet nozzles that don't have the same internal components to maintain.
And as for the airpacks, you apparently have no clue as to what you are talking about. We have two men properly trained and certified who Service test all the airpacks, Regulators and all by inspecting them, replacing worn out parts, Testing them using a very expensive computer controled system. Which determines if there is any blow by on the diaphram, or any other failures. We properly hydrostaticly test all of our bottles. And use a $6,000.00 computer controled monitor to test our masks to see if they fit our faces to meet OSHA respitory standards. I would venture to say your dept doesn't do even half of that.

[Chops]

To all the veterans on the forum...

Do we want to do this again (Smoothbore/TFT/Automatic)?

Those who know what I mean, Think about it. We are just poisioning a innocent inquirer again. We don't need another article written about this forum again.
Dan

[STA2]

I agree with Dalmation 90 about the TFT Mid-Matic with the widget. We carry them on all our 1 3/4" preconnects right now.
Now your all gonna call me a liar but......
Try an 1 3/4" nozzle that will flow 300 GPM plus with about 45 PSI nozzle pressure. How about a 2 1/2" line than can flow 1040 GPM with 70 PSI nozzle pressure? If I had not scene it I would not have believed it. It is calles the Vindicator, made by First Strike, Inc. My career dept.carries them on our 200' 1 3/4" pre-connects. Excellent nozzle. All the water you could ask for. Excellent solid stream. There is no pattern to adjust or mess with. Just stretch it and go. Anaodized aluminum nozzle which is very light. Check them out. Be safe.

Larry

[DD]

A recent forum had some discussion of the "Vindicator" nozzle. I sent First Strike an e-mail and received a phamplet and video tape from them about the nozzle. It was also used in a nearby live burn class and it impressed me. I hope to have the Heavy Attack Model Vindicator in service by the end of the year. It will be another gun in our arsenal. It is an air aspirating type nozzle and is a good foam applicator. Big flow of huge droplets.

[e33]

Please post address and info for First Strike so I can get info on this nozzle. Thanks

[DD]

e33,

Contact Kirk Allen for information on the Vindicator nozzle at First Strike Technologies, Inc. His e-mail address is
<firststrike@ameritech.net>.

I like what I saw in the sales video and at a recent two story dwelling training burn. He also sent a 26 page phamplet. He is selling, but does do a good job of presenting their product.

The Heavy Attack Vindicator tip is used with a 1-3/8" bore shutoff. It discharges 250 gpm at 50 psi NP and a lot more as the NP is increased.


The issue of a tight pattern doesn't bother me. It is a lot wider pattern than my favorite 15/16" solid bore tip produces.

This nozzle seems to be another great weapon to use in our battles. It or no other nozzle that I know of will always be the best one for every situation.

[DD]

I don't know where the address went. It is
firststrike@ameritech.net

[SBrooks]

under 'apparatus innovation/FWD: CAFs systems' there is a post by 'ECBURT' stating that he's used 90psi CAFS lines on thousands of fires with no kinking problems. I suppose there is translation to a 200' 1 3/4 line with a 15/16" tip flowing 185gpm at a nozzle pressure of 50psi and an engine pressure of 140 psi. I think that this lack of translation is because anyone who likes to put a lot of water on red stuff with a stone age smoothbore is a 'neanderthal' and is labeled 'traditional', whereas someone with a CAFs line is 'progressive' and can do no wrong. Physics does not apply. Also, for those of you out there who do use smoothbore nozzles at 35-55psi nozzle pressure, and haven't had kinking problems: well, rest assured kids, you will, KA has ordained it.

From the nozzleman's perspective, these things are equal:
185gpm@50psi np
151gpm@75psi np
131gpm@100psi np
This goes for any straight stream/smoothbore.
Oh, wait, I think 185gpm puts out more fire than 131, but i'm not sure. An aside, they all have similar pump pressures, so they should charge (unkink) the same

To those knowledgeable in CAFs...do you know how to calculate nozzle reaction? I'm guessing that the 2:1 CAFs equivalent is...well 2 gals water for 1 cuft air...but that air is compressed...guessing a np of about 60, so i cuft air has same vol as about 2 gal of water...so water must travel twice as fast for same gpm(water) flow through same orifice...f=mv^2...air negligible mass, so must quarter water mass to be equal...so 45-50 gpm water & 25 cfm air has equal nozzle reaction as 185 gpm water only? I think this flow would make 237 gpm of foam, so maybe? I would think it more about 80gpm:40cfm, just from hearing about other depts sop cafs lines.

Now that was probably the most bs physics problem i've ever bs'd...would really like to hear from someone who *actually* knows what they're doing....spbrooks@usa.net


[This message has been edited by SBrooks (edited September 29, 1999).]

[KEA]

First Strike Technologies, Inc.
PO Box 146
Algonquin, IL 60102-0146
847-658-3216
firststrike@ameritech.net

[Mike C]

TO KEA

Stop advertising your products on this board. Send your spam elsewhere

TO: SBrooks:

(((CAFs systems' there is a post stating that he's used 90psi CAFS lines on thousands of fires with no kinking problems.)))

Don't you think Phoenix with dozens of CAFS rigs (almost all their first out engines) would know more about the subject than you, a person who doesn't run a CAFS rig?

(((Oh, wait, I think 185gpm puts out more fire than 131,)))

Sure so use a 50 psi fog tip, instead of the smoothbore and do everything the smooth bore does and more.

Go to the USFA site and Boston's CAFS test indicate 60 to 90 gpm with CAFS equals 180 gpm with a smooth bore. So more water doesn't always put out more fire.

(((...so 45-50 gpm water & 25 cfm air just from hearing about other depts sop cafs lines.)))

Who in the world pumps two to one water to air??? Why do you suppose all the pump makers and CAF installers make one to one balanced systems? Not to make 2 to 1. Please provide the names of these departments you reference. I'd love to see these SOPS you are talking about.

((who *actually* knows what they're doing....)))

Well, there are a hundred CAFS units in the Northeast. A thousand out west. It is not a new thing, it started in the 70's. Some departments are in generation 6. Most pump 90, or 150 psi, the tips are rarely 15/16", normally 1 3/8 to 2" on a handline 1 3/4" to 2 1/2". Flows are 60 to 90 gallons water and an equal amount of air, 1 to 1 for 1 3/4" and 220 gpm to 220 cuft for 2 1/2". Yes smooth bore attack lines kink when the nozzle is open on the last 50 feet of line. No CAFS lines do not kink.

(((they all have similar pump pressures, so they should charge (unkink) the same???

Yes they should charge the same but not resist kinks the same. It isn't pump pressure that creates the kinks it is the 50 psi at the tip that allows the last section of line to kink versus a fog at 100 psi. Less energy to hold the line rigid. With the cheapening of hose into a commodity in the last three years there is less warp and wep yarns and lower quality materials will insure kinking. Try a length of rubber hose versus today's jacket hose the rubber always wins the kink test. A CAF line is 90 psi front to rear with zero loss. Thus no kinks.

[SBrooks]

Mike C, I'm glad somebody's paying attention. Perhaps I should have made two posts, one comparing apples to apples with plain water, and one requesting information about the orange (CAFS). I apologize for being unclear.

Thank you for directing me to the USFA site, i've found a wealth of information that I was looking for. For the rest of you, I seriously recommend taking a look....<A HREF=http://www.usfa.fema.gov>USFA</A>

At the USFA site, I found two very interesting reports..."Compressed Air Foam for Structural Fire Fighting: A Field Test; Boston, Massachusetts" and "Compressed Air Foam Systems in Limited Staffing Conditions"

Mike C,

Re:"Don't you think Phoenix with dozens of CAFS rigs (almost all their first out engines) would know more about the subject than you, a person who doesn't run a CAFS rig?"
Abslolutely, THAT's why I was asking.

Re:"Sure so use a 50 psi fog tip, instead of the smoothbore and do everything the smooth bore does and more. "
I never specified a smoothbore.

RE:"So more water doesn't always put out more fire."
Speaking of water only, yes it does. From Fornell, D.P. (1991) Fire Stream Management Handbook. "Experience later proved that flow rate, not pressure, is what extinguished the fire. High pressure delivery may have increased distrubution effectiveness but put out little more fire than the same gallonage delivered at normal pressures"
I still maintain that a properly handled 185 gpm at 50 psi np (auto or sb) line will extinguish a larger fire than a 131 gpm at 100 psi np line, despite the fact that both nozzles create the same reaction force.

re:"Who in the world pumps two to one water to air???"

From Forums/Apparatus Innovation/Fwd: CAFS System/ECBURT:
"Research has shown the ideal CAFS for structure firefighting is 1/3 air and 2/3 water. The fog tip makes the perfect interior CAFS. You need water to cool and put out the fire."

From Forums/Apparatus Innovation/Fwd: CAFS System/721:
"Normal structural firefighting we use a foam application rate of 0.3% and 25 - 30% air. "

From "CAFS in Limited Staffing Conditions" by Robert G. Taylor /NFA/EFOP:
"The emerging consensus is that...structural fire suppression requires a wetter foam (Type IV or V)"...though I don't know what the percentages the Types refer to.

From the Boston Report Foam Type Chart on p10...wet foam, 1 3/4" line 70-90gpm, 50-70 gpm.

...............


In conclusion, anyone specing out a new pumper should take a long hard look at information on CAFs, but realize that it's not a cure all.

Also special thanks to Robert G. Taylor of the Morristown (NJ) Fire Bureau for writing the research project that answered the real question of my post. "CAFS was found to have agreater extinguishing ability than plain water by a factor estimated between 2 and 15. Even accepting the lowest of these estimates, a one- or two-person hoseline crew equipped with CAFS has fire extinguishing power considerably superior to that of a plain water hoseline of equal weight and nozzle reaction"
...apples to apples

Sean Brooks


[This message has been edited by SBrooks (edited October 05, 1999).]

[Mike C]

Nice job you pounded two folks, then made their case for them, then you said it is not a do all. Then you quoted a study saying ((by a factor estimated ))2 to 15 times more effective, got any real data to support that post other than someone put it in a report?

(Abslolutely, THAT's why I was asking.))

Guess where EC is from.

It seems the magic is not 131 or 180. It is where do you arrive 180 as the right number in the first place. Why not 250 or 125? My first 15 year in the FS we used 200 to 220 gpm 1 3/4" lines. A new generation of FF's came in and said it was too hard to hold. The old timers held it just fine. Fires went out fast. All the fire flow formulas would say we out gpm application rates are too high, wouldn't they?

With a 1 3/4" flowing 180 and a 2 1/2" flowing 250 what is the point in having two sizes of lines. 1 3/4" will flow the 250 gpm. Boston's test prove 60 to 90 gpm will do the same as 180 gpm.

Could it be in everyones effort to "be like Mike" (read FDNY) that real firefighters wear leather helmets, don't use their masks, don't use their air pack waist belts, and shoot water out of a 1 3/4" smooth bore tips. They only own two tips. The next 9 largest departments all own tips that flow up to 325 gpm not FDNY's 250 limit. So who is right? More fires are fought with 100 psi fog that are fought by SB's by a huge factor. The day 1 3/4" hose and high flow nozzles came out departments were winnning the fire game with 125, 95, 60 and 30 gpm tips. All were pumped at 60 or 95 setting. Some outfits like Detroit still are doing that. A 1" line at 60 to 95 gpm would be easier to pull, and put out the same amount of fire. The Kimbal Royer formula (based upon over 100 actual structure fires) says it would eat a room 33 by 33. Seen any rooms that size in a house or apartment? A 12 by 12 bedroom needs a whopping 8 gpm for 30 seconds. So a 95 gpm tip would need 5 seconds to achieve knock down whereas a 180 gpm stream would need 3 seconds. What is the point? Can you say Overkill? Of course the national fire academy formula which was invented by student opinions based upon ZERO burns says you'd need three times the flow.ISO, Factory Mutual go along with Iowa. Either way, still overkill.

Smooth bores for tradition? 2 1/2" hose for tradition? Leather for tradition?

CAFs for the progressive, automatic tips for the progressive..with 45 psi tips, 1 3/4" or 2 inch hose only for interior attack with higher flows than most 2 1/2" lines.

The progressive has thought out what they are doing and not holding on to the past.

Does CAFS use less water, cool the room faster, limit water damage, allow for a quicker stretch, produce less steam, clean up with a broom, use a less expensive nozzle, convert to water instantly, save firefighters backs, match today's staffing better than a 2 1/2", cover exposures better, do a better job on an attic, cause a lot less property damage, does it make your tank water go further, work better in today's world of lousy or no truck work to support the attack (venting, salvage, search, etc), cling to vertical and horizontal surfaces when applied, keep a surface wet longer by a factor of 20 over water, offer minimal maintenance, perform as a wetting agent, put out flamable liquid fires, work or brush, wood shake roofs, ..one line all inside and outside fires. Your right it certainly doesn't ound like a do all.

What is second and how far back is it?

((CAFS has fire extinguishing power considerably superior to that of a plain water hoseline of equal weight and nozzle reaction.)))

Nozzle pressure is impact and reach, so you are willing to give up penetration, wind resistance of the stream, can you take on a LP prop at 50 psi?


((I never specified a smoothbore.))

My mistake when I read the following
((a 15/16" tip flowing, with a stone age smoothbore, for those of you out there who do use smoothbore nozzles at 35-55psi nozzle pressure, )) I figured you were talking about smooth bores.

((Experience later proved that flow rate, not pressure, ))

Whose experience? I'd say there is plenty of research (more books and movies) that method of application being more important than pressure and flow. IOWA conducted over 100 tests all instrumented, and your source? Remember the author sold nozzles. What kin was he selling at the time? COuld it be he was behind the move to new nozzles for other reasons than better? He was selling easy. You say 50 psi he said 75 psi. Why not 30 psi or 10 or an open butt. That has to be easier and flow more.

((From the Boston Report Foam Type Chart on p10...wet foam, 1 3/4" line 70-90gpm, 50-70 gpm.))

That would be one to one

Conclusion anyone buying a fire truck should look at water but but realize that it's not a cure all.

Anyone looking at buying a nozzle should look at low pressure non-NFPA compliant nozzles but realize that it's not a cure all. And if your users get hurt, you get to justify why you don't follow the standards (the law in 26 states).

We've done some training burns over and over again on idetical houses A 10 to 15 gpm line will put out a duplex in seconds that a 60 to 95 gpm water line cannot put out even after blowing 750 gallons. USFS tests and videos show the same thing as do Hales.

[SBrooks]

Mike C. I apologize if I have offended you. It was never my intention to make anyone angry, just to use rational judgement. I agree 100%, from what I've read, that CAFs is the current 'way to go'. However, I have to base all of my judgement on 'what people put in reports.', as I have not witnessed any demonstrations of CAFs apparatus, never played with CAFs, and never made an attack with CAFs. So when the USFA recognizes the excellence a paper with the NFA's Outstanding Research Paper award, I tend to put some faith in its contents, much more so than I do in the posts of persons with cryptic on line names and no profile information.

I went back and read my original post, and realize I <ul>was[/list] kind of hard on some folks....perhaps I could say it more democratically by saying that noone should blindly follow the tactics and SOPS of another department, be it FDNY or Phoenix. Those of you out there who will not llsten to another's opinion, either because it's not the way your used to, or because you've already been there and done that, are limiting your abilities.

As far as my 185 vs 131 gpm, well, admittedly the 185 is what a (FDNY) 15/16" tip will flow. I also know that it is a really easy line for me to hold, advance, etc. When dealing with the topic at hand, that of nozzles, specifically select-o-flow on an 1 3/4", a 15/16" tip is a cheap upgrade. The 131 is what a 100psi nozzle will flow at an equivalent nozzle reaction.

I wasn't aware that smoothbore nozzles were non-compliant. It seems to me that in order to be found negligent in providing non-compliant nozzles, the nozzles would have to be proven to cause an injury in a circumstance where compliant nozzles would have prevented an injury.

All told, things being equal (no foam, no air) it is water flow that puts out the fire. The water must be able to be applied to the fire from a distance of, what 30' max? It must come to the nozzle in a hose that is light weight enough to be extended through one room, backed out, and extended into another by as few as one firefighter. It must not kink. I suggest finding a generous minimum flow, for your typical sructural fire, establishing the minimum nozzle pressure you are comfortable working with, and finding the smallest diameter hoses that will flow the lenghth you typically pull, at a maximum pump pressure you find acceptible. Any minimum pressure above about 30psi will get a stream as far as you'll need it inside a residential structure, but will kink if not handled correctly.

As far as CAFs not being a cure-all...I apologize once again for being unclear on my meaning...CAFs is not a cure all, however it perfoms (according to the reports) better than water alone. It does not alleviate the need for truck work. Ventilation, Extension checks, Salvage and OVerhaul, etc. must occur. However all reports state that CAFs produces less steam at knockdown, the CAFs blanket shows where hot spots are, the penetrating capabilities improve wet down, the decreased water use improves salvage efforts, etc.

In short, if you're gonna get a new pumper, go look at cafs. If all the reports are correct, it should sell itself to you. I wouldn't recommend anyone spending a quarter million plus dollars on a piece of equipment that you do not understand, haven't seen work, or haven't used. On the other hand, if you are gonna spend $.25M that is going to protect your community for the next 10-20 years, you should hungrily grasp for whatever innovations you can find, and eagerly pursue training on such new technology.

If you aren't getting a new pumper soon, evaluate your attack lines, particularly your preconnects. Are you flowing what you could for the work you do? Do you make your interior attack behind a wide fog curtain? Do you have adequate ventilation during your initial attack?

Again I apologize for clouding the issue by bringing up the CAFs topic here when it should have been brough up elsewhere.

[This message has been edited by SBrooks (edited October 05, 1999).]

[DED1645]

I can't give much more info than the only nozzle I've ever used in a job are auto TFT's. The other stations used turbo jets and I preferred the TFT's out if all the nozzles that I've every trained w/. My enter station is only TFT's from 3/4" brush line to the deck gun's massive TFT. My chief gives the impression he only purchases the best so that's that.

------------------
David DeCant
firefighter/NREMT-B
Lindenwold,NJ

[capt120]

Greetings from a new forum member...

I`ve read most of what these "salesmen" are
telling you what to do,but I have an idea.

How about telling us what you want to do.

What kind of gpm do you want to flow.
Do want to be able to use foam off an eductor

I won`t try to tell you what to do but I`ll
help you out...separate the B.S from the truth.

But give me some help I`m not a mind reader.

[benson911]

I started out using an Akron Brass nozzle on 1.5" hose at 95 gpm, progressed to 1.75" lines with 125 gpm dialed in on the same nozzles, now my department uses TFT flowing 150-250 gpm on 1.75" hose. All things being equal - making this apples to apples - I put out a lot more fire a lot faster with the TFT. All that firepower is there if you need it and you'll want it when you really need it. I haven't tried anything else since going to the TFT, but it's awesome!

[chiefnfd]

You talked about going to the Task Force Tip
nozzles. It is an excellent choose. Last year I bought two Mid-Force nozzles for our 1 3/4 lines. At first the old hands didn't like them but as they got use to them, their attitude changed. Now that is all they want to use. They found that the nozzle man now had mthe control of the flow, with less turbulance. Best way is to purchase the nozzles and let them find the difference.

------------------
Regards, Raymond Godfrey