Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

hose

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • FyredUp
    replied
    ecfr1978 FyredUp


    Why would you overpump the 7/8 tip to flow 190? A 15/16 tip flows 182 at 50 psi and would be aheck of a lot easier to handle and give a better looking stream.


    I never said we overpumped the 7/8" tip. Thats at 50 psi np. We are able to pump that becaused of the larger preconnect. Sorry that is physically impossible. At 50 psi the 7/8 tip flows roughly 160 gpm. Unless you have developed a way to defy phyical science my guess is your flow meter and or pitot gauge was way off calibration. The simple fact of the matter is a nozzle is designed to flow a certain amount of GPM's at a certain nozzle pressure and the size of the hose is totally irrelevant to that. Well, at least as long as the hose is physically capable of moving that amount of hose. So it doesn't matter if you put that 7/8 inch tip on 1 1/2, 1 3/4, 2, 2 1/2, 3 or even 5 inch hose, if the nozzle pressure is 50 psi that nozzle will flow 160 gpm.

    Why would you overpump the low pressure nozzle to flow 180 gpm? Why not just get a 175 at 50 psi combo nozzle or a 175 at 75 combo nozzle? Again overpumping a combo nozzle can give more gpm's but also adds to nozzle reaction as nozzle pressure goes up.



    Again I did not say we overpumped the nozzle. This was tested with a an inline intake flow meter. This was done twice on the same preconnect once with a SB the other with the Chiefs nozzle. The first time we pumped the line till we had 50 PSI at the tip, 100 psi at the pump, and 180 gpm on hte flow meter. Then we changed the nozzle and pumped the line again till we duplicated the numbers. Both lines they are both managable by one person, but with everything else, two makes it a whole easier. Again unless your flow meter was way out of calibration or the nozzle was marked wrong this is physically impossible. Irregardless of the hose size. I would have that salesman back and tell him you think his flow meter was messed up because I certainly do.

    I also understand that Ponn Con Quest is larger, I was simlpy giving the gentleman another option.

    I am not trying to be an *** but what you are saying you are doing is impossible if you actually believe in the laws of physics. Hose size is irrelevant as long as nozzle pressure remains constant.

    FyredUp
    Last edited by FyredUp; 10-02-2006, 09:42 PM. Reason: clarity

    Leave a comment:


  • ecfr1978
    replied
    FyredUp


    Why would you overpump the 7/8 tip to flow 190? A 15/16 tip flows 182 at 50 psi and would be aheck of a lot easier to handle and give a better looking stream.


    I never said we overpumped the 7/8" tip. Thats at 50 psi np. We are able to pump that becaused of the larger preconnect.



    Why would you overpump the low pressure nozzle to flow 180 gpm? Why not just get a 175 at 50 psi combo nozzle or a 175 at 75 combo nozzle? Again overpumping a combo nozzle can give more gpm's but also adds to nozzle reaction as nozzle pressure goes up.



    Again I did not say we overpumped the nozzle. This was tested with a an inline intake flow meter. This was done twice on the same preconnect once with a SB the other with the Chiefs nozzle. The first time we pumped the line till we had 50 PSI at the tip, 100 psi at the pump, and 180 gpm on hte flow meter. Then we changed the nozzle and pumped the line again till we duplicated the numbers. Both lines they are both managable by one person, but with everything else, two makes it a whole easier.


    I also understand that Ponn Con Quest is larger, I was simlpy giving the gentleman another option.

    Leave a comment:


  • FyredUp
    replied
    steeda....

    And all I have tried to establish, without attacking your way of fighting fire, is what is the basis for your not liking it? Did you try it and have difficulties? Was it the wrong color? Was the nozzle not right for this hose? Didn't it fit in your hose bed? It was forced on your by admin? What? it really is a simple question.

    If it is practical experience then share it. If it is just because it's not what you do then just say so. That's all I am asking...

    FyredUp

    Leave a comment:


  • Steeda83
    replied
    Originally posted by FyredUp
    As I said to an earlier poster here I don't want to get into a ****ing match with you over this.

    There are a few FD's in my area running with 1 3/4 inch lines for smaller flows, 2 inch lines for short, 200 foot or less, stretches where they need 2 1/2 inch flows but don't have a ton of guys to pull the line, AND 2 1/2 inch beds for longer handlines and supply and sprinkler supply.

    If you look at 2 inch hose it is a viable option to replace 2 1/2 in some situations. For us it works out to 300 foot flowing 2 1/2 inch flows. Why would we want a line that weighs more and doesn't do anymore? If we need to go farther than that we have a dead lay bed of 3 inch with a gated wye attached to 100 feet of 2 inch. This way as far as our 3 inch bed goes we can flow 2-2 inch lines. Ho9nestly in my mind it makes tons of sense to replace the last 100 feet of a 2 1/2 inch line with 2 inch hose. The same flow at a slightly higher pressure that doesn;t beat your guys up moving it around.

    And frankly if you have never actually used 2 inch I once again question where your base of knowledge comes in it? Comparing 2 inch hose and not liking it to a top mount pump panel (which ny the way we agree on) is well, just silly. I am sure you have climbed up and down on a few top mount pumpers and developed an opinion. At least you had a minimum of experience with that.

    I know I will not change your mind and we see no reason for ours to be chnaged so I guess that's that.

    FyredUp

    im not trying to have a "****ing match" with you, i am not a fan of 2" hose plain and simple i really dont see why that has to be debated
    Last edited by Steeda83; 10-02-2006, 05:26 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • FyredUp
    replied
    Steeda83: i realize this, the orignial poster never said if he was going to replace all his hose with 2'' or just use it in place of 1 3/4...to carry 2'' and 2 1/2'' seems slightly strange..however in your case of replacing the 1 3/4'' and the 2 1/2'' i can understand it..my personal preference is to have both the 1 3/4'' and 2 1/2''...ive never had a top mount pumper and i know i dont like them
    As I said to an earlier poster here I don't want to get into a ****ing match with you over this.

    There are a few FD's in my area running with 1 3/4 inch lines for smaller flows, 2 inch lines for short, 200 foot or less, stretches where they need 2 1/2 inch flows but don't have a ton of guys to pull the line, AND 2 1/2 inch beds for longer handlines and supply and sprinkler supply.

    If you look at 2 inch hose it is a viable option to replace 2 1/2 in some situations. For us it works out to 300 foot flowing 2 1/2 inch flows. Why would we want a line that weighs more and doesn't do anymore? If we need to go farther than that we have a dead lay bed of 3 inch with a gated wye attached to 100 feet of 2 inch. This way as far as our 3 inch bed goes we can flow 2-2 inch lines. Ho9nestly in my mind it makes tons of sense to replace the last 100 feet of a 2 1/2 inch line with 2 inch hose. The same flow at a slightly higher pressure that doesn;t beat your guys up moving it around.

    And frankly if you have never actually used 2 inch I once again question where your base of knowledge comes in it? Comparing 2 inch hose and not liking it to a top mount pump panel (which ny the way we agree on) is well, just silly. I am sure you have climbed up and down on a few top mount pumpers and developed an opinion. At least you had a minimum of experience with that.

    I know I will not change your mind and we see no reason for ours to be chnaged so I guess that's that.

    FyredUp

    Leave a comment:


  • Steeda83
    replied
    Originally posted by FyredUp
    I did read your post and all I did was correct, factually, how 1 3/4 inch hose came about. Sorry if that offended you.

    As for my comment on 2 inch, you never did answer...Have you ever used it? I mean actually pulled a 2 inch line into a structure fire and used it? Not stand in the parking lot and spray a little water but actully used it? If not what makes you think you have a valid opinion of 2 inch hose? I am in total agreement that you have every right to comment on 1 3/4 and 2 1/2 inch hose since you use it. But if you have never actually used 2 inch it is kind of like the kid who has never tasted broccoli saying he hates it cause it's green.

    I am not knocking the way anyone else fights fire here or the size hose they choose. The original poster wanted comments on 2 inch hose and MY FD uses it so I felt that I could honestly and realistically comment on it.

    FyredUp

    i realize this, the orignial poster never said if he was going to replace all his hose with 2'' or just use it in place of 1 3/4...to carry 2'' and 2 1/2'' seems slightly strange..however in your case of replacing the 1 3/4'' and the 2 1/2'' i can understand it..my personal preference is to have both the 1 3/4'' and 2 1/2''...ive never had a top mount pumper and i know i dont like them
    Last edited by Steeda83; 10-02-2006, 02:53 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • FyredUp
    replied
    Bones42: I never used Heroin, but I know it's bad for me.
    Bones....you know just what to do to diffuse this. Although in my area crystal meth and cocaine are the drugs of choice these days.

    FyredUp

    Leave a comment:


  • Bones42
    replied
    I never used Heroin, but I know it's bad for me.

    Leave a comment:


  • FyredUp
    replied
    Originally posted by Steeda83
    FDNY was the first ones to come up with 1 3/4..then they were using 2 1/2 for everything and others were using either 1 1/2 or 2 1/2..they found 1 3/4 to have a good flow while still being very manageable..they dont have manpower issues so im assuming they just as easily could've used 2'' which im sure when they went with 1 3/4 they would've looked at teh idea of 2''...in my opinion if your running 2 1/2 and 1 3/4 you've got a good base to work from..2'' and 2 1/2'' are becoming too close to eachother


    im not knocking it..yes if you're not going to carry 2 1/2..2'' would be the way to go..i just think carrying 2 1/2 and 1 3/4 cant be beat...but if you're looking to have all one size ofcourse the logical choice would be 2''..please read what i say before you reply to it
    I did read your post and all I did was correct, factually, how 1 3/4 inch hose came about. Sorry if that offended you.

    As for my comment on 2 inch, you never did answer...Have you ever used it? I mean actually pulled a 2 inch line into a structure fire and used it? Not stand in the parking lot and spray a little water but actully used it? If not what makes you think you have a valid opinion of 2 inch hose? I am in total agreement that you have every right to comment on 1 3/4 and 2 1/2 inch hose since you use it. But if you have never actually used 2 inch it is kind of like the kid who has never tasted broccoli saying he hates it cause it's green.

    I am not knocking the way anyone else fights fire here or the size hose they choose. The original poster wanted comments on 2 inch hose and MY FD uses it so I felt that I could honestly and realistically comment on it.

    FyredUp

    Leave a comment:


  • Steeda83
    replied
    [QUOTE=FyredUp]
    Originally posted by Steeda83
    FDNY was the first ones to come up with 1 3/4..then they were using 2 1/2 for everything and others were using either 1 1/2 or 2 1/2..they found 1 3/4 to have a good flow while still being very manageable..they dont have manpower issues so im assuming they just as easily could've used 2'' which im sure when they went with 1 3/4 they would've looked at teh idea of 2''...in my opinion if your running 2 1/2 and 1 3/4 you've got a good base to work from..2'' and 2 1/2'' are becoming too close to eachother[/QUOT

    This is from Dave Fornell's Fire Stream Management book. The Rand Corporation was hired in the 1960's to help evaluate and plan the FDNY's fire defenses. They discovered that flow effeciency was increased by almost 95% by going from 1 1/2 inch lines to 1 3/4 inch lines with 1 1/2 in couplings. Rand also advocated the use of Rapid water and in fact the FDNY did experiment with Rapid water but it was phased out due to expense and problems with the system.

    As for 2 inch hose, my FD runs it as a stand alone size hose. We flow 160 to 300 with it. We don't have any 1 3/4 inch hose or 2 1/2 inch hose on our rigs.

    I can;t help but wonder if you have ever flowed a piece of 2 inch hose? If not how can you realistically judge it?

    FyredUp
    im not knocking it..yes if you're not going to carry 2 1/2..2'' would be the way to go..i just think carrying 2 1/2 and 1 3/4 cant be beat...but if you're looking to have all one size ofcourse the logical choice would be 2''..please read what i say before you reply to it

    Leave a comment:


  • VinnieB
    replied
    The weight of the water from two 2.5" lines, the weight of the members on the floor, the wieght of the stock, and the incredibly shoddy construction seems to be the cause of why the floor gave. Members recall the floor shifting just before it gave.

    Although they had no idea about the construction in the basement and they were trying to get at the fire that was in the rear of the building. The operation was typical and no one expects a floor to give when its not weakend by fire,,,,,
    Last edited by VinnieB; 10-02-2006, 03:10 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Spencer534
    replied
    Vinnie,

    I am sorry to hear about your 2 brothers. I read about their tragic death, but was unaware of the circumstances. Do you mean they did too much water damage and the construction was so shoddy the water damage caused the building to fall?

    My comment was solely meant to say I would rather have the ability to flow more if needed and that you can cause water damage with a 150gpm stream if you dont shut it down at the proper time. Shut it down when you darken it down.

    Leave a comment:


  • VinnieB
    replied
    Originally posted by FyredUp
    This has been for the most part a good discussion by everyone. Thanks for that.

    FyredUp

    Check your PMs bubba,,,,,

    Leave a comment:


  • FyredUp
    replied
    Originally posted by VinnieB
    Holy geez...old school. The Rapid water system served ONE purpose...to reduce manpower during the po' days of the city. They said 1.75" would flow as much as a 2.5" b/c of a substance that was injected into the hulls of US Navy ships to help reduces the friction of the water flowing across the bow.....thing was that insane pressure was required on the lines to maintain the gpm. Vinnie I knew the history but I wanted to straighten out steeda183 on where 1 3/4 inch hose came from. I was aware of what Rapid Water was supposed to do and also of the shrotcomings of the system.

    Yes, we use 1.75" and 2.5".....with 3 to 4 men on the line.......these days we avg 27,000 structural fires a year.....and what we do works for us.....big fire, big water, little fire, little water. I have stated many times that what we do works for us and it may not work for anyone else. I also stated that if I had a 5 man engine I might reevaluate my thought process and switch. As for big fire big water, little fire little water just because we CAN flow 300 GPM doesn't mean we do all the time. We start at 160 and go up from there to 200 at 75 with the combo or 300 at 40 with the smoothbore. The fire determines the flow.

    SPENCER You may want to re-evaluate you comment about water damage and training....."water damage" combined with shoddy construction was a MAJOR factor in what recently killed 2 of my brothers. Vinnie I think you and Spencer agree more than disagree. I viewed his post to mean shut off the water when you darken the fire and let it blow and then finish extinguishment. But he also said if the shissen is hitting the fan water damage is his last concern.
    This has been for the most part a good discussion by everyone. Thanks for that.

    FyredUp

    Leave a comment:


  • VinnieB
    replied
    Originally posted by FyredUp
    This is from Dave Fornell's Fire Stream Management book. The Rand Corporation was hired in the 1960's to help evaluate and plan the FDNY's fire defenses. They discovered that flow effeciency was increased by almost 95% by going from 1 1/2 inch lines to 1 3/4 inch lines with 1 1/2 in couplings. Rand also advocated the use of Rapid water and in fact the FDNY did experiment with Rapid water but it was phased out due to expense and problems with the system.


    FyredUp
    Holy geez...old school. The Rapid water system served ONE purpose...to reduce manpower during the po' days of the city. They said 1.75" would flow as much as a 2.5" b/c of a substance that was injected into the hulls of US Navy ships to help reduces the friction of the water flowing across the bow.....thing was that insane pressure was required on the lines to maintain the gpm.

    Yes, we use 1.75" and 2.5".....with 3 to 4 men on the line.......these days we avg 27,000 structural fires a year.....and what we do works for us.....big fire, big water, little fire, little water.

    SPENCER You may want to re-evaluate you comment about water damage and training....."water damage" combined with shoddy construction was a MAJOR factor in what recently killed 2 of my brothers.

    Leave a comment:

300x600 Ad Unit (In-View)

Collapse

Upper 300x250

Collapse

Taboola

Collapse

Leader

Collapse
Working...
X