Testing Nick and Jeff

[GeneMiller]

I decided to do a little testing myself just to see what would happen. I'm assuming that they did the test to the best of their ability. This is just the results of the first set of tests.
I started my machine and set it to single wand at 500 psi.
Then I connected the hose to the machine for 200' of vacuum and restricted it with a wand. I put the other wand in a 5 gal bucket and ran it for one minute. I used the stop watch function on my iphone which uses 10ths. I ran the test five times without turning off the machine so the psi wouldn't change and measured the results.

Test 1 mark on bucket.
Test 2 mark on bucket 1/8 inch below mark one
Test 3 mark on bucket 1/8 inch below mark two
Test 4 mark on buck same as test 2
Test 5 mark between test 2 and test 3
Each test was accurate with 10ths of a second.

Sorry I didn't have a fancy graduated bucket but I wasn't looking to measure the volume.

What this test proves to me is that you can't count on the pump to supply the same amount of water even though I didn't turn off the machine. Also, maybe because it was cooler the pump provided more water on the first test. From test 1 to test 3 it was 1/4 lower in a five gallon bucket. I didn't bother to measure the amount but it is significant.
I have an idea for a more accurate way to measure how much water is actually extracted but it has to start with the same amount coming out of the machine instead of just timing it.


I have a similar test ready when I get the time for the vacuum test.I want to check what happens when you pour a gallon in the end of different lengths and then check the recover. How much gets left in the hose for example ? Is 10 seconds long enough to clear it ? I don't have any 2.5 hose but I wonder how much water it holds after the 10 seconds.

Also when I do the vacuum test I will be weighing the carpets before and after which I think will tell more.

I consider myself a free thinker and I rarely believe something just because others are doing it. I have no agenda other then it bothers me not to know the truth. If their test results are right then it saves me money. I already have plenty of 2" hose. My testing may not convince a soul, who am I, but I'll bet I can come up with a more accurate way of testing short of a lab. I'll be convinced. I'll post my results as I get them just in case somebody else cares.

Gene

 

[Bill Soukoreff]

I agree with your findings. Interesting.

I find that when there is a sudden pressure change due to weather (not sure if is high or low) but it effects the pressure of my pump and suction chem draw.

 

[Greenie]

Gene, I commend you on your zeal.

but...if you already have tons of 2" hose, and don't mind running 4 to the door, just keep at it. Most that run 2.5", do it for convienience as much as superior recovery.

 

[GeneMiller]

i'l let you know about that superior recovery.

my local distributor has it now although he hasn't sold any yet. i'll cut a deal with him to let me use it for the test. if it wins then i'll buy it. you never know he may go for it.

Gene

 

[Greenie]

Wins what? recovers 6% more?

They are just two ways to improve vacuum, which is the end goal. Either you WANT to drop $200 and be able to run a single hose, or you don't want to spend the money and just stick with running two separate hoses.....and still have superior vacuum.

I don't understand where the question is?

 

[Able 1]

I like to run 2.5 to whatever distance, then a 25' 2" whip I would say that is the sweet spot with my tm... 2.5 hose has paid for itself in the blower belts I've been saving.

Look at it this way 2.5 hose is like enzyte for your tm. :shock:

If you are going to do tests use a 2" "Greenglided" wand for sure to take out the question of a bad glide design. I still firmly believe 2.5 hose or 4 to the door is the best upgrade you can make to most tm's.

 

[dealtimeman]

i run all 2.5 exept the 50' 2 inch whip, i believe there is only so much air that can go through wand. as of right now i dont want any more vac it is hard enough pushing the titanium with the glide on certain carpets with my current configuration.

 

[GeneMiller]

all my wands are 2" and glided. i'm really just testing the test. I tend to be a tinkerer and like making and trying new things. i never bothered with my machine before except to correct obvious problems. this stupid board has me thinking about my machine all the time. i was perferectly happy before being completely oblivious . life was simplier before.

i can easily see how they got their results just from my first test. i won't being doing a timed test but rather an exact volumne of water added to my machines water box . I'll repeat each test 5 times and take an average.

Gene

 

[Bob Savage]

Thanks, Gene, for taking your time to do this.

I look forward to your final report!

 

[Cameron1]

Lord have mercy...........I must be from another Planet.

 

[GeneMiller]

I did some additional testing today and boy was I surprised.
I ran 150 of 2" hose and sucked up aprox. 3 gals of water. I let the machine run for 1min to clear the hose and 25 seconds to idle down. The hoses had just been used less then an hour previous. I did the test 5 times. After I sucked up the water I drained it back into the bucket and left the drain open for 2 minutes.

Test 1 I lost 60 ounces of water.
Test 2 thru 5 I lost no measurable amount.
The bucket had 60 ounces less on test 1 which leads me to believe that it took that much water to coat the hose and every other surface it touched.

I also did a 4 to the door test with the same hose and I lost 40 ounces on the first test. Test 2 thru 5 all showed no measurable loss.

Imagine how much water it takes to coat the inside of a 2.5 inch hose. I see why they came up short.

There is no way that with our equipment that you could do a definitive test. Even if you weigh the carpet which would be the best way, you still have to have the same amount of water coming out. My pump will not give that consistency. You could measure the amount of water in the water box and run until it's dry each time but I'm not willing to do that to my pump.

Logic still dictates that the more air you have the drier the carpet. If a bigger blower dries a carpet because of more cfm's then just do a cfm test with the different configurations. That should be definitive. I don't think anybody here needs to be convinced but it was still interesting doing it.

Gene

 

[Duane Oxley]

I decided to do a little testing myself just to see what would happen. ...
What this test proves to me is that you can't count on the pump to supply the same amount of water even though I didn't turn off the machine.
Gene

Gene:

It could also be an inconsistency in your regulator's ability to regulate the pressure. This becomes more possible as your system ages.

Not saying that that was the case... Only that it's a reasonable possibility.

 

[Bob Savage]

Good Lord.

While I appreciate you all wanting to get to the bottom of this vacuum hose thing, I can't see where one hose setup or another hose setup is going to make any measurable difference in my life cleaning carpet and making my customers happy.

If the TM is designed with the least amount of restriction within the vacuum system in the first place (both on the discharge side, and on the suction side, including bends), you'll get maximum blower performance and less machine stress, less fuel consumption, and parts lasting longer.

You know that most blowers can produce way more vacuum than you can possibly use efficiently at the end of the hose anyway.

If you are going to run 2-2" vacuum hoses to the door, the benefit to you, as a carpet cleaner, would be to run dual wands, and get the job done sooner, yet with the same great results. You cannot beat a dual wand machine for production, because I have been running dual wands for almost 20 years straight to be able to say this in all honesty.

Duane, I appreciate your stepping up to the plate in this vacuum assesment testing. We (carpet cleaners and some manufacturers over the past 3 years) have already determined that vacuum system design means everything in relation to the vacuum produced at a wand for cleaning and good dry times.

I await your results, but in the end I still believe it is much ado about nothing. I hope I'm wrong. I hope you can find another breakthrough in truckmount vacuum systems. But, if you don't, it will still be a great time for everyone getting together.

I remember the first Summerfest in Columbus, Ohio, where I first met you. Then there was the Summerfest in Hotlanta that you hosted (another great gathering), and finally going to your shop gathering a couple of years later and meeting Shawn York at your mini-Fest.

You have always been a great host!

 

[Duane Oxley]

Not so fast...

Just as internal plumbing makes a big difference, so does, "external".

And it's longer, having more "opportunity" to affect things.

Since you have little direct experience with heat exchange systems and how they are often "under- plumbed" with intentional restrictions, it makes little difference to you (or to me, actually). But there's a growing interest here. Let's investigate it and put assumptions to rest.

Knowledge is power. And an educated professional in his or her field is a good thing.

 

[Shawn Forsythe]

Duane,

I'm glad to see you are doing this. Unless it escapes me, it would seem that the results of this test would have zero impact (no dog in the fight), except to add to your respectability.

Good luck, and best wishes.

 

[GeneMiller]

I await your results, but in the end it is much ado about nothing

Your are right but I was just curious how they got their results. Now I see how. If a dry 150' of 2" kept 60 ounces then I see why their test on 2.5" showed less water pickup. They actually extracted more, just a large amount stayed in the hose.

Shawn I was working under the assumption that they did their best to come to an honest answer. In the end I'm really just satisfying my own curiosity. I might as well post it.

Gene

 

[Duane Oxley]

Duane,

I'm glad to see you are doing this. Unless it escapes me, it would seem that the results of this test would have zero impact (no dog in the fight), except to add to your respectability.

Good luck, and best wishes.

Thanks, Shawn.

I don't sell glides of any kind, unless a customer insists that I get them for him (or her).

Same for 2.5" hose and 2" Wyes, although I've designed a filter box that has port options for various sizes of hose, as the customer wants.

If someone is looking for long- distance performance, I'll explain it to them and set them up as they tell me what they want.

But I really don't have a motive here but to clear the air and get some specifics understood by all.

 

[Duane Oxley]

Duane, I appreciate your stepping up to the plate in this vacuum assessment testing. We (carpet cleaners and some manufacturers over the past 3 years) have already determined that vacuum system design means everything in relation to the vacuum produced at a wand for cleaning and good dry times.

I await your results, but in the end I still believe it is much ado about nothing. I hope I'm wrong. I hope you can find another breakthrough in truckmount vacuum systems. But, if you don't, it will still be a great time for everyone getting together.

I remember the first Summerfest in Columbus, Ohio, where I first met you. Then there was the Summerfest in Hotlanta that you hosted (another great gathering), and finally going to your shop gathering a couple of years later and meeting Shawn York at your mini-Fest.

You have always been a great host!

Thanks, Bob.

I don't see any breakthroughs in design coming from this. (I do from another area, but that's a different story...) If there is a "breakthrough" from this, it may be the importance of proper sizing of vacuum plumbing in affecting airflow. That's something that any truck mount manufacturer who pays attention is keenly aware of. But it's something that various types of manufacturers use in different ways. (I'm speaking of secondary fuel heat systems vs. heat exchange, for the most part.)

The main thing is to go after this issue methodically and see what really gives, and why / how.

Thanks again.