Thread: Nozzle Reaction

  1. #26
    Forum Member
    firenresq77's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Northwest Ohio
    Posts
    5,213

    Default

    We have TFT coming in to do a deo next week to look at some low pressure nozzles. I'm hoping to at least get some ideas to try to get some new nozzles......
    The comments made by me are my opinions only. They DO NOT reflect the opinions of my employer(s). If you have an issue with something I may say, take it up with me, either by posting in the forums, emailing me through my profile, or PMing me through my profile.
    We are all adults so there is no need to act like a child........
    IACOJ

  2. #27
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Look behind you
    Posts
    67

    Default

    Try this link http://www.fire-end.com/Elk2.html and scroll to the bottom. We have had the 200gpm 50 psi nozzles for a few years without any problems with the nozzle. The only issue we have is getting the crews to pump them so they they reach their 200gpm capability.
    I personally use the hand method to calculate friction loss and this gives me 60psi per 100' of 1 3/4. Our crosslays are 200' resulting in a total discharge pressure of 170 psi. Most of our members will not pump at this pressure on the sole reason " that pressure is to high" although none of them have actually attempted to use a line at this pressure. Friction loss ( when done correctly ) has no bearing on nozzle reaction.

  3. #28
    Forum Member
    firenresq77's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Northwest Ohio
    Posts
    5,213

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by slipperypete View Post
    Try this link http://www.fire-end.com/Elk2.html and scroll to the bottom. We have had the 200gpm 50 psi nozzles for a few years without any problems with the nozzle. The only issue we have is getting the crews to pump them so they they reach their 200gpm capability.
    I personally use the hand method to calculate friction loss and this gives me 60psi per 100' of 1 3/4. Our crosslays are 200' resulting in a total discharge pressure of 170 psi. Most of our members will not pump at this pressure on the sole reason " that pressure is to high" although none of them have actually attempted to use a line at this pressure. Friction loss ( when done correctly ) has no bearing on nozzle reaction.
    Is it just me or does 170 psi seem like an awfully high PDP for 200' 1 3/4" line with 50 psi nozzles??????
    The comments made by me are my opinions only. They DO NOT reflect the opinions of my employer(s). If you have an issue with something I may say, take it up with me, either by posting in the forums, emailing me through my profile, or PMing me through my profile.
    We are all adults so there is no need to act like a child........
    IACOJ

  4. #29
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Look behind you
    Posts
    67

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by firenresq77 View Post
    Is it just me or does 170 psi seem like an awfully high PDP for 200' 1 3/4" line with 50 psi nozzles??????
    Why would it seem high?

  5. #30
    Forum Member
    FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    10,275

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by firenresq77 View Post
    Is it just me or does 170 psi seem like an awfully high PDP for 200' 1 3/4" line with 50 psi nozzles??????
    ACtually if you use the CQsquaredL formula it is a little low really.

    C=15.5
    Q=2 Qsquared=4
    L=2

    15.5x4x2=124FL +50NP = 174EP

  6. #31
    FIREMAN 1st GRADE
    E40FDNYL35's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 1999
    Location
    Malingering
    Posts
    3,644

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FyredUp View Post
    What exactly did you like about them? Please share your experienece with us.

    We had thm for a while to demo and I was impressed with the high rate of flow and how easy they were to handle.

    http://00691ee.netsolhost.com/Testim...r%2520FDNY.pdf
    ALL GAVE SOME BUT SOME GAVE ALL
    NEVER FORGET 9-11-01
    343
    CAPT. Frank Callahan Ladder 35 *
    LT. John Ginley Engine 40
    FF. Bruce Gary Engine 40
    FF. Jimmy Giberson Ladder 35
    FF. Michael Otten Ladder 35 *
    FF. Steve Mercado Engine 40 *
    FF. Kevin Bracken Engine 40 *
    FF. Vincent Morello Ladder 35
    FF. Michael Roberts Ladder 35 *
    FF. Michael Lynch Engine 40
    FF. Michael Dauria Engine 40

    Charleston 9
    "If my job was easy a cop would be doing it."
    *******************CLICK HERE*****************

  7. #32
    Forum Member
    Bones42's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Pt. Beach, NJ
    Posts
    10,700

    Default

    We have had the 200gpm 50 psi nozzles for a few years without any problems with the nozzle. The only issue we have is getting the crews to pump them so they they reach their 200gpm capability.
    Never calculated using any formula, just ran a flow meter.

    We run 175gpm 75psi nozzles on our 1 3/4" 200' crosslays and pump at 120-125. Yes, the flow is 175, not 200.
    "This thread is being closed as it is off-topic and not related to the fire industry." - Isn't that what the Off Duty forum was for?

  8. #33
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Look behind you
    Posts
    67

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bones42 View Post
    Never calculated using any formula, just ran a flow meter.

    We run 175gpm 75psi nozzles on our 1 3/4" 200' crosslays and pump at 120-125. Yes, the flow is 175, not 200.
    I assume you just throttle up until the meter reads whatever gpm you are looking for. I am just curious how you are able to overcome the friction loss with only 22-25psi per 100' . i did a quick calculation and for that gpm through 1 3/4 hose you need 46-47psi per 100'.Using the info you gave gives a pump discharge pressure of 168psi. I'm not saying you are wrong i'm just curious.

  9. #34
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Central NJ
    Posts
    1,214

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by slipperypete View Post
    I assume you just throttle up until the meter reads whatever gpm you are looking for. I am just curious how you are able to overcome the friction loss with only 22-25psi per 100' . i did a quick calculation and for that gpm through 1 3/4 hose you need 46-47psi per 100'.Using the info you gave gives a pump discharge pressure of 168psi. I'm not saying you are wrong i'm just curious.
    You'd be surprised how off the tables and formulas are for todays fire hose, especially with the various manufacturers out there. The real numbers almost always come in lower than what the calculations say.

  10. #35
    Forum Member
    firenresq77's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Northwest Ohio
    Posts
    5,213

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MG3610 View Post
    You'd be surprised how off the tables and formulas are for todays fire hose, especially with the various manufacturers out there. The real numbers almost always come in lower than what the calculations say.
    That's what I was thinking.......

    For some reason I am thinking that for our 100 psi combi nozzles, the PDP needs to be at like 153 psi for 200' 1 3/4".......
    The comments made by me are my opinions only. They DO NOT reflect the opinions of my employer(s). If you have an issue with something I may say, take it up with me, either by posting in the forums, emailing me through my profile, or PMing me through my profile.
    We are all adults so there is no need to act like a child........
    IACOJ

  11. #36
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Look behind you
    Posts
    67

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MG3610 View Post
    You'd be surprised how off the tables and formulas are for todays fire hose, especially with the various manufacturers out there. The real numbers almost always come in lower than what the calculations say.
    Could you direct me to some of these tables and formulas? This appears to be cutting friction loss in half.

  12. #37
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Central NJ
    Posts
    1,214

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by slipperypete View Post
    Could you direct me to some of these tables and formulas? This appears to be cutting friction loss in half.
    What I am saying is the formulas and frictions loss charts you typically get from pump manufacturers are typically based on old fire hose and are 20+ years out of date. They are a great way to get into the ballpark of getting the fight flows, but terrible for accuracy.

  13. #38
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    32

    Default

    165 gpm is not used for offensive attack I suposse, so for that flow or greater a good technique is simply seating in the hose, this same technique I teach for flows of 250 gpm.

    In any case, the nozzle operators didn't want to be weared and teared when controling high flow/reaction nozzles, they simply must know how to deviate the reaction forces from them, in this link there is a good guide that myself wrote incluiding several photos: http://usuarios.lycos.es/firecontrol...PITONES21B.pdf

    In this shot (from the link) we can see a nozzle coupled to a Protek 95-250 gpm nozzle flowing 250 gpm(with TFT's Sho Flow) and 2" hose, operated easily and at no wearing for a pair of FFs, note that the reaction is sent to the pavement. (for the record: 150 ft of 2" hose and 175 psi at the pump).

    The nozzleman hands are only directing the stream, not holding the reaction, note also that the second FF is putting his knees over the hose, so the friction maintains it anchored against the pave.

    Regards
    Last edited by janusfire; 10-26-2008 at 11:51 PM.

  14. #39
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    MD
    Posts
    99

    Default

    [QUOTE=janusfire;1000361]165 gpm is not used for offensive attack I suposse, so for that flow or greater a good technique is simply seating in the hose, this same technique I teach for flows of 250 gpm.


    Why would you think that 165 gpm wouldn't be used for an offensive , interior attack? Nozzle reaction is what wears you down , not gpm.

    For the record we run 175 gpm @ 75 psi on all of our lines. They are Elkhart Brass , break apart nozzles , no pistol grips. Everyone carries a 15/16" tip in their coat or pants. Should they choose to use a smoothbore we just screw off the fog tip and screw on the 15/16" tip and tell the operator to drop the discharge pressure about 20 -25 pounds so that we get 50 psi at the nozzle rather than 75psi. Works great for us.

  15. #40
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    32

    Default

    THEENGINEGOES

    No doubt that this works for you, but is simpler and "FF proof" using a selectable fog nozzle 95-250 gpm, you'll ever have all the components at hand, nor you've to thread out and then in a new tip.

    Besides, whats if that day the FF does not have the tip, or the thread is fooled with matter, mud, etc?.

    You need 150 gpm?, you only have to put the volume ring in 150, do you need 200 gpm, the same and so on.

    Regards

  16. #41
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    New Jersey, USA
    Posts
    17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by janusfire View Post
    THEENGINEGOES

    No doubt that this works for you, but is simpler and "FF proof" using a selectable fog nozzle 95-250 gpm, you'll ever have all the components at hand, nor you've to thread out and then in a new tip.

    Besides, whats if that day the FF does not have the tip, or the thread is fooled with matter, mud, etc?.

    You need 150 gpm?, you only have to put the volume ring in 150, do you need 200 gpm, the same and so on.

    Regards

    So your firefighters choose their flow at the nozzle? Ok so in a smoke condition they are gonna sit there and select through?
    And as far as the positioning on the hose line to cut down on nozzle reaction, how exactly is that crew going to "push in" when they have to sit on the line? The only safe way to cut down on nozzle reaction is cut down on operating pressure for nozzles. And the only safe way to do that without effecting GPM is to use low pressure fog nozzles or smoothbore nozzles.
    If you can't move the line due to the pressure your not making an aggressive advance into the building...

  17. #42
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,372

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by janusfire View Post
    165 gpm is not used for offensive attack I suposse, so for that flow or greater a good technique is simply seating in the hose, this same technique I teach for flows of 250 gpm.

    In any case, the nozzle operators didn't want to be weared and teared when controling high flow/reaction nozzles, they simply must know how to deviate the reaction forces from them, in this link there is a good guide that myself wrote incluiding several photos: http://usuarios.lycos.es/firecontrol...PITONES21B.pdf

    In this shot (from the link) we can see a nozzle coupled to a Protek 95-250 gpm nozzle flowing 250 gpm(with TFT's Sho Flow) and 2" hose, operated easily and at no wearing for a pair of FFs, note that the reaction is sent to the pavement. (for the record: 150 ft of 2" hose and 175 psi at the pump).

    The nozzleman hands are only directing the stream, not holding the reaction, note also that the second FF is putting his knees over the hose, so the friction maintains it anchored against the pave.

    Regards

    How is it at all effective to "kneel" on the hose? The idea is to advance the line towards the seat of the fire.

    In an actual firefight...the line is advanced...opened...operated....cracked down.... advanced further....opened....operated. It is generally not operated in the static fashion that you are using to illustrate "your" point.

    In the photo you provided, that is not at all an effective technique for backing up the nozzleman. You are doing nothing in that position but slowing the advance of the line and therefore slowing the extinguishment of the fire. When the nozzleman needs to move, you are in no position to counteract his movements.

  18. #43
    Forum Member
    FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    10,275

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jakesdad View Post
    How is it at all effective to "kneel" on the hose? The idea is to advance the line towards the seat of the fire.

    In an actual firefight...the line is advanced...opened...operated....cracked down.... advanced further....opened....operated. It is generally not operated in the static fashion that you are using to illustrate "your" point.

    In the photo you provided, that is not at all an effective technique for backing up the nozzleman. You are doing nothing in that position but slowing the advance of the line and therefore slowing the extinguishment of the fire. When the nozzleman needs to move, you are in no position to counteract his movements.

    DING! DING! DING!! We have a winner. Excellent post jakesdad.

  19. #44
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    32

    Default

    Excuse the delay You could perfectly advance using traditional advancing technichs, but when stoping and aiming a stream, your partner kneel the hose and there is no fatigue, and far less air consumption. Then you grasp the hose again and again, it's no difficult....

    Firefighting it's not place for static positions.

    Besides, the best way of knowing the volume chosen it's by the reaction force....any well trained ff will know.

  20. #45
    Forum Member
    FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    10,275

    Default

    First of all, let's go back 4 years to this post.

    No doubt that this works for you, but is simpler and "FF proof" using a selectable fog nozzle 95-250 gpm, you'll ever have all the components at hand, nor you've to thread out and then in a new tip.

    Why? Set a target flow and buy a nozzle that will do that. My #1 POC FD selected 200 gpm at 75 psi nozzles. We can underpump to get 160 gpm which is our starting flow, call for more water and go to 200 gpm, or get rid of the combo tip and go to 300 gpm through a 1 1/4 slugtip. The changes in pressure are made at the pump not by dialing the nozzle.

    Besides, whats if that day the FF does not have the tip, or the thread is fooled with matter, mud, etc?.

    With the slug tip it is ALWAYS on the nozzle and all you haveto do is spin off the combo tip.

    Do you fight a lot of structure fires with mud inside the building?


    You need 150 gpm?, you only have to put the volume ring in 150, do you need 200 gpm, the same and so on.

    Nonsense. If the pump operator is pumping the line to supply you with 150 gpm at 100 psi turning the volume ring to 200 will NOT give you 200 gpm until the pump operator boosts the pressure to overcome the increased friction loss. You will not get 150 gpm simply by turning the volume control ring from 200 to 150 if the pump operator is pumping you for 200 gpm. The nozzle will be over pumped and the nozzle will get a higher pressure and thus a higer nozzle reaction. Your nozzle with the volume control ring still calls for coordination with the pump operator to ensure that the proper pressure is being pumped for the proper flow. Add to the the possibility that the pump operator is pumping one gpm and the nozzle is set for another. Belive me it happens. We used to run Akron Turbojets, one of my favorite nozzles, and they were supposed to be set at 125 and straight stream when on the engine. We found them at 30, 60, 95, 125, and the wrong pattern, all the time. The possibility for error is much higher.

    Regards
    Now let's address your latest post:

    Quote Originally Posted by janusfire View Post
    Excuse the delay You could perfectly advance using traditional advancing technichs, but when stoping and aiming a stream, your partner kneel the hose and there is no fatigue, and far less air consumption. Then you grasp the hose again and again, it's no difficult....

    The problem is stopping placing the hose on the floor and kneeling on it causes a delay in advancing the line. Frankly, if 2 firefighters can't control a handline flowing normal interior attack GPMs I would seriously look at their training. Kneeling on the hose is of course a great method for controlling hose if you are all alone on the line, or are going to be in a static position. For rapid forward movement however, it would not be high on my list.

    Firefighting it's not place for static positions.

    Interior firefighting for sure. We must keep advancing to be able to hit the base of the fire and kill it. That's why kneeling on the hose is too slow if you need to make rapid advances to kill the fire.
    Besides, the best way of knowing the volume chosen it's by the reaction force....any well trained ff will know.

    The best way to know the volume being flowed is to have the pump operator pump you what you ask for. If you aren't pumping the proper pressure to your volume control ring nozzles for a specific gpm you trully have no idea how much water you are flowing. We tested our nozzles with a flow meter and marked the gauges so the pump operator knows exactly what to pump our pre-connects at to meet the requested flow. A true example of the KISS principle.
    Welcome back!
    Last edited by FyredUp; 04-27-2013 at 06:47 PM.
    Crazy, but that's how it goes
    Millions of people living as foes
    Maybe it's not too late
    To learn how to love, and forget how to hate

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Nozzle Reaction
    By chiefanthony in forum Fireground Tactics
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 05-27-2007, 04:32 PM
  2. Reaction to SCBA??
    By Pancho in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 06-11-2006, 08:46 PM
  3. Stress Reaction?
    By Oushore in forum Chaplains/Critical Incident Stress
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 07-04-2002, 03:24 PM
  4. nozzle reaction, straight stream VS solid stream
    By BIG PAULIE in forum Fireground Tactics
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 02-02-2002, 12:11 PM
  5. Nozzle reaction force
    By stvfd88 in forum Fireground Tactics
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 04-02-2000, 03:34 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Log in

Click here to log in or register