1. #1

    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    1

    Default Task force tips VS smooth bore

    I am currently a student at Ivy Tech Community college in Indianapolis. I am writing an evaluation paper for my English111 class and would like opinions on your preference of nozzle. include characteristics, specifications, and any other information i may find useful.

    thanks guys

  2. #2
    MembersZone Subscriber
    ffmedcbk1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    781

    Default

    If you do a search that can be very helpful. I assure you that there is a wealth of information in the discussions. I am biased in this arena, but I want to hear of you research, so please expound prior to me giving my opinion.
    thank you.

  3. #3
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    South Bend, IN
    Posts
    33

    Default

    South Bend FD uses elkhart brass sm30 on our main attack lines, sm20 on our trash lines, and we keep some of our commercial lines pre-connected with smooth bores. Our high rise packs are elkhart brass firechiefs. The only task force tips that we have are blitz fire portable ground monitors on E1 and E2.
    Last edited by krazykarl; 09-24-2008 at 05:14 PM.

  4. #4
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Pa Wilds
    Posts
    582

    Default Advantage of TFT's vs smooth bore nozzles

    1. Being an "Old School" firefighter, and an advocate of the indirect attack; a fog nozzle is an essential part of the way I fight fire. That said, I know and choose to ignore the criticism and hostility that will be generated as a result of my statement. It is my experience that the application of a fog pattern in an enclosed or semi-enclosed area will extinguish more fire than a straight stream application. I am well aware of the danger posed by high temperature steam and the fact that I am the coolest (temperature wise) thing in the fire / steam area, resulting in the steam condensing on me and my gear. You must be completely covered to avoid being the lobster in the pot. Exposed skin at 98 deg. F. will instantly attract condensing steam depositing 970 BTU per pound of water vapor onto your flesh. It is not a problem if you are prepared for the conditions. An even better choice would be water with a surfactant (wet water, detergent, penetro-wet, etc.) so that the droplets that do contact the fuel cling to the surface and help with the suppression of flammable gasses being evolved by the fuel.

    2. The TFT allows the firefighter to control the application rate so when he is faced with issues of footing, dragging hose or tenuous positions, he is able to control the reaction force to his advantage. Additionally, when facing high fire volume, he is able to apply water flows approaching the capability of a 2 1/2" line without the weight factor of 2 1/2" hose.

    3. This ability to flow volumes approaching 200 GPM on Preconnected 1 3/4" hand lines is only achieved by engine pressures above 180 PSI. Most pump operators will be able to explain that for pressures above 150 PSI, engines must be derated and at 200 PSI can only deliver 70% of rated capacity. My urban, suburban, rural coverage area of 102 sq. mi. requires and our SOP demands a 2 section engine company. This means that the attack engine provides the preconnected lines and is supplied by a second pumper at a water source (hydrant, tanker, drop tank or static source). Relay operations provide an incoming pressure of about 30 psi at the attack engine. This allows full volume of the attack engine since the net pump pressure is exactly 150 psi. Thus a 1750 gpm. pump can supply the full rated volume at 180 psi.

    4. Engine set-up for preconnect lines 4 or 5 - 1 3/4", 2 - 2 1/2" & a P.C. master stream device. Total delivery capacity can be 1750 and could approach 2000 gpm. depending upon manpower and nozzle selection.

    5. Yes, the major disadvantage is a relatively high reaction force for flows above 150 gpm. A single firefighter can handle a 150 gpm line, but above that a second or 3rd FF is needed. A 2 1/2" TFT can supply up to 500 gpm, but is limited by friction loss at 180 psi. engine pressure to about 400 gpm. This arrangement causes about 200 lbs of reaction force and the fully open 2 1/2" nozzle needs to be strapped down or mechanically held in place when flowing this volume of water.

    6. Why so many preconnected lines? You must design your hose and nozzles to apply the full capacity of the engine. To do less negates the expense of buying that 1,500 or 2,000 GPM engine and simply wastes scarce monitory resources of your community.

  5. #5
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Central NJ
    Posts
    1,214

    Default

    KuhShise,

    Im having trouble understanding your statements and logic, give a brother some help.

    Since the rating of a pump is done at draft under specific conditions, operating off hydrants or from the supply provided by another rig (incoming pressure) the rating isnt exactly relevant anymore. That said, the number of preconnects, types of nozzles and such and the capacity of the pump are pretty irrelevant in my opinion.

    My rig has a 1250 single stage. We have attack lines and a wagon pipe capable of flowing a combined 2525 GPM, a very unlikely scenario. In an unscientific test weve gotten 2040 GPM from it from a hydrant, never actually trying to max it out yet. With 2 suction lines in the drink, we did 1600.

    A 2008 FDNY Seagrave has only 3 attack lines, none are preconnected. The pump rating allows them to get the most efficiency at draft, if necessary, for water supply operations. A daily expectation of that 2000 GPM pump would be anywhere from 180-250 GPM, for the typical handlines that are used.

    If a FD does mostly drafting, they need the biggest pump money can buy, because if a needed fire flow is 1500 GPM (One ladder pipe and one wagon pipe, or two 2 1/2's and a ladder pipe, for example), the 2000 GPM pumper will send that water farther than the 1500 GPM pump can simply based on the pumps discharge pressure and FL in the hose. This is another reason LDH is so much more crucial in rural America and not as critical in areas with water supplies.

    My quick figuring says the 1500 Pump can only get the water about 800 feet in 5" if you want to get it there with 20 Residual. Theres probably some fancy math you can do to figure out how much further the 2000 pumpp could move 1500 GPM

    What I regularly read and hear is the theory that small or rural departments dont need big pumps because there isnt any water supply that can handle that volume and cities need big pumps because they have hydrants. Its actually the opposite, wouldnt you agree? Any static body of water is dying to give 2000+ GPM to a fire, as long as you show up with the pump and suction hose ready to take it.

    Am I way off track here?

    Anyway, I like Akron Assault Breakaparts. Best of both worlds. If mated properly, you can have a pair of tips that dont require a pump pressure change when switching from smooth bore to fog. On our 2" 400' line the 200@100 fog tip gives us about 170 GPM and simply removing that tip and exposing the 1 1/8" smoothbore provides 240 GPM, no pump panel changes.
    Last edited by MG3610; 09-24-2008 at 09:52 PM.

  6. #6
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Pa Wilds
    Posts
    582

    Default Some answers for MG3610

    Education is the beginning of understanding. Being wise enough to ask relevant questions is the mark of a truly educated man.

    A pump at draft needs to develop about 110% of rated capacity because of the following:

    1. The volume is specified so it must be met, but the lift (vacuum) adds about 14 psi more work since the eye of the impeller is about 1/2 psi. above a perfect vacuum. Thus the net pump pressure is 150 psi. + the 14 psi below atmospheric or a net total of 164 psi. So your 1500 GPM engine is developing 1500 times 164 or 264,000 gallon psi's of work. At the 70% point it is delivering 200 psi + 13 psi of vacuum (lower because less water is flowing up the suction sleeve so less friction loss and less inertia needed to move less water from rest to flowing velocity.) The pump is producing 223,650 gallon psi's of work. Efficiency is slightly less because the impeller velocity is greater causing additional friction inside the pump. At 250 psi the rated capacity is 1/2 or (you can do the math for a vacuum of 10 psi and a discharge of 250 psi) 195,000 gallon psi's

    2. A 1500 GPM pump can deliver full volume from a single 6" suction sleeve (20 ft. long) with an approved strainer at a 10 ft. lift from source surface to the eye of the impeller. In fact you can get about 1650 GPM from a single 6" suction sleeve before you begin to cavitate the pump. A 1750 or larger pump will require two separate suction sleeves to achieve full volume at draft. In fact larger pumps can sometimes reach full capacity if supplied by one 6" hard sleeve and one or two 3" hard suction sleeves into the source. Examining the energy needed to get water into a pump from draft, the following things must be overcome by atmospheric pressure. A. Lift x 0.435 psi. per ft. of lift.
    B. Friction loss in the suction sleeve, pump casting & strainer.
    C. Inertia of the water. It takes energy to simply accelerate the water from rest to make it move up the suction sleeve and out the discharge.
    I say that atmospheric pressure must overcome these losses, because it is impossible to pull water along a pathway. It must be pushed and the pushing force comes from the air pressure sitting on top of the water source.

    3. Attempting to bring more water into the pump (increase the throttle) will cause the pressure in the eye of the impeller to lower closer to a perfect vacuum. Water will produce water vapor at too low a pressure (read boil) and expand forming bubbles in the water stream. The harder you try to pump the more bubbles are produced inside the impeller eye, so you are effectively being limited in volume by the available atmospheric pressure. There is a second and more devastating problem with cavitation. Boiling water still requires 970 BTU per pound to boil, so this terrific amount of energy is being consumed in the eye and released when the bubbles are carried toward the discharge side of the impeller. (read increased pressure) Since the vapor is still cold (70 degree pond water ?) when it reverts to liquid it gives back the energy, but the adjacent impeller is the target for the release. At the same instant a sonic impulse is sent into the metal causing a molecule or two of brass to be dislodged from the impeller. (read pump class "marbles rolling around in the pump")
    4. Back to NFPA pump ratings. Gasoline engines are notorious for poor horsepower at low engine RPM's so some method (transfer case ratio) is needed to get the power plant operating at its max power point when the pump is producing its rated volume at 150 (164) psi. This is an effective lift of 330 feet (2.2 ft. / psi) and a weight of 1500 X 8.33 lbs per gallon or 4,123,350 ft. lbs. per minute or 124.95 water horse power. Pump efficiencies (pump, transmission, transfer case) can be as low as 50% so the required BHP might easily be 250 HP. A single stage pump needs to turn about twice as fast to reach the 250 psi point, but we were already around 2,000 rpm to reach max HP point. At 4,000 rpm we are at or above the redline for our large gas engine. Thus the reason for 2 stage pumps when coupled with gas engines. Your diesel power plant probably develops max torque around 1,000 rpm or less so we can eliminate the two stage pump because the governed no load rating of your engine is about 2100 rpm and this easily develops the 250 psi needed at 50% volume.

    5. A good estimating technique for friction loss is to square the flow in 100's of GPM's and then multiply by a "K" value for the hose diameter. Example of 3" hose W/ 2 1/2" couplings at 500 gpm. Drop the 2 zeros and square the 5 = 25. The "K" for this hose is 1 so 100 ft of this hose will have a friction loss of 25 psi. at 500 GPM. The "K" for 5" LDH is about 1/15 so your example of 1500 gpm is 15 x 15 = 225 times 1/15 or 15 psi per 100 ft. At 150 psi discharge you should be able to move full volume 1,000 feet. While a flow of 2,000 gpm can only be pushed about 550 ft. with 150 psi. (26.6 psi per 100 ft.) Do not become trapped into some discussions about various manufacturers hoses in these forums. The formulas are based upon the Hazen - Williams equations where the pipe diameter affects the friction loss by the 4.87 power. Any change in the weave that allows the hose diameter to increase under pressure will cause very large changes in the friction loss of the hose. Another problem with LDH is that most manufacturers have a max operating pressure of 200 psi. This becomes the limiting factor on long lays at moderate flows. On the fireground I use a finger calculator. Hold your left hand palm up facing you. Allow each finger a value of 1 (thumb) through 5 (pinkie), squared these would be 1, 4, 9, 16, & 25. Based upon the above calculation for 2,000 gpm (26.6 psi / 100) we can estimate that pinkie will be 2,000 gpm or thumb will be 2,000 / 5 or 400 gpm. Middle finger for 5" hose is 1200 gpm with a loss of 9 psi per hundred feet. A 700 ft lay needs 63 PSI + 20 for incoming to attack engine. A little more than idle for a good engine/pump combination.

    6. I totally agree with your assessment concerning rural need for large pumps and LDH. 2,400' lays (split lay 1200 ft per engine) only need 144 psi at 950 gpm. or a 1,000 GPM pump. Extend that requirement to 1100 gpm and you quickly need a 1500 gpm pump to supply it at 200 psi. Tankers need to be filled at rates of at least 1000 gpm or faster. If the design of vents can handle it, I prefer to fill in less than 60 seconds. A 2,000 gal tanker should be filled in a minute or less and dump in the same amount of time. Don't use LDH to fill tanker shuttles because of the hose weight. 100' of 3" can move 1,000 gpm with a loss of about 100 psi, so a pair of 3" fill lines should be able to meet the requirement.

  7. #7
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Northeast Coast
    Posts
    3,862

    Default

    Sorry we're off the track a little here but this discussion is pretty informative all the way around.

    Kushise: I find it concerning that a dept. would actually need the full rated capacity of their pump through handlines as your #3 implies. While it's perfectly possibly with proper speccing, it's probably not a good idea. This is the "all your eggs in one basket" issue. If the lead attack pumper is laid out with multiple hand lines and the pump craps out or you lose a piece of LDH you're out of business at best. This is obviously a big deal when interior ops are being conducted from this engine as compared to a defensive situation. We "over spec" our pump intakes/discharges to ensure we can capitalize on some of our better water mains, by using the engine as a manifold and exceeding the pumps rated capacity.

    For the original OP: Not a fan of any automatic nozzle in general. But if I dislike any more than another I'd say TFT's are the worst in my view. Sort of in conflict with which "Old School" Kushise went to, my training taught me that any nozzle has two settings: Open and Closed. Using the bale to set the flow is in my view a dangerous practice that often leads to either underflowing the line or sudden full flow that causes the nozzleman to lose control of said line. Time and again, newbies are "caught" flowing just a little in the unrealistic training burns where this can be done. Why? Becasue it's easier. And sadly most of us take the easy road when given a choice. In acquired structures or real fires we find the choice to underflow the line doesn't exist safely. Of coures any nozzle with a bale can be used to control the rate of flow, but TFT markets theirs as variable flow with click adjustable settings.

    On the other hand smoothbores provide the ultimate in reliability and simplicity all the way around.

  8. #8
    Forum Member
    Bones42's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Pt. Beach, NJ
    Posts
    10,678

    Default

    Anyway, I like Akron Assault Breakaparts. Best of both worlds. If mated properly, you can have a pair of tips that dont require a pump pressure change when switching from smooth bore to fog. On our 2" 400' line the 200@100 fog tip gives us about 170 GPM and simply removing that tip and exposing the 1 1/8" smoothbore provides 240 GPM, no pump panel changes.
    We use Akron Assault Breakaparts as well. 75psi/175gpm. 200' of 1 3/4" hose on each of our preconnects. Flow with the adjustable tip on is 170, with the tip removed is ~180 (if I remember the #'s correctly). Pump discharge pressure is 120.

    Yes, the calculations and formulas all say it won't work. We ran this over and over with a flow meter and that's what we get. Personally, anyone that goes and gives me formulas for nozzle flow, I tell them to figure it out and then actually flow meter it.
    "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?

  9. #9
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Pa Wilds
    Posts
    582

    Default

    Fireground tactics usually suggest that if you commit a line to interior attack, you must provide a line of equal or larger size for back-up. Let us begin with a single attack crew and a back-up line say 2 - 1 3/4 lines. (one in and one out) the second engine supplies two additional crews so now we have progressed to - two lines in and two back-ups. Commiting any one of the back-up 1 3/4 lines requires the deployment of a 2 1/2 back-up line. With the proper crews, the max interior operation will be 4 or 5 - 1 3/4 lines with two 2 1/2 back-ups. application rate to the fire is now 720 gpm with a reserve need of 500 for back-up lines or a total requirement of 1220 GPM. With this progression in mind we must now switch to exterior attack mode since we are not permitted to have crews inside if we open up with a master stream device. With a 2" tip on a deluge and both 2 1/2" lines operating, the application rate has grown to about 1580 GPM. Anchoring the two 2 1/2" with automatic nozzles we can easily reach 1880 GPM.
    As for having all your eggs in one basket...Pump operators are trained to keep the tank full, so there will be a few minutes of water to allow the interior crew to back out should there be a failure of the LDH. Large supply hose rarely fails completely, but continues to supply a portion of the original flow for some period of time until shut down is possible. In the event of a pump failure on the attack engine... Lets assume that we have made a 600 ft. lay to the water supply. Assuming the worst case scenario of 5 lines in the building or a flow of 150 gpm per line under the emergency condition. The supply engine merely raises the discharge pressure to 180 psi. and pumps through the attack engine effectively maintaining suffient water to allow attack crews to back out. At 150 gpm on the preconnected 1 3/4" lines, we need about 150 psi. This allows 30 psi to move the 600 gpm through the ldh and the attack engine as a manifold. The 5" supply has about 18 lbs friction loss allowing an additional 12 psi for friction loss inside the disabled attack engine.
    I understand your reluctance to gate the bale of a nozzle back, but this is exactly what the TFT has been designed to do. With experience, we have discovered that the firefighter facing the seat of the fire is a much better judge of needed flows than the pump operator setting up for a standard flow rate. Try advancing a 2 1/2 up a set of stairs with the reaction force at 125 lbs. The TFT can be safely reduced in gpm until the nozzle and back-up are in a position to handle the reaction from a full flow nozzle setting.
    As for forcing a nozzleman to either be full on or full off says that you have not suffiently trained or have not developed enough confidence in the nozzle man to allow him or her the opportunity to make the decision.
    Incidently, studies done in the 1950s & 60's indicated that successful fire departments rarely were able to generate more than 500 gpm per engine assigned to major working fires. (NFPA Fire Attack I - Kimball) Using this info and logic, one could come to the conclusion that a pump larger than 500 was an un-necessary waste of resources. The real cause of the seemingly low application rate was the lack of adequate manpower, 2 1/2" hose and the use of 3rd and 4th alarm equipment as taxi service for firefighters.
    My "Old School" includes about 10 years on a heavy rescue with a 5 stage high pressure centrifugal pump (800 psi) and 300 gal water tank. We thought that "High Pressure" was the best thing going. A standard Elkhart booster nozzle set at 30 gpm put out many well involved structures. At first blush, we thought the 30 gpm was putting out the fire, until someone did the math and found we were really applying about 75 gpm with that nozzle setting.

  10. #10
    Forum Member
    ENG103's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    America, #@[< Yeah !!
    Posts
    64

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jstapert09 View Post
    I am currently a student at Ivy Tech Community college in Indianapolis. I am writing an evaluation paper for my English111 class and would like opinions on your preference of nozzle. include characteristics, specifications, and any other information i may find useful.

    thanks guys
    Jstapert09, I'm not sure if you are actually just refering to fog vs. solid stream or just want info on TFT nozzles in particular. There are some good research articles online regarding what type of stream is better from each side. As far as TFT nozzles are concerned, I hate them. My dept has all TFT automatics and they are a pain. They use a sliding valve instead of a ball valve and require a lot of mantenance for them to operate smoothly. Automatics, I believe are dangerous. I won't go into that since there are threads just about that issue. I would prefer an Elkhart smooth bore or a Low Pressure Fixed Gallonage fog.

  11. #11
    Forum Member
    BKDRAFT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Bay Area, California
    Posts
    1,146

    Lightbulb

    Quote Originally Posted by jstapert09 View Post
    I am currently a student at Ivy Tech Community college in Indianapolis. I am writing an evaluation paper for my English111 class and would like opinions on your preference of nozzle. include characteristics, specifications, and any other information i may find useful.

    thanks guys
    I prefer smooth bore nozzles. Lower psi with more gpm.

    For example. Youcan get a 70-200 gpm TFT breakaway nozzle for a 1 3/4" line. These come with fog tips that can be removed. You now have a smooth bore nozzle. You can change the slugs inside to have a different size orfice (ex: 7/8, 15/16). You can operate these on a low pressure setting where you can pump so you have 50 psi at the nozzle. That way wheather your using a fog or smooth bore the engineer doesn't need to change pressure at the panel.

    Very effective.
    Last edited by BKDRAFT; 09-28-2008 at 04:49 PM.

  12. #12

    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    1

    Default correction on my post

    my paper is on smooth bore vs fog tip...not necessarily TFT

  13. #13
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Upstate (Albany area), NY
    Posts
    422

    Default

    Find copy of David Fornell's book "Fire Stream Management" and read the chapters on nozzle selection, then watch Andy Frederick's Fire Engineering Video "Bread & Butter Operations: Methods of Structure Fire Attack". If you do this, then go out and run some of the tests yourself, you will find that the money that you save not buying nozzles with swivels, springs, o-rings, pistons, spinning teeth, bells, whistles, and brass marching bands will pay for two or three nozzles that might actually contribute to fireground safety, and the unique concept of actually putting the fire out!

    I had a highly regarded instructor that once taught me "Remember, Son, that the 2 1/2" fog nozzle was invented by a nozzle salesman!"
    "If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking."

    George S. Patton

  14. #14
    55 Years & Still Rolling
    hwoods's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Glenn Dale Md, Heart of the P.G. County Fire Belt....
    Posts
    10,739

    Lightbulb Wow.............

    You Guys are Waaaaaayyyyyyyyyyyyy too complicated. Pull a line that looks big enough, attach a nozzle that will flow whatever volume that you want. When the line is in place and flowing, gently wind the throttle out until the you see a bit of Daylight under the Nozzleman's feet, then close the throttle about one quarter turn.


    May I help the next in line, Please?..............
    Last edited by hwoods; 10-01-2008 at 11:24 AM.
    Never use Force! Get a Bigger Hammer.
    In memory of
    Chief Earle W. Woods, 1912 - 1997
    Asst. Chief John R. Woods Sr. 1937 - 2006

    IACOJ Budget Analyst

    I Refuse to be a Spectator. If I come to the Game, I'm Playing.

    www.gdvfd18.com

  15. #15
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,063

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hwoods View Post
    You Guys are Waaaaaayyyyyyyyyyyyy too complicated. Pull a line that looks big enough, attach a nozzle that will flow whatever volume that you want. When the line is in place and flowing, gently wind the throttle out until the you see a bit of Daylight under the Nozzleman's feet, then close the throttle about one quarter turn.


    May I help the next in line, Please?..............
    I think instead of turning the throttle down, one should add a rookie as dead weight, then give the throttle three good turns then maybe one for the wife and kids.

  16. #16
    Forum Member
    nmfire's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Maryland (DC Suburb)
    Posts
    5,738

    Default

    I think people make it way to complicated and personal. The fire is going to go out if you put enough water on it, whether it comes out of a fog or smooth nozzle. As long as you are aware of the potential problems associated with both types of nozzles, you will be fine.
    Even the burger-flippers at McDonald's probably have some McWackers.

  17. #17
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Stamford, CT
    Posts
    411

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DFDCar1 View Post
    Find copy of David Fornell's book "Fire Stream Management" and read the chapters on nozzle selection, then watch Andy Frederick's Fire Engineering Video "Bread & Butter Operations: Methods of Structure Fire Attack". If you do this, then go out and run some of the tests yourself, you will find that the money that you save not buying nozzles with swivels, springs, o-rings, pistons, spinning teeth, bells, whistles, and brass marching bands will pay for two or three nozzles that might actually contribute to fireground safety, and the unique concept of actually putting the fire out!

    Could not have been better put. There's a reason the busiest FD in the country uses smoothbore they work best..DUH !

  18. #18
    55 Years & Still Rolling
    hwoods's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Glenn Dale Md, Heart of the P.G. County Fire Belt....
    Posts
    10,739

    Talking Huh??...............

    Quote Originally Posted by FFPCogs08 View Post
    Could not have been better put. There's a reason the busiest FD in the country uses smoothbore they work best..DUH !

    Kentland uses smoothbores??........
    Never use Force! Get a Bigger Hammer.
    In memory of
    Chief Earle W. Woods, 1912 - 1997
    Asst. Chief John R. Woods Sr. 1937 - 2006

    IACOJ Budget Analyst

    I Refuse to be a Spectator. If I come to the Game, I'm Playing.

    www.gdvfd18.com

  19. #19
    Back In Black
    ChiefKN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    The Nice Part of New Jersey
    Posts
    6,981

    Default

    We use TFT exclusively and have had great success with it.

    I honestly don't think it matters if you use fog or smooth bore, as long as you train with what you use.

    Know the limitations and hydraulics of what you use.
    I am now a past chief and the views, opinions, and comments are mine and mine alone. I do not speak for any department or in any official capacity. Although, they would be smart to listen to me.

    "The last thing I want to do is hurt you. But it's still on the list."

    "When tempted to fight fire with fire, remember that the Fire Department usually uses water."

  20. #20
    Forum Member
    FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    10,033

    Default

    All nozzles in the hands of SKILLED Firefighters will put out fire. In fact everyday somewhere in the world it is happening, probably right now while I am typing this.

    My concern with combination nozzles is the additional complexity, especially if you are talking automatics. All nozzles work fine as long as they are maintained per the manufacturers guidelines. I have been an instructor for 28 years and the one thing I can emphatically say is that nozzles are NOT being maintained. More times than I can count I have been in departments where the automatic nozzle has not worked because it was not maintained. Is it the nozzle's fault? No, it is not. But less complexity destroys that concern.

    1) Know what your equipment is capable of.
    2) Know how to maiximaize it's ability through training.
    3) Proper and periodic maintenance, per the manufacturer, is critical to ensure proper functioning.

  21. #21
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    32

    Default

    If well I am in accordance with FYREDUP ("All nozzles in the hands of SKILLED Firefighters will put out fire") also it's true that the mean FF usually is not interested nor skilled in gpm/nozzle tip selection, so he/she will use thrugout the fire the nozzle tip or nozle size he picks up at the very begining ("this my nozzle" mentality.

    For the side of automatics nozzles, specially the ones with large volume range (i.e. 50 - 300 gpm) with 1,2" female coupling, any time the FF will choose it, he will have at any time at hand (even if he didn't knows it) a simple tool wich will allow to send a correct volume.

    Besides, it's cheaper to buy a pair of nozzles for an ample range of volumes than four or six for meet any flow size (a pair for 95-125 gpm, a pair for 95-200 gpm and pair for 95-250 gpm), also it simplifies training.

    In larges fires, when even the chauffer is altered, all mean FFs will think that bigger is better so the chauffer will pump near excesive psi, so if all of them have only minimal notion about fire volume v/s water volume the fire will be put out in shorter times that when using fixed or selectable (volume ring) nozzles.

    Eventually all the fires are extinguished, but the idea with fire Dept presence it's that the fire stops it's growing when they arrive, not be throwing water in flows useful only for shelter fires and the fires stops itself because it run out of fuel.

    Regards

  22. #22
    Forum Member
    FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    10,033

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by janusfire View Post
    If well I am in accordance with FYREDUP ("All nozzles in the hands of SKILLED Firefighters will put out fire") also it's true that the mean FF usually is not interested nor skilled in gpm/nozzle tip selection, so he/she will use thrugout the fire the nozzle tip or nozle size he picks up at the very begining ("this my nozzle" mentality.

    Frankly this is a silly point. Most often a firefighter has NO choice in nozzle selection at a fire. It isn't like they are going hunting and go to the gun cabinet and pick the gun they want. Does your department have a compartment and the firefighter picks the nozzle he wishes to attach? Of course not...

    For the side of automatics nozzles, specially the ones with large volume range (i.e. 50 - 300 gpm) with 1,2" female coupling, any time the FF will choose it, he will have at any time at hand (even if he didn't knows it) a simple tool wich will allow to send a correct volume.

    A simple tool? No, a tool that may or may not function properly because:
    1) No one has been trained in its use other than by salesman hype. In order for an automatic nozzle to work; the officer, pump operator, AND the firefighter must understand how the nozzle works and then the difficult part...make it happen.
    2) It has not been maintained per the manufacturers specifications. I have lost track of the number of FD's I have been in where automatics didn't function properly because they hadn't been maintained.



    Besides, it's cheaper to buy a pair of nozzles for an ample range of volumes than four or six for meet any flow size (a pair for 95-125 gpm, a pair for 95-200 gpm and pair for 95-250 gpm), also it simplifies training.

    Who does this? My volly FD has one handline nozzle we use on every handline. Of course we only use one size of handline so it makes life easy. We use 2 inch hose with a 200 at 75 psi low pressure nozzle. This is backed by a 1 1/4 inch slug. We flow from 160 to 300 gpm with this set up and it works great. No extra springs, no complicated automatic nozzle to maintain, no additional training and our firefighters like it.

    Please show me a fire department that buys nozzle like you indicate above. Frankly if you have a nozzle capable of flowing 95 to 250 why would you buy the other 2? Again a silly comparison wasting money and adding complexity that's not needed.


    In larges fires, when even the chauffer is altered, all mean FFs will think that bigger is better so the chauffer will pump near excesive psi, so if all of them have only minimal notion about fire volume v/s water volume the fire will be put out in shorter times that when using fixed or selectable (volume ring) nozzles.

    If your pump operators pump excessive pressures at big fires instead of flowing what their training says they should flow I reccomned remedial pump training for all of them. My career FD has a pump chart our MPO's follow and my volly FD has the correct pressures labled by each discharge gauge. There is simply no excuse for a pump operator not to flow the proper pressure for the proper flow because it is a big fire. Frankly your comments are one of the reasons I despise automatic nozzles. The pump operator doesn't do anything any more except flow a max pressure. He doesn't have one clue how to figure friction loss, add or subtract pressure for longer or shorter lines, or how to figure what to pump in a relay or to a ladder pipe. I have taught pump operator classes where I have been told "oh we don;t need a pump chart we ALWAYS pump 200 psi." When I ask what do you pump in relay? What do you pump to a sprinkler connection? What do you pump to a ladder pipe? All I get is blank stares. Because they were brainwashed into believing they didn't need to know anything except 200 psi.

    Eventually all the fires are extinguished, but the idea with fire Dept presence it's that the fire stops it's growing when they arrive, not be throwing water in flows useful only for shelter fires and the fires stops itself because it run out of fuel.

    Yep and a max pressured flowed line where the nozzle person gates down that 50 to 350 automatic to oh, 70 to 120 gpm's so he feels comfortable extinguishes fire faster how? Will 300 gpm through your automatic mystically, magically put out more fire than 300 through my single gallonage nozzle? I would love to see you tell me how it would. 300 gpm is 300 gpm no matter what nozzle it comes from.

    Regards
    Are you a TFT saleman or do you work for the factory? I haven't seen such nonsensical rhetoric since the 70's when TFT's became all the rage.

  23. #23
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ChiefKN View Post
    We use TFT exclusively and have had great success with it.

    I honestly don't think it matters if you use fog or smooth bore, as long as you train with what you use.

    Know the limitations and hydraulics of what you use.
    Same here with the exception of the redline on our brush rigs. We have variable gallonage akron tips on those. We have very good luck with both of them...

  24. #24
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    32

    Default

    FYREDUP

    Originally Posted by janusfire
    If well I am in accordance with FYREDUP ("All nozzles in the hands of SKILLED Firefighters will put out fire") also it's true that the mean FF usually is not interested nor skilled in gpm/nozzle tip selection, so he/she will use thrugout the fire the nozzle tip or nozle size he picks up at the very begining ("this my nozzle" mentality.

    Frankly this is a silly point. Most often a firefighter has NO choice in nozzle selection at a fire. It isn't like they are going hunting and go to the gun cabinet and pick the gun they want. Does your department have a compartment and the firefighter picks the nozzle he wishes to attach? Of course not...

    In fact my dept has a nozzle for every size of fire, except the big ones, those are the TFT DualForce 90-300 gpm

    For the side of automatics nozzles, specially the ones with large volume range (i.e. 50 - 300 gpm) with 1,2" female coupling, any time the FF will choose it, he will have at any time at hand (even if he didn't knows it) a simple tool wich will allow to send a correct volume.

    A simple tool? No, a tool that may or may not function properly because:
    1) No one has been trained in its use other than by salesman hype. In order for an automatic nozzle to work; the officer, pump operator, AND the firefighter must understand how the nozzle works and then the difficult part...make it happen.

    Error, only it's needed the pump operator pumps for a fixed POTENTIAL gpm for that hose laying, and then the nozzleman selects the flow he needs.

    2) It has not been maintained per the manufacturers specifications. I have lost track of the number of FD's I have been in where automatics didn't function properly because they hadn't been maintained.


    [I]The only maintenance is lubricating with the oil specified by the maker, the other "malfunctions" are normally pump operator error pumping very low pressures.[/I]

    Besides, it's cheaper to buy a pair of nozzles for an ample range of volumes than four or six for meet any flow size (a pair for 95-125 gpm, a pair for 95-200 gpm and pair for 95-250 gpm), also it simplifies training.

    Who does this? My volly FD has one handline nozzle we use on every handline. Of course we only use one size of handline so it makes life easy. We use 2 inch hose with a 200 at 75 psi low pressure nozzle. This is backed by a 1 1/4 inch slug. We flow from 160 to 300 gpm with this set up and it works great. No extra springs, no complicated automatic nozzle to maintain, no additional training and our firefighters like it.

    I agree ingreat part with you, but you are missinterpreting my saying.


    Please show me a fire department that buys nozzle like you indicate above. Frankly if you have a nozzle capable of flowing 95 to 250 why would you buy the other 2? Again a silly comparison wasting money and adding complexity that's not needed.

    [I]It looks like I expressed me wrong, I mean it is enough with a pair of 95-250 selectable nozzles or 90-300 auto nozzles in place of a lot of different nozzles sizes.[/I]
    In larges fires, when even the chauffer is altered, all mean FFs will think that bigger is better so the chauffer will pump near excesive psi, so if all of them have only minimal notion about fire volume v/s water volume the fire will be put out in shorter times that when using fixed or selectable (volume ring) nozzles.

    If your pump operators pump excessive pressures at big fires instead of flowing what their training says they should flow I reccomned remedial pump training for all of them. My career FD has a pump chart our MPO's follow and my volly FD has the correct pressures labled by each discharge gauge. There is simply no excuse for a pump operator not to flow the proper pressure for the proper flow because it is a big fire. Frankly your comments are one of the reasons I despise automatic nozzles. The pump operator doesn't do anything any more except flow a max pressure. He doesn't have one clue how to figure friction loss, add or subtract pressure for longer or shorter lines, or how to figure what to pump in a relay or to a ladder pipe. I have taught pump operator classes where I have been told "oh we don;t need a pump chart we ALWAYS pump 200 psi." When I ask what do you pump in relay? What do you pump to a sprinkler connection? What do you pump to a ladder pipe? All I get is blank stares. Because they were brainwashed into believing they didn't need to know anything except 200 psi.

    Again I am in agree with you in a 90%, but as I said, the pump operator only have to pump for a POTENTIAL high volume, then the nozzleman will select the gpm he needs, only with an auto nozzle you can do this, with a ring control nozzle you NEED to comunicate with the pump operator for the new higher or lower gpm you selected.

    For the big ones, it's essential for the pump operator to calculate the FL as precise as possible for pumping for towers, master streams and simmilars


    Eventually all the fires are extinguished, but the idea with fire Dept presence it's that the fire stops it's growing when they arrive, not be throwing water in flows useful only for shelter fires and then the fire stops itself because it run out of fuel.

    Yep and a max pressured flowed line where the nozzle person gates down that 50 to 350 automatic to oh, 70 to 120 gpm's so he feels comfortable extinguishes fire faster how? Will 300 gpm through your automatic mystically, magically put out more fire than 300 through my single gallonage nozzle? I would love to see you tell me how it would. 300 gpm is 300 gpm no matter what nozzle it comes from.

    Yes 300 gpm are 300 gpm, but with an auto nozzle you don't have to select an change any tip, but the nozzleman will know better how much gpm's he is flowing, the nozzle reaction will be a more precisse flow indicator than an overpressurised little tip. If he choose 300 gpm he knows he will have those, if he choose 100 gpm....the same

    Regards

  25. #25
    Forum Member
    FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    10,033

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by janusfire View Post
    FYREDUP

    Originally Posted by janusfire
    If well I am in accordance with FYREDUP ("All nozzles in the hands of SKILLED Firefighters will put out fire") also it's true that the mean FF usually is not interested nor skilled in gpm/nozzle tip selection, so he/she will use thrugout the fire the nozzle tip or nozle size he picks up at the very begining ("this my nozzle" mentality.

    Frankly this is a silly point. Most often a firefighter has NO choice in nozzle selection at a fire. It isn't like they are going hunting and go to the gun cabinet and pick the gun they want. Does your department have a compartment and the firefighter picks the nozzle he wishes to attach? Of course not...

    In fact my dept has a nozzle for every size of fire, except the big ones, those are the TFT DualForce 90-300 gpm

    And so does mine. A 200 gpm at 75 psi low pressure nozzle that we can underpump and it works fine at 160 gpm. Or we can go to the slug for the very few times we need 300 gpm. This set up is a whole lot less expensive and easier to maintain than the TFT's.

    For the side of automatics nozzles, specially the ones with large volume range (i.e. 50 - 300 gpm) with 1,2" female coupling, any time the FF will choose it, he will have at any time at hand (even if he didn't knows it) a simple tool wich will allow to send a correct volume.

    A simple tool? No, a tool that may or may not function properly because:
    1) No one has been trained in its use other than by salesman hype. In order for an automatic nozzle to work; the officer, pump operator, AND the firefighter must understand how the nozzle works and then the difficult part...make it happen.

    Error, only it's needed the pump operator pumps for a fixed POTENTIAL gpm for that hose laying, and then the nozzleman selects the flow he needs.

    How does the nozzle person know how much water he is flowing? He doesn't, all he knows is that the pump operator is flowing something and if he opens the nozzle all the way he gets whatever that is, andif he gates the nozzle he has not one single clue how much he is flowing.

    2) It has not been maintained per the manufacturers specifications. I have lost track of the number of FD's I have been in where automatics didn't function properly because they hadn't been maintained.


    [I]The only maintenance is lubricating with the oil specified by the maker, the other "malfunctions" are normally pump operator error pumping very low pressures.[/I]

    Bull Crap. I have seen TFT 50-350 nozzles that refused to operate at 100 psi until flushed. Then they would work until shut down and then it took flushing them again to make them work. They had NEVER been maintained and simply did not work properly anymore. This can't happen on a single gallonage nozzle. Although the pump operator error thing is quite true because once again training was lacking.

    Besides, it's cheaper to buy a pair of nozzles for an ample range of volumes than four or six for meet any flow size (a pair for 95-125 gpm, a pair for 95-200 gpm and pair for 95-250 gpm), also it simplifies training.

    Who does this? My volly FD has one handline nozzle we use on every handline. Of course we only use one size of handline so it makes life easy. We use 2 inch hose with a 200 at 75 psi low pressure nozzle. This is backed by a 1 1/4 inch slug. We flow from 160 to 300 gpm with this set up and it works great. No extra springs, no complicated automatic nozzle to maintain, no additional training and our firefighters like it.

    I agree ingreat part with you, but you are missinterpreting my saying.

    How am I misinterpreting what you are saying? No department I know of buys nozzles the way this paragraph above suggests.


    Please show me a fire department that buys nozzle like you indicate above. Frankly if you have a nozzle capable of flowing 95 to 250 why would you buy the other 2? Again a silly comparison wasting money and adding complexity that's not needed.

    [I]It looks like I expressed me wrong, I mean it is enough with a pair of 95-250 selectable nozzles or 90-300 auto nozzles in place of a lot of different nozzles sizes.[/I]

    That may be what you meant but most certainly is NOT what you said.


    In larges fires, when even the chauffer is altered, all mean FFs will think that bigger is better so the chauffer will pump near excesive psi, so if all of them have only minimal notion about fire volume v/s water volume the fire will be put out in shorter times that when using fixed or selectable (volume ring) nozzles.

    If your pump operators pump excessive pressures at big fires instead of flowing what their training says they should flow I reccomned remedial pump training for all of them. My career FD has a pump chart our MPO's follow and my volly FD has the correct pressures labled by each discharge gauge. There is simply no excuse for a pump operator not to flow the proper pressure for the proper flow because it is a big fire. Frankly your comments are one of the reasons I despise automatic nozzles. The pump operator doesn't do anything any more except flow a max pressure. He doesn't have one clue how to figure friction loss, add or subtract pressure for longer or shorter lines, or how to figure what to pump in a relay or to a ladder pipe. I have taught pump operator classes where I have been told "oh we don;t need a pump chart we ALWAYS pump 200 psi." When I ask what do you pump in relay? What do you pump to a sprinkler connection? What do you pump to a ladder pipe? All I get is blank stares. Because they were brainwashed into believing they didn't need to know anything except 200 psi.

    Again I am in agree with you in a 90%, but as I said, the pump operator only have to pump for a POTENTIAL high volume, then the nozzleman will select the gpm he needs, only with an auto nozzle you can do this, with a ring control nozzle you NEED to comunicate with the pump operator for the new higher or lower gpm you selected.

    For the big ones, it's essential for the pump operator to calculate the FL as precise as possible for pumping for towers, master streams and simmilars


    Truth be told the nozzle operator has no clue what he is discharging with an automatic nozzle any time he gates the nozzle. All he knows for sure is it is less water. In fact, he doesn't know how much he is ever discharging unless the FD has used or IS using flow meters. You make it sound like when he gates the nozzle he knows how much he is flowing which is absolutely wrong. The nozzle person has no way of knowing.

    Eventually all the fires are extinguished, but the idea with fire Dept presence it's that the fire stops it's growing when they arrive, not be throwing water in flows useful only for shelter fires and then the fire stops itself because it run out of fuel.

    Yep and a max pressured flowed line where the nozzle person gates down that 50 to 350 automatic to oh, 70 to 120 gpm's so he feels comfortable extinguishes fire faster how? Will 300 gpm through your automatic mystically, magically put out more fire than 300 through my single gallonage nozzle? I would love to see you tell me how it would. 300 gpm is 300 gpm no matter what nozzle it comes from.

    Yes 300 gpm are 300 gpm, but with an auto nozzle you don't have to select an change any tip, but the nozzleman will know better how much gpm's he is flowing, the nozzle reaction will be a more precisse flow indicator than an overpressurised little tip. If he choose 300 gpm he knows he will have those, if he choose 100 gpm....the same

    How do you utilize the low pressure setting without shutting off the nozzle to change it? We don't over pressurize anything, if we need more water than the 200 gpm at 75 psi nozzle flows we will shut down and remove the tip and flow 300 through our slug tip. The advantage to our system is it is simple to operate, low maintenance, and far less expensive than yout TFT set-up.

    Regards
    I see you chose, very conspicuously by the way, to not answer whether you are a TFT saleman or factory rep. We like honesty here regarding that so answering that question would be appreciated.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. Brass smooth bore tips
    By dbier57 in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 11-05-2008, 09:54 AM
  2. Fog vs. Smooth Bore
    By FyrFyter510 in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 65
    Last Post: 11-01-2008, 06:51 AM
  3. Smooth bore Vs. Fog
    By Firefletch67 in forum Florida
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 06-03-2007, 12:05 PM
  4. Smooth bore vs Fog
    By HFRH28 in forum Apparatus Innovation
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 12-06-2004, 04:39 PM
  5. New Task Force Tips Spanner Wrench Good?
    By The Snake Man in forum Apparatus Innovation
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 02-25-2000, 06:20 PM

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