We do the same. In addition the Engine on the hydrant may fully dress it using pony lengths of 3" to the 2.5" sides. Usually not needed for single-bed drops, but for pipeline lays.Quote:
Originally Posted by FWDbuff
Printable View
We do the same. In addition the Engine on the hydrant may fully dress it using pony lengths of 3" to the 2.5" sides. Usually not needed for single-bed drops, but for pipeline lays.Quote:
Originally Posted by FWDbuff
Brings up a question.. why don't they use Stortz fittings right on the hydrant?Quote:
Originally Posted by Weruj1
That is starting to be done in some areas. But as with anything else, tradition and dollar bills.Quote:
Originally Posted by voyager9
We are in the same situation, using a Stortz adapter for the hydrant. Most of our trucks are setup with 1000 feet of 5" LDH with Stortz couplings, and a Stortz to 2 1/2 threaded adapter already attached to the last section. The reason for the 2 1/2, there are still quite a few hydrants in our city that don't have steamers, so we are setup for what will work everywhere.Quote:
Originally Posted by voyager9
Easier and cheaper to buy an adapter for X number of companies than to replace/retrofit(not sure how it works) what is surely a much, much greater number of fire hydrants. There are probably 100's to 1000's times more hydrants than their are companies in most urban and suburban areas.Quote:
Originally Posted by voyager9
as many of you have stated .........not all the hydrants have the stortz on the Steamer .......slowly they come .........so ya gotta "adapt" and overcome.
First order of business is to KEEP THE DALMATIAN IN THE CAB! Just can't stand grabbing PEE to spin off the hydrant caps.
Quite honestly I don't know if I WANT storz on the steamer of the hydrants, given that we hit them with HUMATS 70% of the time. Don't think I'd feel comfy with a HUMAT sitting on the hydrant with 1/3rd of a turn.Quote:
Originally Posted by Weruj1
Elton John's rocket man comes to mind....Quote:
Originally Posted by FWDbuff
we aint got NO stinkin HUMATS ! .......:DQuote:
Originally Posted by FWDbuff
Anyone tested head to head flow of HUMAT vs TFT Oasis or (other relay valve (AWG/Kochek Hydrassist))? Application is relay pump at middle of LDH lay (vs at hydrant). Relative friction loss, function, reliability, etc.
Going to be purchasing with AFG $ so looking at options. Will be 5"S on all four sides. HUMAT is tried/true claims to beat TFT. TFT claims great things and looks like better design/style for our application.
Ask Chiefengineer11, I am almost positive we did this a few years ago. He might not be available for a few days, I know he is enroute to Breda to pick something up to run to Baltimore for the show.Quote:
Originally Posted by neiowa
I'm back for a day, then off to Breda to get a demo. I'm not aware of any tests, but it would be a great thing to have, to know which units have the least friction loss. Also, which are the easiest to operate. Right now Humats do the job quite well. If anyone would do any testing, it would be Oreland Fire Co./Supplee Bros. Certainly, if they had, Bill would have reported it at our Engineers' Association meeting. But maybe we can con him into it. I know they're big fans of "Z" valves for relay work, but not for hanging on hydrants.Quote:
Originally Posted by FWDbuff
"Z" valve? Have not heard that term.
I was just looking in Harrington's catalog for one, but I couldn't find it.Quote:
Originally Posted by neiowa
It's a relay valve shaped, as you might imagine, like a Z. If I remember correctly, when it's not being used to boost pressure, water flows in one of the points on the Z, through and out the other point. When it's being used to boost or support a line, a line to an engine is connected to one of the ends and the line from the engine goes to the other end. A valve in the center is switched so that the water is diverted into the engine, pressure is boosted and sent back out. It's very efficient, especially in the boost mode. Then, the water is moving through it in a straight line.
We hook up to hydrants with a 10' length of 5" hard suction.
Humats have an internal 3.5" Chamber. There is a constriction through the body and the lower chamber. This increases with volume. Don't have a number for you.
Try that in our area, you come away with two couplings and a shredded pile of rubber.Quote:
Originally Posted by KB1OEV
Google came up with this info. Apparently HUMAT lower friction loss than Akron. Which is logical based on their catalog info which says Akron has 3-1/2" bore and Humat 4".Quote:
Originally Posted by chiefengineer11
http://firelink.monster.com/training...lay?print=true
I don't have any numbers either, but at really high flows it could be significant. Somewhere in my stuff I have a graph for 3-1/2" (3" waterway) Waterous valves, which I know will pass well over 2000 gpm. When supporting a hydrant with a Humat, the water paths are in a straight line, passing through two of the 3-1/2" passages. We've never tested for actual loss, but we've never come up short on water, either. With 185 psi on 20" and 22" mains, the losses probably are doing us a favor.Quote:
Originally Posted by Truck_3