Why register? ...To Enhance Your Experience
+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 29 of 29

Thread: HAV/Humat Valve

  1. #21
    Forum Member Rescue101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Bridgton,Me USA
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    Again, that is your choice.

    I have worked with fog nozzles far more than solid stream, and I feel very comfortable with working with them in just about any residental situation, which has been easily 95% of the fires I have worked.

    Do solid stream have their place? Sure. Commercial fires, warehouse and other large open area fires and some other situations. I have used them in those situations and the reach and penetration is nice. But for the bulk of the operations I have been involved in, I prefer fog.
    Used combos for YEARS,QUITE familiar with them.100psi at the nozzle to make them work RIGHT. SB,50 psi at the nozzle and MORE water delivered. Since I stayed at the Holiday Inn last night that would make it a NO Brainer on making life easier for my crews. Less reaction,easier maneuvering,and more water. WHY wouldn't this be better? T.C.


  2. #22
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,562

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rescue101 View Post
    Used combos for YEARS,QUITE familiar with them.100psi at the nozzle to make them work RIGHT. SB,50 psi at the nozzle and MORE water delivered. Since I stayed at the Holiday Inn last night that would make it a NO Brainer on making life easier for my crews. Less reaction,easier maneuvering,and more water. WHY wouldn't this be better? T.C.
    I certainly agree that less reaction and lower pressures is much easier for the crews. No disagreement there.

    I just find that I have more options with a combo nozzle. Again, it's just my preference and a lot of that preference is likely based on the frequency of use.
    Given the choice, I would prefer a fog nozzle for 95% of the structural incidents we respond to.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  3. #23
    Forum Member Rescue101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Bridgton,Me USA
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    I certainly agree that less reaction and lower pressures is much easier for the crews. No disagreement there.

    I just find that I have more options with a combo nozzle. Again, it's just my preference and a lot of that preference is likely based on the frequency of use.
    Given the choice, I would prefer a fog nozzle for 95% of the structural incidents we respond to.
    I've still got both but the changeover is well underway to go with SB's. I find the reach and hard hit of the SB along with easier handling FAR outweigh the chicken(or boiled alive)factor of the Combination. We have a couple Vindicators too, a hard hitting nozzle that knocks fire down Quick. Like I said, the Combi's are mainly used on propane tanks,with very little Interior done with them.Not real sure of the "options" you speak of. T.C.

  4. #24
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,562

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rescue101 View Post
    I've still got both but the changeover is well underway to go with SB's. I find the reach and hard hit of the SB along with easier handling FAR outweigh the chicken(or boiled alive)factor of the Combination. We have a couple Vindicators too, a hard hitting nozzle that knocks fire down Quick. Like I said, the Combi's are mainly used on propane tanks,with very little Interior done with them.Not real sure of the "options" you speak of. T.C.
    Depends on the region.

    You see very little SB in this half of the state including the full-time career departments, Simply not used. Area has been raised on fog and works on fog.

    If you look at our structure fires v. other fires that fog works better on - brush, vehicle, well and battery tank - vast majority of the time the preconnects are pulled it's not for structure fires. I agree with my command staff that fogs are far better for residential fires. We can go 2-3 years without any type of a commercial fire where the SBs are more relevenat.

    Again, fogs work far better for us.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  5. #25
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    114

    Default

    Have another question regarding the Hydrant Assist Valves... I've looked at a few of them and my department is considering getting at least one. The thing is, We are in the process of installing permanent hydrant Storz adapters on all of our hydrants... All of the HAV's I've looked at are made for the threaded steamer connections... Can they be used with the Storz adapters on the hydrant?

  6. #26
    Forum Member FWDbuff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Pee-Ayy!
    Posts
    7,395

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by volff1170 View Post
    Have another question regarding the Hydrant Assist Valves... I've looked at a few of them and my department is considering getting at least one. The thing is, We are in the process of installing permanent hydrant Storz adapters on all of our hydrants... All of the HAV's I've looked at are made for the threaded steamer connections... Can they be used with the Storz adapters on the hydrant?
    I would NOT want to use one with a storz connection. They are extremely heavy by themselves. Then add the weight of three 5" lines connected to it (not to mention the water in them) and then throw in the dynamics of the vibration, twisting, etc. I personally would not trust a storz connection in conjunction with any HAV.
    "Loyalty Above all Else. Except Honor."

  7. #27
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    48

    Default

    We run our Humat with a short section of 5 inch attached to it I would say about 6 feet in length. Takes the weight off the storz connection and also makes it easier to attach the other lines to as it can be moved away from obstructions usually parked cars or snow banks.

  8. #28
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,562

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by happyvalleyff View Post
    We run our Humat with a short section of 5 inch attached to it I would say about 6 feet in length. Takes the weight off the storz connection and also makes it easier to attach the other lines to as it can be moved away from obstructions usually parked cars or snow banks.
    Interesting idea.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  9. #29
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Bryn Athyn, Pa.
    Posts
    1,618

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by volff1170 View Post
    Have another question regarding the Hydrant Assist Valves... I've looked at a few of them and my department is considering getting at least one. The thing is, We are in the process of installing permanent hydrant Storz adapters on all of our hydrants... All of the HAV's I've looked at are made for the threaded steamer connections... Can they be used with the Storz adapters on the hydrant?
    I can't speak for any other valve, but Humats are available with just about any kind of connection you want, even oddball threads. You can get the different couplings separately and they're easily changed. Anyone with a 1/2" or 9/16 wrench can do it.

    I agree with young son that I'd be afraid of putting any of the hydrant valves directly onto a hydrant with Storz. I have a couple of 4-1/2" Zip nut connectors for Humats sitting in my collection of stuff because they wouldn't stay on the hydrant. I don't know if it was due to the weight of the valve, the hydrant pressure or the fact that our youngest members were making the hydrant connections.

    The idea of using a short connector line and putting the valve on the ground has alot going for it, as long as it's long enough to keep the kinks out.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. Hale and Waterous Relief Valve Operational Checks
    By MFD018 in forum The Engineer
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 05-02-2011, 04:32 PM
  2. 5" INTAKES AND DISCHARGES
    By ffglenn in forum The Forum for Fire Service Webmasters
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 07-27-2001, 02:53 PM
  3. 5" INTAKES AND DISCHARGES
    By ffglenn in forum The Engineer
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 07-26-2001, 07:15 PM
  4. Large diameter hose
    By the rookie in forum The Engineer
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 07-22-2001, 11:11 AM
  5. RFP's
    By D Littrell in forum Apparatus Innovation
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-08-2000, 06:36 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