Thread: How effective is this stream?
06-11-2001, 10:21 AM #26KEAFirehouse.com Guest
OK its my turn now
This is what is really going on with this line.
They pulled the 2 1/2 and positioned themselves in front of the house. Once in position they gave thunbs up for the enginerre to send the water.
Knowing the initial surge of water can send a line flying they pre-positioned the shutoff to the open position to minimize hose jump from the massive pressure the operator is sending. (Any operator seeing this fire would surely send a lot of pressure to the knob)
So, why the week looking stream? Simple! The photo was taken the moment the photographer saw water coming out of the nozzle. Thus, the stream is just getting started!
Had they taken a photo 5 seconds later they would have shown a much more aggressive stream.......If what I stated was true.
Just another possibility.
Stay Safe, Stay low, and Flow big water
First Strike Technologies, Inc
06-11-2001, 04:41 PM #27Captain GonzoFirehouse.com Guest
The pump operator/chauffeur/engineer may be in the process of switching the water supply from the Engine's tank to draft from the porta-tank and just throttled down for a moment to do the changeover!
Firefighters: Today's heroes protecting everyone's tomorrows!
[This message has been edited by Captain Gonzo (edited 06-11-2001).]
06-11-2001, 11:27 PM #28chief1001Firehouse.com Guest
I definately agree that not enough water is bieng supplied from the engine on this pic. Some things I noticed
1 the guys are not even leaning into this line, if you were flowing what this line is capable of you would probably situate yourself differantly.
2 the line appears to be making a 45 or 90 degree turn before the nozzle, we know that if any correct pumping pressure was being supplied, that hose would try to straighten itself out and those two would be struggling to fight the reaction of that let alone the nozzle reaction.
I also agree this picture was taken only moments after the bail was opened. I believe that maybe the engineer probably has not ramped the pressure up yet due to the nozzle just being opened.
06-12-2001, 03:49 PM #29ScooterRFDFirehouse.com Guest
Not going into hose size or GPM, what about the modified fog sometimes called a power cone or 30 degree fog. Its gets better displacment on water/steam conversion and will really upset any of the thermal balance.Just a thought. We us it as a primary stream on an interior attack at it is more effective at extinishment over any straight or solid stream. When we look at solid or straight we are looking more at reach.
06-12-2001, 10:16 PM #30FF/EMTSPANBAUERFirehouse.com Guest
Is a straight bore nozzel more effective than a fog stream?
I think this is a question that could be ponered on and opinionated for days. Both nozzels are very effective, if they are used for the purposes they were intended for.
On a 2 1/2" line, this can be a doozy. Don't get me wrong, this is a very effective means of attack, however sufficient manpower had better be available, otherwise your effectivness plummets. (FACT TO REMEMBER) Water weighs a little over 8lbs per gallon. In a 200ft section of 2 1/2" hose, (which is common lenght for most pre-connects) you are looking at probably 100+ gallons. Which translates to 800lbs. Not the easiest in the world to move around with a 2 on the line.
Straight bore nozzels were designed to deliver a solid stream of water into a well developed fire area. (i.e. Large, Open commercial structures, shopping malls, Airport hangers, Barns) What amazes me to this day, is that you can almoast consider straight bore nozzels as an unsung hero. They are always the preconnect which is pulled off on your maintnance night, and cleaned thoroughly to remove all the dust.
Now in this picture, it seems to me that no matter what nozzel choice the IC decides to use, it is a lost cause. Furthur more, if I were made aware that there was a fully charged propane tank sitting inside, just waiting to BLEVE; well I would think twice before placing a nozzel team 10ft from the structure.
In conclusion, nozzels are just like any other piece of equipment that is used in the fire service today. Each is effective is used properly & if used in the right situation. Trial & Error during your department's drill nights, will allow you to discover which is best for your district.
06-13-2001, 10:43 AM #31Dalmatian90Firehouse.com Guest
1.5" 11 feet/gallon .75lbs/ft
1.75" 8 feet/gallon 1lb/ft
2" 6.1 feet/gallon 1.3lbs/ft
2.5" 3.92 feet/gallon 2lbs/ft
4" 1.5 feet/gallon 5.6lbs/ft
5" 1 foot/gallon 8lbs/ft
2.5" uses about 25 gallons/hundred feet to charge and weighs in at 200lbs per 100 feet.
1.75" needs 12.5 gallons to charge a hundred feet, and weighs in at 100lbs per 100 feet.
Plus comparing current day top shelf fire hose to the old heavy water-absorbing cotton double jacket rubberlined and brass coupled fire hose can make an even more dramatic weight difference!
[This message has been edited by Dalmatian90 (edited 06-13-2001).]
06-13-2001, 09:42 PM #32ALSfirefighterFirehouse.com Guest
I'm with some of the others, its definately the right line (that's a no brainer), but it said it in the caption...rural, and while there is the water relay doesn't matter bandit out there, they obviously had a volume problem. As far as the smooth-bore/fog debate, I don't think with this job it really matters. This volume of fire, needs large volumes of water, and it doesn't matter or care what it comes out of. In fact the only question that comes to my mind is..How rural was it? If there is no other immediate exposure threat why not just conserve the water to prevent a wildfire and let it go. At the stage of involvement on the cover, to me if they didn't either just run out of water, or just getting it, they should have just shut down, you can see that the fire is consuming the amount of water that is being flowed. Overall I just don't see what you are gaining at the point of the pic by still attempting extinguishment, the entire structure is well involved, and the majority of the contents are completely destroyed.
The above is my opinion only and doesn't reflect that of any dept/agency I work for, deal with, or am a member of.
06-17-2001, 12:56 PM #33*LHSFirehouse.com Guest
There certainly isn't anything wrong with the nozzle in use in the photo. The crew of two or even one can easily handle the flow range of the tip as long as the pump operator figures out how to get it to the line.
The caption should read, "No pressure no flow."
Whether a rural FD or a city, it is the FD's job to bring enough water to address their challenges. Certainly, this is in the earlty stages of the event. I'd have a hard time understanding why the first preconnect off the rig can't produce a real fire stream.
We teach our rookies how to hold a 2 1/2" line flowing 250 gpm with a fog tip at 100 psi NP, standing with one finger. So if you know how to hold a hose it insn't too tough. We also teach a crew of two to advance a line flowing the same flow. We've never had a reason to change nozzles because the guys couldn't control or hold a hose line.
06-18-2001, 05:11 PM #34nshake67Firehouse.com Guest
Remember this simple saying:
"BIG FIRE BIG WATER"
06-19-2001, 02:58 PM #35*LHSFirehouse.com Guest
THOUGHTS ON THOUGHTS ON NOZZLES
//the guys are not even leaning into this line,
Are you sure you need to lean into a line flowing 200 to 300 gpm?
// if you were flowing what this line is capable of you would probably situate yourself differantly.
Why, they aren't going in are they?
//the line appears to be making a 45 or 90 degree turn before the nozzle, we know that if any correct pumping pressure was being supplied, that hose would try to straighten itself out and those two would be struggling to fight the reaction of that let alone the nozzle reaction.
I've seen 28 inch loops in hose at 300 psi. Maybe they have good hose.
//A 2 1/2" line, this can be a doozy. Don't get me wrong, this is a very effective means of attack, however sufficient manpower had better be available,
Isn't any firefighter over one on the line in this exterior attack a waste? Certainly one guy can handle any possible flow out of a 2 ½" line, can't they?
//otherwise your effectivness plummets.
Sitting on the hose or standing with one guy doing an exterior attack, how has the effectiveness plummeted?
(FACT TO REMEMBER) Water weighs a little over 8lbs per gallon. In a 200ft section of 2 1/2" hose, (which is common lenght for most pre-connects) you are looking at probably 100+ gallons. Which translates to 800lbs. Not the easiest in the world to move around with a 2 on the line.
Do you really move anything but the last 50 feet of line? The house would need to be bigger than 2500 square feet to use more hose, wouldn't it?
//A fog nozzle on a 2 1/2" line is much too difficult for two people to operate,
So use one!
//. That 100 p.s.i. nozzle pressure causes a lot of nozzle reaction.
A lot huh? Isn't the reaction at 250 gpm ZERO if the nozzleman knows what he is doing?
//2.5" is the correct size line.
So it is the hose size that puts out a fire not the flow rate?
Pull a modern day 2 ½" line it can flow what 0 to 325 gpm or maybe even 600 gpm. If the 2 ½" was the CORRECT sized line then the fire would have gone out.
NO this is an issue of flow, not hose size. A 1 inch line at the correct EP and right nozzle will flow more than the 2 ½" line in this poor cover shot.
I'd prefer a 1 ¾" line in this case and it can flow 383 gpm, be controlled and moved by one firefighter and kick this fires tail.
//The TFT is not the best choice,
Yeah it is the nozzles fault that the fire department in the photo can't figure out how to get water out of the nozzle?????? Come on get a grip!
//The TFT is not the best choice
All you boys in Dallas, Miami, Syracuse, LA County, Seattle, Houston, and the other 20,000 users listen up. You all made a bad choice. Your fires will not go out. Yeah right.
//The TFT is not the best choice
Will the nozzle flow its flow range? Yes. Is that flow range more than enough for almost any interior attack? Yes. Has it been in use for over 26 years successfully? Yes Does every major nozzle maker produce an automatic nozzle? Yes! So the opinion of the writer must be flawed.
// like other people have noted the stream doesn't look quite right. Having worked with TFT's in the past I'd say that the line isn't flowing anywhere near what it could.
So that is why the nozzle is the wrong choice? Maybe the FD should use buckets! Is the TFT the only nozzle that has to be pumped right?
//This is definatly a 2 1/2" fire as a minimum.
So, 264 gpm out of an 1 ½" line wouldn't be OK? So 383 gpm out of a 1 ¾" wouldn't work? Or 500 gpm out of a 2 inch wouldn't work either? The fire sees a 2 ½" line and goes out? Even with a 1 inch smooth bore tip only flowing 200 gpm?
// . The nozzle is doing exactly what it is supposed to do, maintain a good looking stream regardless of water supply,
It is doing just that. You smooth bore boys wouldn't be able to hit the building with this flow,
// The salesmen will tell you that the automatic will develop an effective stream no matter what the flow.
And it does and a smooth bore or fixed flow nozzle won't.
///Now lets define effective, to me it is a flow that is capable through reach and volume to overcome the BTU's being produced to extinguish the fire, without this the fire will continue to burn until it is small enough to be controlled by the water supply available. Fire flow MUST be matched to the size of the fire.
So pray tell how do you design a nozzle to do that? That ain't a nozzle issue. The TFT will o all those things if yo use the right sized hose, pump the correct pressures. In fact no nozzle can do the above unless the pump operator has his act together.
//The fact that the firefighters pictured are kneeling may indicate a lack of pressure and or volume exiting the fog nozzle they are operating.
Or it may not.
// This could be due to a malfunctioning nozzle and or low water pressure in the area.
There is zero evidence to support your claim the nozzle could be malfunctioning.
There is 100 percent evidence that low water pressure in the area of the hose line in use is the problem.
//At any rate this fire , in my opinion is beyond the capabilities of even large handlines.
So I pull a 1000 gpm handline off my pumper and there is no way I can put this fire out?
//But if large handlines are all that were available here, smoothbore nozzles would be a more desirable
I see. Let's say 100 gpm is flowing out of that nozzle. You have the same EP and flow rate that the TFT has. Your 1 1/8" smoothbore would reach out a whopping 8 feet from the nozzle. You'd only have 9 psi nozzle pressure, but you have the same 100 gpm and less reach and allegedly more penetration…10 feet worth. It is the EP not the nozzle…geeesh!!!!!
///choice to bring this incident to it's inevitable conclusion.
Which is to burn to the ground????
Ever see the movie the nozzleman or Coordinated fire attack? They took on buildings this large with 60 and 95 gpm handlines.
// I would prefer large caliber master streams to try to darken down this heavy volume of fire.
So what do you do drive around the building to get every room knocked down? It can't work according to your own words, if "it is beyond the ability of the largest handlines" 1000 gpm, what does the deck gun offer for flow?
/// Many of you hose humpers out there that have time on the job know that there's a time and place for straight stream, narrow stream,narrow fog and fog patterns during interior operations.
And what type of nozzle can deliver all three patterns? Yeah that is right the combination fog nozzle. Can a smooth bore do all three? NO. SO if you want flexibility and a full range of options in your crews hands…Guess what nozzle will provide it?
//After being "lobstered" a time or two in the past
I believe there is only one way to get lobstered, not use the nozzle right. SO that is operator error not the nozzles fault,
// I'm not sure the old-timer that told me this was right but it stuck w, I'll take the steam burns anyday if a wide fog stream, swirled in a good old fashioned "O" pattern, applied to heavy heat or flame will knock the fire down.
And how do you do that with nozzle you suggest we use for the fire in the photo? A smooth bore doesn't make a good fog, but the combo nozzle in the photo sure does.
/// The nozzles do just too good of a job breaking up water for indirect type attacks. Even on straight stream it just won't do it.
So two 250 gpm streams, one coming out of a smooth bore and the other coming out of a combo nozzle…are yo saying one wouldn't put the fire out? Are you saying it is the nozzle not the flow that puts the fire out just like the guys who preach it is the hose size that puts fire out? I wonder why all these departments out all their fires out? Why hasn't NFPA banned all these horrible nozzles that have served for 50 years???
/// Sometimes the nozzle operator is not even aware of it because of his position. The smooth bore with whatever tip you would like(I prefer a 1-1/4 330 gpm) would be a better choice just because the stream would make it to the bldg before it evaporated.
So you see the stream in the photo all 100 gpm of it evaporating before it gets to the fire? It is penetrating, it is getting the floor wet, it just isn't enough. 330 gpm through that same nozzle wouldn't put the fire out equally The combo tip at 100 psi would definitely have better reach and more impact.as well?
//The stream can be managed by the same number of people because the reaction force is less for the same amount of gpm.
Reaction force is just as much an issue of hose control as flow. If you don't know what you are doing the hose wins, if you do, you win. The momentary reaction of a SB tip is higher than a fog nozzle at any and all flows.
//It has been my experience, every time, that an automatic nozzle will use more psi to operate than any other nozzle.
Every time??????? SO a 50 psi nozzle doesn't use more pressure than the automatic in emergency low pressure override at 30 psi, at 40 psi,, and at 45 psi??? Everytime? Always? Wrong!
/// There are automatics out there that take more than 25 psi to just activate the nozzle, forget about any type of stream.
Obviously that isn't an issue in this photo now is it? There are nozzles out there 100% of all of them made that require the pump operator to do his job. Why buy the ¼ to ½ million dollar fire truck if you are not going to pump the line? Would there even be a forum if the engineer was doing his job? SO we should all change nozzles or teach the pump operator how to do his job?
//It is obvious that at the moment the picture was taken there was not enough pressure at the tip for some reason. To assume there was or blame the lack of reach/volume on an auto is nonsense.
So one guy can't hold a 2 ½" FOG LINE FLOWING 250 GPM AT 100 PSI np? Yeah right!
06-21-2001, 09:49 PM #36FF/EMTSPANBAUERFirehouse.com Guest
Well guys, I don't see any further need for any of us to respond to another post. Just ask this gentleman, he seems to have the right answer for anything!!!!
...by the way, you forgot to tell us how you single handedly extinguished the fire with your 2 1/2" in one hand, and your axe in the other.
--Stay Safe, and Remember our Fallen Brothers and Sisters.
Firefighter / EMT-B / Dispatcher
06-21-2001, 10:30 PM #37BLACKSHEEP-1Firehouse.com Guest
You know those double whiz-bang emergency overide better than a smooth bore on a straight stream anyone can hold at 750gpm through an 1-3/4 line automatic nozzles? They make great lamps, and if you wire them just right you can even use the bale as a dimmer.
06-22-2001, 10:54 AM #38mongofire_99Firehouse.com Guest
This is becoming laughable. Most of us with more than one or two days on the job can clearly see the pressure is not enough. But some of us are so set in our ways that we will say anything to support an indefensible position. To make blanket statements that the smoothbore is better than the fog (or the other way around) in this situation is a very weak position to hold...
Now on to the questions that will probably never get answered...
But if large handlines are all that were available here, smoothbore nozzles would be a more desirable choice to bring this incident to it's inevitable conclusion.
How much more water are you flowing through your smoothbore handlines than auto handlines will deliver?
What size smooth bore should these guys be using?
What would the flow through your chosen smoothbore with the low pressure these guys have in the picture?
What would the stream reach be from your chosen smoothbore at that low of a pressure?
let's say that they do have enough pressure, the stream is not getting to the fire.
What a stretch! Lets 'pretend' they don't have enough pressure when it's obvious they don't?
Did you get the braile edition of FireHouse?
Do they or do they not have enough pressure?
What would the flow be through your chosen smoothbore at the same pressure they have?
Would your chosen smoothbore make an effective stream at that pressure for this fire?
How far would your your chosen smoothbore reach at that pressure?
The smooth bore with whatever tip you would like(I prefer a 1-1/4 330 gpm) would be a better choice...
So, in your own words, "let's say that they do have enough pressure."
What size smoothbore would make an effective stream at the pressure they are flowing?
...just because the stream would make it to the bldg before it evaporated.
Now a stream just has to make it to the building before it evaporates to be effective?
What happened to volume, reach and penetration?
The porch is part of the building, if the stream fell short of the fire but got the porch all wet, it has made it to the building and meets your definition of effective.
It appears that the stream they have is at least making it to the porch. Using your own words it must be effective.
It has been my experience, every time, that an automatic nozzle will use more psi to operate than any other nozzle.
Smooth bore - 50psi
50psi Low pressure fog - 50psi
Which one needs more pressure to operate?
(To be fair, you may have never seen a low pressure fog and your statement admitting your limited experience might be true. But you should still be able to answer the questions.)
Forget the Fog vs. Smooth bore, and the 1 1/2" vs. 2 1/2" debates.
In this particular instance, you can't. It's why the whole thing started. A smoothbore fan wants to slam autos with inaccurate and incomplete information using a picture that captured 1/125 of a second (at the most) of the early stages of an incident.
On a 2 1/2" line, this can be a doozy. Don't get me wrong, this is a very effective means of attack, however sufficient manpower had better be available, otherwise your effectivness plummets. ... Not the easiest in the world to move around with a 2 on the line.
Would a 2" be easier to move with two people on the line?
This volume of fire, needs large volumes of water, and it doesn't matter or care what it comes out of.
The required volume delivered in the required amount of time in the required stream puts out the fire. We all remember the basics don't we?.
In this case a smoothbore or an auto will do fine. To say one would be better than the other is stupid.
[This message has been edited by mongofire_99 (edited 06-22-2001).]
06-22-2001, 01:02 PM #39BLACKSHEEP-1Firehouse.com Guest
It is getting laughable, that's why I made a joke of it. let's face it no one really knows what happened at that moment in time. I just don't appreciate my comments being taken out of context. I'll stand by my original statement, in it's entirety.....
Even the one about lamps.
[This message has been edited by BLACKSHEEP-1 (edited 06-22-2001).]
06-22-2001, 02:13 PM #40mongofire_99Firehouse.com Guest
It is getting laughable, that's why I made a joke of it.
OK then, if your original statement that you stand by is a joke, disregard the rest of this and please except my apology. If it is a joke it's a funny one (you're not iferawhatyoufight are you?.
let's face it no one really knows what happened at that moment in time.
I just don't appreciate my comments being taken out of context. I'll stand by my original statements, in it's entirety.
And you refuse to answer any of the questions that could demonstrate your position to be on shaky ground. No sweat, happens all the time in these forums - so often in fact anyone that posts here can predict when it will.
OK, here's your original statement...
let's say that they do have enough pressure, the stream is not getting to the fire. I've seen this problem before using fog nozzles. The nozzles do just too good of a job breaking up water for indirect type attacks. Even on straight stream it just won't do it. Sometimes the nozzle operator is not even aware of it because of his position. The smooth bore with whatever tip you would like(I prefer a 1-1/4 330 gpm) would be a better choice just because the stream would make it to the bldg before it evaporated. The stream can be managed by the same number of people because the reaction force is less for the same amount of gpm.
Now, with every intention of keeping this civil, what parts of this statement do you stand by?
The part that says:
The nozzles do just too good of a job breaking up water for indirect type attacks. Even on straight stream it just won't do it.
Do you really believe that when properly flowed and operated, the auto in the picture will not put out this fire?
Everyday across this great land of ours fires just like this are put out in the same short order with autos and smoothbores.
Are you saying you stand by this statement that when taken in context and in spite of everyday experiences (my own just yesterday, except we used an SM-30 on a 2" @ 325gpm) from around the US has you telling us autos can't put out this fire? ("Even on straight stream it just won't do it.")
If you still maintain that position let me ask you the following:
How in the world are fires like this going out for departments that don't use smoothbores?
Psychic ability to will the fire out with an auto nozzle that "just won't do it"?
Gotta be something. What's the reason?
Or are the departments just putting on a good show for the cameras and onlookers until the fire burns down to the size and into a situation an auto can handle?
How about this part:
The smooth bore with whatever tip you would like(I prefer a 1-1/4 330 gpm) would be a better choice just because the stream would make it to the bldg before it evaporated.
If I prefer a .875" or a 1" tip, that would be a better choice than the 300gpm plus auto the guys are using? In context with what you said, whatever size smoothbore I choose has to be a better choice, because as you said and in context "The smooth bore with whatever tip you would like (I prefer a 1-1/4 330 gpm) would be a better choice just because the stream would make it to the bldg before it evaporated."
And if you'd prefer a 330gpm tip, wouldn't 350gpm be better, more water properly applied makes the fire go out quicker doesn't it?
But then again, why are you limiting yourself to 330gpm with a 1.25" smoothbore? You probably flow 415gpm on it from the deckgun or a groundset.
What's the difference if the water is coming out of a handline, deckgun or groundset? An 1.25" tip is a 1.25" tip.
Is it just too hard to hold?
Or is it just that's what we've always been taught so that's the way it's gotta be?
Again, gotta be something, what's the reason?
06-22-2001, 04:35 PM #41BLACKSHEEP-1Firehouse.com Guest
Who said the fire would only go out with a smoothbore? I happen to think it will go out faster and with less work by using a smoothbore. You seem to take the approach they will only go out using your brand of nozzle...Did I Strike a nerve? My last experience on an "automatic nozzle" was on a ladder truck, with a local dept, it was advertised as being a 2,000gpm nozzle. fair enough. We tried to flow it at 2,000. When the stream hit about 1600gpm it started acting up. When we looked into it we were informed by the rep that it was "adjusted" to have agood stream between 1,000-1,500gpm, because that was where it would usually end up.However it could be re-adjusted,( would that make it a semi-automatic?)That is a pretty true statement, arranging flows of over 1500gpm for a single unit on the fireground can get involved. But it would seem to me that the theory of " a good stream at any gpm using an automatic nozzle" didn't really hold up in this case, and it's not the first time. Which is one of the reasons why I would prefer a gpm adjustable nozzle over an automatic. I'll admit, getting a good stream over a 750-2000gpm range is a pretty daunting task for a nozzle mfg. In this case it is now irrelevant since this truck carries an selection of stacked tips on it and the automatic stays in the compartment.
[This message has been edited by BLACKSHEEP-1 (edited 06-22-2001).]
06-22-2001, 05:09 PM #42mongofire_99Firehouse.com Guest
Who said the fire would only go out with a smoothbore?
OK then to be fair, what does this statement of yours mean?
"The nozzles do just too good of a job breaking up water for indirect type attacks. Even on straight stream it just won't do it."
What is the it that an auto or other fog operating and flowing the proper pattern and volume won't do?
I happen to think it will go out faster and with less work by using a smoothbore.
Now you've stated an opinion like an opinion, not like a fact like you did previously.
You seem to take the approach they will only go out using your brand of nozzle...
Never said that. In fact I said these fires are put out in the same short order with autos and smoothbores. And we use both.
...Did I Strike a nerve?
Not at all.
As to the rest of what you wrote, no experience with having to re-adjust an auto so I can't comment on that. Sounds like you were BS'd by a rep though.
And I noticed you still didn't answer any of the questions...
06-22-2001, 11:52 PM #43StaylowFirehouse.com Guest
It's clear to me that the more concentrated stream and better penetration of the smoothbore nozzle would work more efficiently in this situation than the automatic's straight stream. But, if you want to use the other options out there, no problem. This is a personal preferance call that needs to be made by those who are faced with the task.
06-23-2001, 10:32 AM #44BLACKSHEEP-1Firehouse.com Guest
I think I've said this already, if I pulled a handline for this fire, it would be a 330gpm 1-1/4 tip at 50 psi with 125lbs reaction force, 2 guys can move that line. I would do this for reach and penetration. If, there was a problem with pressure they can change the tip size, but at some point they will not flow enough water to put this out. So let me get this straight your saying that it's ok not to have enough pressure because an auto matic makes the stream better? So it's the looks of the stream not gpm that puts the fire out? One guy recomended flowing 380gpm on this from a 1-3/4 line? that's 190 lbs of reaction force on a 100psi nozzle,218psi of friction loss,(PER 100FT!!) lets see now, 318 psi on the panel... if you are at draft you've just made your 1,000gpm pumper capable of less than 500gpm....skip the backup line, or maybe use a booster. It's rural, maybe you get forestry to do an air drop. I was going to e-mail a buddy about you automatic guys, but I couldn't remember if anal-retentive had a hyphen.
[This message has been edited by BLACKSHEEP-1 (edited 06-23-2001).]
06-23-2001, 01:30 PM #45mongofire_99Firehouse.com Guest
So let me get this straight your saying that it's ok not to have enough pressure because an auto matic makes the stream better?
How did you come up with that?
So it's the looks of the stream not gpm that puts the fire out?
How did you get that?
Especially since us either-nozzle-will-work-fine-when-properly-flowed guys will state clearly, plainly and repeatedly that either nozzle properly flowed and operated is suitable for this fire.
I realize that you want the 2.5" with the 1.25" tip. Not a bad selection and it will work just as well as the line in the picture when and if both are flowed properly.
But what would your line make better with the pressure these guys had when the pic was taken?
And you still didn't answer any of the questions...
Maybe the buddy you were going to email could help you with the answers...
06-23-2001, 05:04 PM #46BLACKSHEEP-1Firehouse.com Guest
Let's make this real simple for you, if you have a smoothbore and not enough pressure you can go to a smaller tip and usually get the stream back, If you have a gpm adjustable fog and not enough pressure you can go to a lower gpm setting and usually get the stream back. If you have an automatic you better pray that it has a wide enough operating band to operate with less pressure, because there is nothing you can do to as a nozzleman to help yourself. Now at some point you will get to the fact that you are not flowing enough water to extinguish the fire and of course that's going to be a problem. Now if I'm going to put the most amount of water on the fire, with the least amount of personnel it's going to be with a smooth bore nozzle, not that there is no place for fogs, there is, but I intend to put this out, not mist it. There are fogs out there and water does come out of the end, but they come with a price in reaction force, and I've illustrated that when you use them on a small enough line and try to force a lot of water through them that you will eventually pay the price in pumping capacity as well. I've also illustrated that automatics are not capable of covering large ranges in pressure ,as is sometimes advertised,in another prior post. Now, if you go back through the past communication(s), you will find that your questions have been answered, sometimes several times.
[This message has been edited by BLACKSHEEP-1 (edited 06-23-2001).]
06-23-2001, 06:11 PM #47mongofire_99Firehouse.com Guest
if you have a smoothbore and not enough pressure you can go to a smaller tip and usually get the stream back
OK, now that it's simple.
We know that the pressure is way too low (at least most of us do), so with that in mind, what size smoothbore tip makes the flow in the picture an effective stream for this fire?
I'll admit that there isn't an smoothbore, auto or adjustable fog that can turn the pressure they have into an effective stream for the fire presented.
You'll say it all day about an auto or adjustable, do you have the eggs to admit your smoothbore is in the same category in this case?
If you have a gpm adjustable fog.... because there is nothing you can do to as a nozzleman to help yourself.
So you've gotten yourself in over your head and you have a ****-poor inneffective stream with all three nozzles.
Now if I'm going to put the most amount of water on the fire, with the least amount of personnel it's going to be with a smooth bore nozzle,...
How much do you want to put on it? You've been talking about 330gpm. We can (you can too) put 500gpm in service in the same short amount of time with one person on a 2.5", smoothbore or auto, doesn't matter.
not that there is no place for fogs, there is, but I intend to put this out, not mist it.
Will an auto on a straight stream and flowing the proper flow (say 330gpm) and properly operated put this fire out?
Simple question, easy to answer Yes or No?
I've also illustrated that automatics are not capable of covering large ranges in pressure, as is sometimes advertised,in another prior post.
Yes, you might be correct in your instance, but overall you are incorrect. That I'm aware of, autos are available to cover ranges to 4,000gpm. How much larger range do you want?
Now, if you go back through the past communication(s), you will find that your questions have been answered, sometimes several times.
I agree, some of them have been answered, not the one I'm really interested in, but you'll never answer that one.
06-23-2001, 07:27 PM #48BLACKSHEEP-1Firehouse.com Guest
I've said it before, a properly operating fog nozzle will put this fire out, if you just stand there and stare at it, it will go out as well, it'll just take a little longer. The smooth bore is still my choice. If you want to know what the nozzle pressure is in the picture I'll guess it's somewhere between 40-60psi. I believe that it's somewhere in that area since I've flowed a similar nozzle to the one in the picture not too long ago, right off of a hydrant connection at 58psi and it looked about the same. That is prime smooth bore territory, and if it's not flowing at that pressure I would go from a 1-1/4" to a 1" and go back after it. If you think that you can go to some pressure overide and get the stream back, you might, but what you've done is overide the automatic nozzle and basically turned it into a gpm adjustable fog. Now here is another possibility, maybe the nozzle is on a flush setting and it's being adjusted.Boy ain't this fun!!
..Just so you know, about 15 minutes ago I went to another station that had some of the nozzles lying around that appear to be identical to the one in the picture. I took a flow gauge, and a stacked tip 1-1/4(of course)and put them on a hydrant with a globe valve. At 50psi the smoothbore looked good, all the way down to 40 psi. The automatic was a pooch at 50 psi. The stream went out about 8ft, even when I changed the bale position. Today, 15 minutes ago with that gauge, it took 70psi on the auto to make the stream look ANYTHING like the one in the photo. I did that because I wanted to make sure I wasn't BSing anyone out there. So, if you don't mind, I would like to amend the above statement to indicate that I believe that the nozzle in the picture has AT LEAST 60psi on it.
[This message has been edited by BLACKSHEEP-1 (edited 06-23-2001).]
06-23-2001, 11:40 PM #49BIG PAULIEFirehouse.com Guest
For anyone that is intrested, I will be teaching a large caliber stream class at the Firehouse Expo next month. Alot of what is being discussed on this thread can be reproduced on the drill field which I think can settle most of it once and for all. I will have flow meters and pressure gauges. Believe it or not alot of the stuff LHS is talking about is true. I think I can make believers out of you without ridiculing. We will show how to get the flows and reach from both smooth bores and automatics using special techniques and specific operating pressures.
1-3/4" hose up to around 380 gpm
2" hose up to around 450gpm
2-1/2 and 3" hose 500 to 600 gpm all day.
Handle smooth bore tip nozzle pressures up to 115 psi
I get the impression that some of the feelings expressed on this thread are based on the way we have always done it VS thinking out of the box for new ideas. I have said it befor and I will say it again. How much resistance do you think there was when we went from horses to engines?
06-24-2001, 01:25 PM #50pumpertankerFirehouse.com Guest
If you are using a smooth bore you can always go to a smaller tip? Always is an awfully big word. That means all users of smooth bore tips used stacked tips with a flow range from 50 to 350 gpm? We know that is not true. FDNY for example has two tips for 1 3/4" hose, a 15/16th and an overhaul low flow tip. That is a drop of 130 gpm between tips. If you are suggestiong life gets better on this fire with a good 1/2 smooth bore 50 gpm stream I'd beg to differ Blacksheep. So yo get an lousy stream with a smooth bore too, great.
FDNY's 2 1/2" lines don't have a stack. So ALWAYS doesn't work here, however the nozzle in the picture can adjust automatically as can all autiomatics to their entire flow range. You'd need 7 to 9 smooth bores to cover the same range properly. If water supply wasn't an issue we wouldn't have seen a bad stream in the photo.
The comments about the selecto flow are right on. At least 80% of the automatics on the market and in the field will produce streams with less than 100 psi and 50 gpm at the tip, either thru override features tht date back to the early 70's or they have NPs that begin at zero. Is it really asking that much to have a pump pressure of 100 psi to get the 20% that won't make a stream to work? I mean what is your minimum standard to do this job? One glove is not being fully dressed nor is 100 psi at 50 gpm. The smooth bore wouldn't look real good at 100 psi and 50 gpm either. This is not a nozzle issue, it is a pump operator issue.
Pretty stange you bring up nothing you can do about it as a nozzleman and then say you operated the same nozzle at 58 psi with the stream in the picture. So if 58 produces a good reach, tight pattern, with what little you supplied, what else do you want? Then yo amend it by two psi or more. Operating at 50 instead of 58 results in a whopping 2 pound reduction in reaction, will the crew even know?
You know when their is too much pressure or reaction the crew can gate back the automatic and keep the same reach, which smooth bore allows you to do that?
The comment about the most gpm with least amount of people. The answer will be one no matter what nozzle is used in this situation, right? One is the minimum staffing for a fire hose.
The "I'm going to put the most amount of water on the fire", comment is certainly wrong suggesting a smooth bore would be the choice for the fire in the picture. Any nozzle could do that and a deck gun better. This is as the caption suggested is a rural event where using your water wisely is rule 1. High flow is not the best way to address the fire.
A high expansion foam tip would by far be first, 2nd a low expansion tip, CAFS would be third and the fastest knockdown, a fog gel attack 4th, A low ex Class A attack 5th , a wide fog exterior attack with class A foam fourth with the 2nd fastest knockdown, a wide fog exterior attack with water fifth witht e 3rd fastest knockdown, and any kind of smooth bore of straight stream combo nozzle next. RIGHT?
Certainly the CAFS line would move easier than any water stream. A flow 50% of that is needed for water to do the job, too. Least amount of people would be a 60 gpm booster and one guy going window to window.
"water comes out at the cost of reaction"? Oh, use a wide fog and steam this thing out, reaction will be at least 125 pounds less than the smooth bore you suggest.
"I've illustrated that when you use them on a small enough line and try to force a lot of water through them that you will eventually pay the price in pumping capacity as well" That was the sorriest arguement you've ever made. This fire does not by your own words require anyone to anywhere close to pump capacity with their fire engine.
Using the smallest allowable NFPA pump for a pumper allows you to use any size line from 1" to 5" made to achieve a flow to put this fire out. RIGHT?
"I've also illustrated that automatics are not capable of covering large ranges in " Define a wide range. 50 to 250 gpm at 45 to 110 psi s this a wide range? Or 70 to 325 gpm at 75 psi, or 30 to 350 gpm at 20 to 120 psi? Or 200 to 1000 gpm at 40 to 120 psi. How about 500 to 4000 gpm at 75, 80, 90, 100, 110 or 120 psi...you pick the np at the time of use. Please tell me what smooth bore tip has that flow range and psi range. How many tips will you need? That automatic data is taken off the manufacturers web sites. I bet they come pretty close to that. What proof do you have they don't?
" if it's not flowing at that pressure I would go from a 1-1/4" to a 1" and go back after it." 60 gpmfrom a 1" smooth bore will go 8 to 10 feet, that is suppose to be a solution, the automatic is giving better reach and a stream than that!
"If you think that you can go to some pressure overide and get the stream back, you might," So? If yo liik at the photos the crew never lost their stream did they?
" but what you've done is overide the automatic nozzle and basically turned it into a gpm adjustable fog." No it is not! It is a fixed flow nozzle at that point.
"Now here is another possibility, maybe the nozzle is on a flush setting and it's being adjusted." You sure you operated one of these from a hydrant recently? If so you'd know the nozzle in the picture flushes in wide fog only.
"I took a flow gauge, and a stacked tip 1-1/4(of course)and put them on a hydrant with a globe valve. The stream went out about 8ft, even when I changed the bale position. " So which is it? You said earlier you got the stream in the foto, now you are saying 8 feet.
"At 50psi the smoothbore looked good, all the way down to 40 psi. The automatic was a pooch at 50 psi. " Gee the smooth bore could only handle a 10 psi drop but the automatic handled a 50 psi drop, 20% versus 50%, there is a fair test. Who the heck fights fire at 50 psi off hydrant pressure? Ehat is the point? If you are going to operate at those pressures use a LP fog and compare it to a smoothbore.
It is really hard to support you when the claims are so wild.
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)