Why register? ...To Enhance Your Experience
+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 62
  1. #41
    Forum Member HFRH28's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    573

    Default

    Any pictures? I think you could just as simply drill and tap the can itself at the very top, but re-enforce and put a nut on the backside of the fitting. Run the hose from that fitting to the air source. The air source pressurizes the tank and the pickup tube works as normal. Only problem with this is it would affect the integrity of the tank, but if done right it would not be a problem.

    We did another test with the CAF extinguisher, nozzle-less. We used a 2' long piece of old light pole, and with just a tad of accelerant, lit it. The CAF extinguisher knocked it right out with little water, no smoldering or embers. After drying, we tried same again, but used conventional water-foam. With the water extinguisher I had to make a complete 360 around it to put it all out. After all was out, I was walking away and it re-lit. Needless to say I had to use the CAF extinguisher to finish putting it out.


  2. #42
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Joshua Texas
    Posts
    178

    Default

    Congratulations!!! you are well on your way to becoming a CAFS expert.

    I like your idea and think you are right about drilling the SS container with a proper fitting. Be careful though, and to those that haven't done this before, I might suggest... BE REAL CAREFUL.lol

    You put a big ol smile on MY face describing the CAFS putting out the other applications fire and you will be a welcomed new member of the CAFS converts. I can hardly wait to hear about your experiences when you upgrade to a full blown 1.5 or 1.75 CAFS hose. (185+ cfm)

    I think you can only imagine my amazment when I first saw a 6 inch CAFS flowing 6,000 gpm. (1,000 cfm) We covered a soccer field up in Canada at 3M's plant, it froze and looked like a glacier. We later used it to extinguish a coal mine fire.
    Mark Cummins

  3. #43
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Memphis, Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    1

    Default Using 1 Qt. Of ATC/AFFF in a 2 1/2 Gallon PW Extinguisher

    I have had great results when mixing 32 oz of ATC/AFFF in a 2 1/2 gallon pressurized water extinguisher. You get both an A rating greater than a 2 and between a 10 and 20 B rating equivalent. I put in 2 gallons of water and then add the ATC/AFFF. When inverting type Chemical Foam extingushers were popular prior to 1966, there were techniques necessary for applying the agent to a spill fire. The straight stream was directed to the ground just in front of the blazing fuel. The stream was actually banked off the ground and it deflected onto the blazing product. It actually worked very well for the day. This technique works very well with the ATC/AFFF extingtisher with a standard pressurized hose and nozzle. You will get great penetrating of deep seated Class A Fires with this mix. I also would rather use this extinguisher than and 5 or 10 lb ABC Powder extinguisher for Class A and B fires

  4. #44
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    19

    Default Winterize a Water Can

    Hi,

    I've been lurking for a while.

    I own a brand-new pressure-water extinguisher (Thanks EBAY) and live in Rural PA. I've had it in my trunk for the summer, and it has been used a couple of times for small brush fires at work, etc.

    Now that it is getting close to winter, and temps will be below freezing soon, I'm looking for some suggestions on how to "winterize my water can" so that I can still use it.

    Thanks,

    Jon

  5. #45
    Forum Member HFRH28's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    573

    Default

    I added a dab of RV Antifreeze to my mixture.

    I finally broke down and built another CAF ext. I drilled and tapped for an air fitting in the tank itself, with a nut on the backside. Then i did the usual procedures for a CAF ext, with two 1/16" holes in the up-pipe. Fill to the top with water, attach quick connect air hose to air source. My air source was a 5 gallon portable tank at 130 PSI. With two cups of foam, and the extinguisher full of water it made about 35 gallons of finished foam, in about one minute. The 5 gallon air tank does lose pressure, but it last long enough to empty the extinguisher. This works real well with the air outlet on our pumper. We're thinking about mounting an air hose reel beside the booster reel. When it's needed, plug the air line in, take the ext and go.

    BEWARE! If you make something like this be sure your fitting is SECURE. be sure you pressure test it in a safe environment before you use it! I set the tractor bucket over mine and pressure tested it to some 160 PSI or so.
    Service is the rent you pay for having space on earth.

  6. #46
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    40

    Default foam

    i accidentally posted to wrong section
    Last edited by abdulcroft; 10-23-2005 at 04:15 PM.

  7. #47
    Forum Member HFRH28's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    573

    Default

    I had an opportunity to use my above extinguisher in it's first real fire situation. Van fire (Chevrolet Astro) loaded with pine straw in front of my residence. I see same pouring smoke and throw the ext. and air tank on the back of the truck, pull out to it and see a fully involved engine fire. After debating whether to attempt it with an extinguisher or to go get a truck, a truck checked in route and I decided to go for it with the extinguisher.

    MAN! That thing WORKS! Using it in spurts i completly knocked down the fully involved engine fire then moved to the passenger compartment to knock down extension. By the time all fire was knocked out and first truck was on scene, I still had about a 1/2 gallon of water left. It's truely amazing what CAF can do! (Although bystanders probably thought I was going to pump up their tire when I walked up with a 5 gallon air tank.)
    Service is the rent you pay for having space on earth.

  8. #48
    Forum Member Co11FireGal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Country Roads, Take Me Home...
    Posts
    721

    Default

    Okay, I am absolutely captivated now...anyone have pic?
    IACOJ

    "And let us not grow weary while doing good, for in due season we shall reap it if we do not lose heart."

  9. #49
    Forum Member HFRH28's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    573

    Default

    If you'll send me a private message with an AIM screen name or an email address, i'll send pictures of the finished foam. I'll try to make a picture of the extinguisher, but it's not much to see.
    Service is the rent you pay for having space on earth.

  10. #50
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    45

    Default foam in extinguishers

    I add a product called FireAde 2000 to my 2.5 gallon extinguishers. the product is Ph neutral and have had NO problem with corrosion.

  11. #51
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    40

    Default dish soap

    posted to section by mistake
    Last edited by abdulcroft; 09-29-2008 at 05:54 PM. Reason: wrong section

  12. #52
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    23

    Default FireAde 2000 in demilled halon fire extinguishers... just what this wood yard needed

    We had tested FireAde 2000 concentrate in our small 2 1/2 gal water fire ext. and noted that it put out fires that a 5 lb dry chemical extinguisher would not touch, plus did not have the mess... We came accross some demilled 15 gal Halon fire extinguishers and modified them to hold 7 1/2 gal of water/fireade 2000 3% solution and pressurized them to 200 psi w/ nitrogen. I can attest that if a fire occurrs within 40 feet of the nozzle, it will be coated in foam and be put out within seconds. We have yet had to use more than one extinguisher in a fire, even hydraulic oil fires. seems this fireade 2000 foam cools the burning surface so it does not re-ignite. We are now looking into modifying spent 5 lb chemical fire ext. into foam/water/nitrogen extinguishers and mounting them in heavy equipment-they are so much more efficient. just my 2 bits...

  13. #53
    Forum Member FWDbuff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Pee-Ayy!
    Posts
    7,395

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scootertrs View Post
    We had tested FireAde 2000 concentrate in our small 2 1/2 gal water fire ext. and noted that it put out fires that a 5 lb dry chemical extinguisher would not touch, plus did not have the mess... We came accross some demilled 15 gal Halon fire extinguishers and modified them to hold 7 1/2 gal of water/fireade 2000 3% solution and pressurized them to 200 psi w/ nitrogen. I can attest that if a fire occurrs within 40 feet of the nozzle, it will be coated in foam and be put out within seconds. We have yet had to use more than one extinguisher in a fire, even hydraulic oil fires. seems this fireade 2000 foam cools the burning surface so it does not re-ignite. We are now looking into modifying spent 5 lb chemical fire ext. into foam/water/nitrogen extinguishers and mounting them in heavy equipment-they are so much more efficient. just my 2 bits...
    Anyone think about what any of those chemicals could do to non-stainless steel vessels?
    "Loyalty Above all Else. Except Honor."

  14. #54
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    469

    Default

    well SCwhatever, your musings are misguided and unsafe. Lets startbackwards with the 5lb extinguisher in the fact that according to "you" it is a safe thing to do this pouring of water and chemical in a cheap milled aluminum vessel. How much chemistry and engineering have you had to be able to professionally determine that it is OK?

    Secondly a few yrs back we had a rise in snake aide sales in the area. I even looked into the sales advertisement ratings versus their actual UL rating, guess what UL had it at a 3-6 and their inter company ads were 1-3

    Thirdly you appear to have some strange view on things with over 23,000 threads and over 300,000 posts you have found the one thing that is a "hot" topic or betters the fire service by resurecting a 7+ yr old thread, and you with only 20 posts come on.....
    Am I being effective in my efforts or am I merely showing up in my fireman costume to watch a house burn down?Ē (Joe Brown, www.justlookingbusy.wordpress.com)

  15. #55
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FWDbuff View Post
    Anyone think about what any of those chemicals could do to non-stainless steel vessels?
    I can attest to the fact that metals (steel and aluminum) that have been submerged in fireade 2000 for several months (I had the same concern and did it as a test) are unaltered. more importantly, seems that the sealing rubbers and orings of the fire extinguishers are unaffected by the solution.

    This stuff has saved our butt more than once... today, a mechanic was working on a small gas powered water pump at the machine shop. A small amount of gasoline had leaked out of the tank as the pump was tipped on its side. A spark ignited the gas when a screwdriver scraped the base of the pump. The fire engulfed the pump and the now freely flowing gasoline. One of my geniuses threw a bucket of water on the burning gasoline, only to help the fire spread. The shop manager reached for the fireade 2000 loaded fire extinguisher and with a single blast, a blanket of foam covered the burning gas, water pump and floor. Fire was out in less than 30 seconds even counting the time spent throwing water on the blaze! On Tuesday the local fire department will be performing a training session for their foam eduction system at our site. I will make sure all of my employees are present to observe, specially the water bucket brigade! You can never be too safe.

  16. #56
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Capt387 View Post
    well SCwhatever, your musings are misguided and unsafe. Lets startbackwards with the 5lb extinguisher in the fact that according to "you" it is a safe thing to do this pouring of water and chemical in a cheap milled aluminum vessel. How much chemistry and engineering have you had to be able to professionally determine that it is OK?

    Secondly a few yrs back we had a rise in snake aide sales in the area. I even looked into the sales advertisement ratings versus their actual UL rating, guess what UL had it at a 3-6 and their inter company ads were 1-3

    Thirdly you appear to have some strange view on things with over 23,000 threads and over 300,000 posts you have found the one thing that is a "hot" topic or betters the fire service by resurecting a 7+ yr old thread, and you with only 20 posts come on.....
    BTW, I am only sharing this because of today's experience. As far as chemistry goes, I do have a BS in chemistry from the University of Florida, but I am not relying on it for anything else other than using the scientific method to test my theories. I did not mean to offend you or anyone in the group. Maybe in my enthuthiasm I stepped on some toes. For that I apologize. I just know that the product did help us and our situation and believed that maybe someone could inexpensively improve their situation. My motives are totally pure and if you wish for me to share pictures of the extinguishers I mentioned, I would be glad to.

    What exactly is your point here. I am not trying to resurrect anything, I just wanted to share my experience. Sorry if I offended you or any other member.
    Last edited by scootertrs; 12-09-2010 at 08:20 PM.

  17. #57
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    469

    Default

    SC, there has been a rise of resurected posts, usually from banned members, that are just trying to mud up the waters here. On your chemistry degree only goes so far to experience. Some of us have a FSL degree. Let me guess in your submerged vessel test, did you just test the vessel, or the whole extinguisher entact (with no pressure). FWD and my point in the reaction stems from this your initial thoughts in this next question - Is water corrosive? Your first thought would be no but fire service experiece tells a different story. If you were a firefighter with any time in you would have had a chance to see that a 5" storze adapter on the steamer of the fire engine when opened has "barnacle like" corrosion on the inside. This is a reaction to water being in contact with two dissimilar metals (cast iron and alluminum alloy) and a end result is having the rookie scrape them out periodically. Back to my original point, unless you left the chemical mixture in the closed extinguisher (granted uncharged) for your exteded time then you results at best are superficial as there are several different assemblies used in dry chemical fire extinguishers all reaction tested to a "dry" agent, not a wet one. Ever consider what is in the gauge on that extinguisher? Some of the things to also consider in your results in your field (appears possible to be in the oil industry with discussion of field pumps and shop workers) would be-

    Temperature storage - Hot and or cold changes reativity
    Agitiation - vehicle mounted on a service truck.

    Also, another thought would be that the dept of transportation has certified the pressure vessel in relation to the chemical it was designed for in relation to testing and service life, now you have voided that. In the event of a mishap and a worker gets injured, whether its the fault of the extinguisher or not, any guess whats going to happen when OSHA finds out it had a agent not designed for tha particular pressure vessel?

    Look, I apologize if I seem critical and no you didn't step on my toes. I have lived my life the past 24+yrs in the fire service. I am a career FD officer and I volunteer in my home VFD on my days off. I just get a bit concerned when a "new" idea tends to re-invent the wheel and when one of the spokes breaks out a brother gets hurt or worse. I can usually smell these ideas out. For instance "several" years back a chemical saleman came to my FD and promoted a absorbent that would remove the flamability of spilled gasoline. We got a metal coffee can, put a inch or so of gasoline in it set the can down and a few seconds later dropped a match in it. Care to venture what happened?? We waved as the salesman dropped his head and left the parking lot.
    Am I being effective in my efforts or am I merely showing up in my fireman costume to watch a house burn down?Ē (Joe Brown, www.justlookingbusy.wordpress.com)

  18. #58
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    23

    Default

    I understand your point and appreciate your input. Very valid points. But I am not a resurrected banned ex-member and I was really excited about my sequence of events and wanted to share. Thus I shared it with the forum, not realizing that the thread was basically dead. After today's situation, I did some research in the forum regarding the topic and came up with this thread. I, maybe mistakenly, thought that it would be of interest and on point. You brought up some very valid points and I will undoubtedly be doing further research. After all, that is what I thought the purpose of the forums were for. And for God's sake, my project is just fodder for thought but I do believe that there is room in the theory for "proper" implementation of the concept. Believe me when I tell you that I try to read most postings, but only opine about the ones where I have personal knowledge of the topic. Again, thank you for bringing these issues up.

  19. #59
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    469

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scootertrs View Post
    I understand your point and appreciate your input. Very valid points. But I am not a resurrected banned ex-member and I was really excited about my sequence of events and wanted to share. Thus I shared it with the forum, not realizing that the thread was basically dead. After today's situation, I did some research in the forum regarding the topic and came up with this thread. I, maybe mistakenly, thought that it would be of interest and on point. You brought up some very valid points and I will undoubtedly be doing further research. After all, that is what I thought the purpose of the forums were for. And for God's sake, my project is just fodder for thought but I do believe that there is room in the theory for "proper" implementation of the concept. Believe me when I tell you that I try to read most postings, but only opine about the ones where I have personal knowledge of the topic. Again, thank you for bringing these issues up.
    I apologize for my harshness in thinking you were a previously banned member but the order of your prior post being toward one or two things and then a plunge to something older fit the profile to the T of a member like scarecrow and all the other aliases he added after.

    As for the concept, go further with the testing. I feel the weak link will be the gauge over time. Keep in mind that in discharge is where the product will come in contact with the pressure gauge components. From what I remember they are a bi-metal type (I think copper and tin if it is like a SCBA cylinder gauge) This all however is alleviated if you just stick with a stainless steel vessel (air over water extinguisher) as previously questioned. It is designed for liquids. I get really concerned when partially tested tested ideas come out and then all of a sudden there is a problem. To prove my point there was a chief in eastern KY that I knew that died over placing 3 rescue airbags together and died in an accident on Dec 23, 2004. Fast forward, this past summer I had a chief from a VFD in the next county brought over a airbag set to demo for a sales company and preceeded to say how the company "says" you can stack 3 bags together. I immediately stopped the presentation by saying, "oh, isn't that the same thing a chief in eastern KY was trained on too?" There is nothing like seeing a 2yr old standing next to her Dad's casket at christmas time to make you more pro-active toward firefighter safety. (the center airbag in the set ejected out striking and killing the chief).
    Am I being effective in my efforts or am I merely showing up in my fireman costume to watch a house burn down?Ē (Joe Brown, www.justlookingbusy.wordpress.com)

  20. #60
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Joshua Texas
    Posts
    178

    Default Tired of Nay Sayers

    Just another Nay Sayer? wanting to think heís going to put everyone with a new idea in their place.
    Iíve heard all this same ďyouíre going to get someone hurtĒ for the past forty years from higher officers than captains. Fact is, I have never seen or heard of anyone being hurt from using a pressurized vessel using regulated air or nitrogen at 100 psi or lower. Yes a lot of these containers will rust out for what ever reason causes the corrosion, (usually oxygen) lol. But when the first pin hole shows the tiny stream, it will bleed the tank empty and make a mess. You donít have to be a Dr. or Master to be careful. You canít cure stupid and if you stick the hose in your ear most of us fire fighters will tell you itís gonna hurt.

    CAFS works, foam wonít burn, (it IS water) it will form a blanket of water. It stays where you put it. It will suffocate fire caused by flammable fuels, liquid or solid. You can argue till youíre blue in the face, but you will still see CAFS is always better than water and you have to be stupid to not understand that. Yet there are still fire fighters that think all they needed was more water.

    I extinguished a coal mine fire last yea that took 7 hundred million gallons of CAFS foam to get the fire out and the million dollar a day mine back in operation. I used equipment that was available at the mine site and none of it was designed or engineered for the purpose I was using it for, but it all worked. No one got hurt, and a lot of out of work miners went back to work. If I had to have the stuff I used engineered to OSHA standards, it would not have been possible in this lifetime.

    What the fire service is in dire need of is people who look for ways to save lives, property and protect the environment, not how to shut down innovative ideas or brave men that take chances to do a very dangerous job.

    Try to encourage someone to find better ways get things done and do things safely.

    I think the stainless steel water extinguishers were a great idea, and I still have the very first one ever built on my Quint. It still makes great foam and will extinguish fires that the Quint canít.

    I am retiring very soon and I hope that someone will pick up where I am leaving off, to continue to develop the foam applications that will save lives, property and protect the environment.

    I hope this is useful information.

    Mark Cummins
    Mark Cummins

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Posting Permissions

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