[dai]

MBS I have posted a picture on the ground floor pole for domestics thread.

You will notice that this brush does not have jets in the middle of the bristles, the jets are nearer the top.
If you turned the brush over you would see that I have put the jets in the same row as the second row of bristles from the top.
I will post more pics when I next jet some brushes. Dai

[m.b.s.]

MBS I have posted a picture on the ground floor pole for domestics thread.

You will notice that this brush does not have jets in the middle of the bristles, the jets are nearer the top.
If you turned the brush over you would see that I have put the jets in the same row as the second row of bristles from the top.
I will post more pics when I next jet some brushes. Dai

no probs thank if you put them in the same row on the bottom of the brush so you put four jets in two top two bottom will this  be a lot better as in theory would you not be bruhing over clean water which is coming out of the bottom jets

[michael papworth]

Here are a couple of pictures of high-set jets. One of them is detail taken from Dai's picture (I hope that's OK with you, Dai) and the other one shows my Addis brush that had such jets in.

Dai's brush


My Addis brush - It's junk, btw. The Bentley is better.

[m.b.s.]

thanks wally what do you think about putting jets in the bottom as well as said on my last post

[michael papworth]

Now having jets high - I can say that it seems to be of some use. I did it and liked the results, even with a crappy brush.

High and low? I really couldn't say. I'm not experienced enough to give a practical answer. Haven't done it so I can't say for sure.

The problem is that window washing isn't an exact science. It's not possible to say, for instance that rinsing efficiency is proportional to water speed hitting the glass or some such thing. If it was, you could set up an equation and solve it for a given jet type or configuration.

Because of this, you can only really go on anecdotal evidence (like Luke's) or gut feeling.

My gut feeling is that it would use more water to little or no benefit. I've run this through the mental maths computer and the numbers really don't look encouraging.

[m.b.s.]

thanks for  advise 

[Jeff Brimble]

I have tried top and bottom jets, they are handy if you want to turn the brush upside down for doing the bottoms of patio windows and glass that is below you. Also handy for doing inset narrow slit glass in bays windows when you use the brush vertically the jets clean both vertical frame edges. I have 6 jets on my current brush to enable me to do this.

[michael papworth]

I have tried top and bottom jets, they are handy if you want to turn the brush upside down for doing the bottoms of patio windows and glass that is below you. Also handy for doing inset narrow slit glass in bays windows when you use the brush vertically the jets clean both vertical frame edges. I have 6 jets on my current brush to enable me to do this.

That's a lot of jets!!! And it's interesting.

What diameter are they?

Are they all on at once or are they selectable?

[Jeff Brimble]

Dont know the size but are probably a tad less than 1mm - Hozelock green ones, they come in diff sizes just to complicate things. Put whatever size ones in you need. The more jets the more water you need and less pressure so if you tilt the brush with the wrong set up you can find all the water coming out the lower jets and none out of the higher ones.
They have a fine accurate pencil jet, the internal has a vortex chamber to enable this.