Interested In Advertising? | Contact Us Here
Warning!

 

Welcome to Clean It Up; the UK`s largest cleaning forum with over 34,000 members

 

Please login or register to post and reply to topics.      

 

Forgot your password? Click here

dai

  • Posts: 3503
Adopting a new standard
« on: February 07, 2008, 08:55:32 pm »
We often get questions on here about flow rates. Some reply in litres per minute or Veristream settings.
These all vary according to the system being used.
There is one simple way we can measure flow rates, and a way everyone would understand.
Hold your brush 6 ft above the ground, and measure in feet the distance from the brush to where the water hits the ground.
On my preferred flow rate, using this method, my water hits the ground about 7ft away, that's using 2mm pencil jets, so we could say we were working with a 6,7, or 8ft flow rate.
This method would apply to any system being used, as long as you try it in a spot sheltered from the wind. does this make sense? what do you all think? Dai

NWH

  • Posts: 16952
Re: Adopting a new standard
« Reply #1 on: February 07, 2008, 08:58:57 pm »
We often get questions on here about flow rates. Some reply in litres per minute or Veristream settings.
These all vary according to the system being used.
There is one simple way we can measure flow rates, and a way everyone would understand.
Hold your brush 6 ft above the ground, and measure in feet the distance from the brush to where the water hits the ground.
On my preferred flow rate, using this method, my water hits the ground about 7ft away, that's using 2mm pencil jets, so we could say we were working with a 6,7, or 8ft flow rate.
This method would apply to any system being used, as long as you try it in a spot sheltered from the wind. does this make sense? what do you all think? Dai
Good idea,when someone ask`s me about flowrate that`s exactly how i would describe it.

AuRavelling79

  • Posts: 25397
Re: Adopting a new standard
« Reply #2 on: February 07, 2008, 11:07:42 pm »
Personally I prefer litres per minute as that is easily measured by nicking my wife's measuring jug and seeing how much goes in in one minute. (Which ever brush/jet I use.)
It's a game of three halves!

macmac

Re: Adopting a new standard
« Reply #3 on: February 07, 2008, 11:25:53 pm »
What about this one, we could have a system of words like-

Bit low

Too high

Just right

Bit more

Mmmmm, not quite

GEEEEEEEEESS, turn that damn thing off!

I prefere the third one ;) (with 2mm pencil jets)

Tony


Conflagration2000

  • Posts: 146
Re: Adopting a new standard
« Reply #4 on: February 08, 2008, 06:04:51 pm »
God almighty this is so simple:

Length X Breadth X Pi r squared X the square root of the pressure at source = Whatever the hell Dai

was on about ???

Come on people, get a bloody grip  ;D
Just like that

dai

  • Posts: 3503
Re: Adopting a new standard
« Reply #5 on: February 08, 2008, 08:40:54 pm »
I have found a flaw with this method.
IT'S JUST TOO SIMPLE. Dai

Re: Adopting a new standard
« Reply #6 on: February 08, 2008, 09:00:05 pm »
You need an acronym. I suggest p, projected inflow standing standard

Tosh

Re: Adopting a new standard
« Reply #7 on: February 08, 2008, 09:05:25 pm »
We often get questions on here about flow rates. Some reply in litres per minute or Veristream settings.
These all vary according to the system being used.
There is one simple way we can measure flow rates, and a way everyone would understand.
Hold your brush 6 ft above the ground, and measure in feet the distance from the brush to where the water hits the ground.
On my preferred flow rate, using this method, my water hits the ground about 7ft away, that's using 2mm pencil jets, so we could say we were working with a 6,7, or 8ft flow rate.
This method would apply to any system being used, as long as you try it in a spot sheltered from the wind. does this make sense? what do you all think? Dai

Dai, sorry mate, but too complicated; there's at least two measurements to be taken with a tape measure, and if you mean that the brush head should be 90 degrees to the Earth, then you require a spirit level too.

This is the simplest way:

Personally I prefer litres per minute as that is easily measured by nicking my wife's measuring jug and seeing how much goes in in one minute. (Which ever brush/jet I use.)

Regards,

Tosh

dai

  • Posts: 3503
Re: Adopting a new standard
« Reply #8 on: February 09, 2008, 12:19:56 pm »
Ok, I give up. I assumed that everyone knows how high 6ft is, the average guy being 5ft 10, I also thought that most guys have a good idea how far 7ft is, and would know if his brush was at approx 90 degrees  too. I was only suggesting this as a rough guide when describing your flow rate to someone that is new to the game. Nothing scientific, just a rough rule of thumb for a new WFP guy to make a comparison between his own flow rate, and that of a more experienced guy. Dai

[GQC] Tim

  • Posts: 4536
Re: Adopting a new standard
« Reply #9 on: February 09, 2008, 12:56:08 pm »
Ok, I give up. I assumed that everyone knows how high 6ft is, the average guy being 5ft 10, I also thought that most guys have a good idea how far 7ft is, and would know if his brush was at approx 90 degrees  too. I was only suggesting this as a rough guide when describing your flow rate to someone that is new to the game. Nothing scientific, just a rough rule of thumb for a new WFP guy to make a comparison between his own flow rate, and that of a more experienced guy. Dai

It's all approx this approx that. Measuring jug takes less time, less guessing, and is 100x more accurate that all that guessing in feet.

Pj

Re: Adopting a new standard
« Reply #10 on: February 09, 2008, 01:28:12 pm »
I think the measuring jug method is most practical

but I can't find one with minute measures on it.

[GQC] Tim

  • Posts: 4536
Re: Adopting a new standard
« Reply #11 on: February 09, 2008, 01:49:14 pm »
I think the measuring jug method is most practical

but I can't find one with minute measures on it.

LOL hahaha  ;D