How do automatic fire hose nozzles work?

AI Thread Summary
Automatic fire hose nozzles, such as those from Task Force Tips (TFT), maintain a constant nozzle pressure by adjusting the outlet aperture, which compensates for upstream friction losses as flow rate increases. This design maximizes flow rate while adhering to a specified nozzle pressure, typically around 700 kPa. The discussion raises questions about how the throttle slide valve reduces flow without creating turbulence, suggesting that energy loss may contribute to increased internal energy of the water. Concerns about turbulence and its effects on flow dynamics highlight the complexity of balancing pressure and flow rate in these nozzles. Understanding these mechanisms is crucial for optimizing firefighting effectiveness.
russell2pi
Messages
10
Reaction score
0
How do "automatic" fire hose nozzles work?

I'm hoping someone can explain to me how "automatic" fire hose nozzles work. As in TFTs (Task Force Tips). I have a background in physics and since becoming a volunteer firefighter for my own interest have been working through some of the physics behind firefighting. I am happy with fixed-diameter nozzles, which I understand as a device that converts (static) pressure to velocity (dynamic pressure) -- Bernoulli's principle. But these selectable-flow-rate nozzles baffle me (pun intended). TFT have long descriptive article:

http://www.tft.com/literature/library/files/ltt-010.pdf

but it doesn't make much sense to me. It talks as if pumps are constant flow devices, not constant pressure devices (as operators usually regulate them to be). It also talks about producing a constant "nozzle pressure" of 100 psi and seems to indicate that this is the pressure of the ejected stream (Fig 13) when I would have thought the stream's static pressure was atmospheric (0 gauge) and neglecting friction loss the difference between this and pressure immediately upstream of the nozzle is equal to the constant pump pressure.

So, is the above document very confused, or am I, or both?

Is the nozzle a lossy device, that simply dissipates power through turbulence around a sharp obstruction (Fig 12) so as to uphold the promise of a "constant nozzle pressure"? If so, this doesn't really live up to the hype of providing the best stream possible for the available water.

Or is it a conservative device, that regulates flow past a nearly-lossless spring-loaded obstruction (fig 16a)? If so, how does that work out-- what is the relationship between pressure and flow rate? I am struggling with ram pressure vs static pressure and the effects of angled faces and pressure gradients.

Hoping someone can help :).
 
Engineering news on Phys.org


FWIW I have nutted out half of the answer.

They do maintain a constant pressure across the nozzle, by adjusting the outlet effective aperture and relying on upstream friction losses to reduce pressure as flow rate increases. Effectively it maximises flow rate for the system and pump pressure given the constraint of 700 kPa nozzle pressure.

That's when the flow selector is a full throttle. I haven't yet worked out how the flow selector works or whether it really does ensure a constant flow.
 


OK, I *think* the other half of the story is the flow control throttle.

What I'm wondering about is the claim that the throttle slide valve "reduces flow" (drops pressure) without creating turbulence.

How is this actually achieved at the particle level? The lost energy must go into the internal energy of the water by raising its temperature. This occurs by giving particles random kinetic energy. If there is any spatial coherence of the velocity field then you have turbulence. Likewise if particles lose forward kinetic energy to the valve walls, again surely this would happen with some spatial coherence, inducing eddies and so forth. Or is it the case that turbulence will be occurred but it stabilises over a short path length and is not evident some distance downstream of the throttle?
 
Hi all, I have a question. So from the derivation of the Isentropic process relationship PV^gamma = constant, there is a step dW = PdV, which can only be said for quasi-equilibrium (or reversible) processes. As such I believe PV^gamma = constant (and the family of equations) should not be applicable to just adiabatic processes? Ie, it should be applicable only for adiabatic + reversible = isentropic processes? However, I've seen couple of online notes/books, and...
I have an engine that uses a dry sump oiling system. The oil collection pan has three AN fittings to use for scavenging. Two of the fittings are approximately on the same level, the third is about 1/2 to 3/4 inch higher than the other two. The system ran for years with no problem using a three stage pump (one pressure and two scavenge stages). The two scavenge stages were connected at times to any two of the three AN fittings on the tank. Recently I tried an upgrade to a four stage pump...
Back
Top