EXPERIMENTS IN SPRAY HYDRAULICS THESIS FOR TIIII DEGREE III III. ‘3. Glenn R. Starcher I930 EXPERIMENTS IN SPRAX’HYDRAULICS Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of the Michigan State College of Agriculture and Applied Science as partial Fulfillment of the Require- mmnta for the Degree of mneter of Science y g b’ 4““ y Glenn.R.F§§§zcher kfw JCfl' 1930 1 rifi THESIb , EXPERIMENTS IN’SPRAY’HYDRAULICS Introduction. One of the most outstanding differences in fruit tree spraying today as compared to a few years ago is the high pressures at‘which the materials are now being applied. Before the advent of the gasoline engine, practically all the spraying was done by hand poser, and it was unusual to maintain pressures much in excess of 100 pounds to the square inch. NO doubt the growers might have preferred higher pressures so as to be able easily to reach the tops of the trees, but hand pumping was too labonbus an operation. even with the best of equipment. now that the gasoline engine is here, spraying pressures have been steadily increasing. Stronger and better hose is being built that will easily accommodate pressures of from.400 to 600 pounds, and even more in some . cases. Pumps are being built that deliver larger and larger volumes of solution at these high pressures. It takes careful spraying at high pressures to cover the trees and fruit efficiently. More and more attention is being given to the pressure at which the spray is applied and Just howwmnch is applied. modern spray schedules call for thorough spraying of large orchards in Just a few days. 43.15; ”N” ”H," "I 2. Object of Studies. This experiment was undertaken in an effort to learn more about the volume of delivery under various conditions, and the pressure losses encountered due to these varying conditions. Haas of 3/8, 1/2, and 3/4 inch diameters and of 50 and 12 1/2 foot lengths was used. The volume of delivery and pressures at both the air chamber and the gun were determined, using various sized disc apertures at different pressures with both standard and large hose fittings. From.these data the pressure losses in the pipes and hose were determined. Similar but less complete studies were made of the multiple nozzle rods. Also, various combinations of cutoffs, pipes, and whirl- plates were tried with these rods to see how they influenced the rate of delivery and spraying pressure. Tk' 3. Review of Literature. Since high pressure spraying is a development of very recent times, there is little literature available on that subject. Some of the oldest work along related lines was done in connection with tests on fire hose. In 1878 Ellis (3) reported experiments conducted to show the pressure losses, water deliveries, etc., for both leather and rubber fire boss of various diameters, lengths, and pressures. The pressures were all relatively low, none exceeding 130 pounds. However, his explanations and theories of discharge should be similar to those for the much higher pressures and smaller hose used in moiern spraying. Pressure gauges placed along the flow of water show only the pressure at that point not converted into velocity, so this loss plus the gauge reading is the actual pressure. A gauge at the nozzle would register a pressure I of zero. Table I.gives the velocity of flow in feet per second and the pressure in pounds required to produce that given velocity, which amount must be added to the apparent pressure to give the actual pressure. Table I. Velocity Pressure Velocity Pressure Velocity Pressure 8.5 100$ .5 lbs. 31.0 ft. 3.0 lbs. 89.9 ft. 0.0 lbs 11.2 " 1.0 22.8 3.5 32.5 7.0 14.9 1.5 84.4 4.0 34.5 8.0 17.8 2.0 25.9 4.5 56.6 9.0 19.3 3.5 2708 500 38.6 10.0 T HI 4. From.other data supplied by Ellis (3) calculations were made of the velocity in feet per second required through different sized pipes to deliver various amounts of water per minute. Table II Diameter of Pipe 1 gel. 5 gal. 10 gal. 13 gal. 1/4 inch 6.67 feet 33.3 feet 66.7 feet 100.0 feet 3/8 8.92 14.6 20.8 43.8 1/2 1.63 8.8 16.3 z4.5 5/8 1.05 5.3 10.5 15.8 3/4 .72 3.6 7.2 10.8 7/8 .53 8.7 3.3 8.0 1 .41 2.1 4.1 6.3 From.tables I and II it is possible to calculate the actual pressure if the gauge reading, the size of pipe on which the gauge is fixed, and the volume of delivery are known. The amount of friction in a hose depends directly on the velocity of flow. Doubling the velocity increases the loss in pressure by nearly four times. Doubling the diameter of the pipe decreases by one-half the friction loss at the same velocity. By reducing the velocity so as to have the original delivery, or one-fourth the original velocity, the friction loss is reduced by about thirty-two times. This makes it clear why it is necessary to have adequate water- ways in.modern spray pumps. 1H5 Hughes and Safford (6) in 1911 collected data to show that for fire hose laid in its ordinary smooth curves but not cramped or kinked, the friction loss would be about 6% greater than for perfectly straight hose. It seems likely that there would be a similar friction loss in spray hose. The effects of couplings and other constrictions in the hose in relation to pressure loss are also quite fully discussed by Hughes and Safford (6). They say, #If water is caused to flow through a constriction, the increased velocity through the "throat" will produce a corresponding pressure drop. A diverging streul.is always less stable than a converging stream; that is, it is more readily broken up into whirlpools and eddies, and hence more loss of energy takes place beyond a constriction than back of it or in it." Daugherty (2) found that the loss of pressure due to a re- duction of the area of the stream at couplings was about equal to the sum of the loss in sudden contraction on elbring the bushing, and the loss in sudden enlargement on leaving the bushing. There was relatively little loss in the constricted area itself. Gradual constrictions caused very much less loss of pressure. Any features which disturb of change the velocity of flow induce some additional friction losses. These observations shouhi make it clear as to why the large hose fittings used in parts of the present experiment gave the results they did. mason (7) brought out the interesting ‘point that each tea or elbow in a pipe line causes friction equal to about forty feet of the straight pipe, so it is 6. little wander that angles are to be avoided as much as reasonably possible in spraying equipment. mason (7) also reports experiments with.different types of nozzles. He found that the thinner the disc, the wider the ring of spray; but the thin discs were out quickly and required frequent replacements to maintain a constant delivery. Inner discs or whirl-plates have from two to six slanting entrances arranged around the outer edge, through which the spray material enters the eddy chamber. The more holes there are, the narrower the cone of spray and the more drive it has. The present experiment shows that pressure and volume of delivery are also affected. Anderson and Roth (1) observe that disc apertures of 3/32 and 7/64 inch should be the ones most frequently used in orchard work; and efficient operation of a spray gun requires not less than 230 pounds of pressure. Hough (5) says that a nozzle with six holes in the whirl-plate produces a desirable type of cone which carries three times farther than the fanplike cone produced by the same nozzle 4 when there are only two holes in the whirl-plate. He recommends that apples be sprayed with a pressure not exceeding 400 pounds, with pressures of from 300 to 323 pounds to be preferred. He also says that disc openings of 1/16 and 1/12 inch diameters have proved to be the most useful in multiple nozzle rods. Discs of these sizes wore to 1/12 and 1/10 inch holes, respectively, in about forty- five hours of continuous spraying when three pounds of lead arsenate to the hundred gallons of water was sprayed out at 300 pounds pressure. TH! 7. As summarized by Hughes and Safford (6) the factors causing accumulation of pressure losses because of friction are : (a) Increased area of rubbing surface, as with smaller pipe, (b) Increased roughness of the lining of the channel, (c) Increase with the square of the velocity, (d) Abrupt changes in the cross-sectional area of the channel, (e) Bends or Junctions with other channels, (f) Increase of suspended matter in the water, and (g) Decrease in temperature. 8. Method of Procedure. All of the following experiments were run with a three cylinder Bean pump with a rated capacity of sixteen gallons per minute. Power was furnished by a five horsepower electric motor bolted to the frame where the gasoline engine had been removed. Electric energy supplied a more convenient and more uniform.source of power than could be expected from a gasoline engine. All the tests were run inside a building where the outfit stayed all the time. Tap water was used in all the tests. Water alone will not wear the pump and nozzcl parts as rapidly as most spray mixtures, so its use here led to a greater degree of accuracy between tests than could be expected with actual spray nurtures. In all the tests of water delivery with the different hose and discs a Hardie model D spray gun was used (Fig.1). The gun was always opened to its fullest extent. The pressure gauges used were of the type such as are standard equipment on practically all spray rigs, and were calibrated from.zero to 600 pounds in intervals of ten pounds. It was found that after being used for some time the various gauges did not quite read consistently, so a new one was set aside as a standard and used only occasionally in checking and adjusting the others on the pump. Because of the slight variation in the gauges and the oscillation of the indicator hand when under pressure and the large interval between calibrations, it was impossible to make readings closer than five pounds, and there are occasional indications of more error than that. 1H 9. In order to make it more convenient to read the pump pressures, the air chamber gauge was set on the back of the spray rig and connected to the air chamber with a 3/8 inch piece of spray hose. This connection reduced the Vibration of the gauge hand but had no other effects. Timing of spray delivery was done with a stop-watch. Each run was for two minutes so as to reduce as much as possible any error there might be in timing. The water was sprayed into a sixty gallon tank setting on an accurate platform scales. For practically all the tests two readings were made and unless they checked within a quarter of a pound, three and possibly four readings were made. In converting the deliveries to gallons, 8.35 pounds was taken as the weight of a gallon of water. Throughout this paper disc aperture diameters are referred to as whole numbers, one sixty-fourth of an inch being the standard. For instance, the disc having a 4/64 or 1/16 inch opening is called a number four, and the disc having an 8/64 or 1/8 inch opening is called a number eight. The pressure gauge at the end of the hose next to the spray gun was fitted into a tee of three-quarter inch galvanized iron pipe (Fig. 11). In order to connect this tee with the male coupling at the end of the hose, it was necessary to weld a piece of female coupling to one end of the tee. Some of the data are incomplete at the high pressures and for large disc apertures because the expected delivery would be in excess of the capacity of the pump, or because the air chamber pressure would have to be higher than the 450 pounds which was the maximum pressure used. 10. Presentation of Data. One set of tests was made to determine the volume of delivery and the loss in pressure between the pump and the gun. In these tests the pressure at the pump was maintained ' at 800, 230, 300, 350, 400 and 450 pounds. Determinations were made at each of these pressures with 3/8, 1/3, and 3/4 inch hose. The hose length was 50 feet in each instance. Disc apertures of 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 14, and 16 sixty- fourths of an inch were used with each hose at every pressure indicated. One run was made when the hose fittings were of the common or standard type and a second run was made when fittings with Larger openings were used. The specifications of these fittings are given in Table VI, and Figure IV'shows photographs of them. Tables III, IV, and Y'present the re- sults of these determinations. Another similar set of tests was made to determine how much.pressure at the pump is necessary with the various hose and discs to maintain 150, 200, 250, 300, 350, and 400 pounds at the gun. The results of these determinations are presented in Tables VII, VIII, and 115 Only the standard fittings were used in these tests. There is some inconsistency in a comparison of the gun and air chamber pressures for the 318 inch hose in Tables III and VII. After the first set of records was made one fitting was broken, and the substitution of another increased the pressure losses slightly. In order to determine if the loss of pressure was due more to friction in the hose or at the fittings, tests were made with 12 1/z feet of 3/8 inch hose. Standard and large fittings were used. The results are presented in Table I. Volumes of delivery were not determined but they could be ll. calculated from Graph XI. Multiple nozzle rods having from.three to eight nozzles were substituted for the spray gun in certain tests. Pressures of 250, 350, and 450 pounds were maintained at the pump. Three-eighths inch hose 50 feet in length equipped with large fittings was used in these tests. A hose of larger diameter would have been better for this purpose but accurate com» parisons can be made by using the pressures at the rod rather than at the pump. Figures V, VI and VII show the heads of the various rods used, and Table XI records the results. The relation of the diameter of pipe, or tubing used between the cutoff and the nozzle head, to delivery was studied and the results are presented in Table XII. A third pressure gauge was attached to the outer end of the pipe so as to observe the pressure loss in the pipe. Fifty feet of 3/8~inch hose with large fittings was used. Pump pressures were maintained at 350 and 450 pounds, with numbers d and 6 discs. A Bean head of four nozzles and a Hardie cutoff was used in all the comparisons. One section of tubing was three feet long and of 5/8 inch diameter and the other was four feet long and of-5/16 inch diameter. Table XIIIshows another comparison of various parts of different rods. .The whirl-plates in Hardiczrods have four openings, while those in the Bean have six, all of which vary between 9/64 and 10/64 inch in diameter. In these tests both types of whirl-plates were used in both fiardie and Bean rods. The air chamber pressures were 250, 350, and 450 pounds, using 50 feet of 3/8 inch hose with large fittings. 12. Four different types of cutoffs were tested at 350 and 450 pound pump pressures, as shown in Tables XIV and XV. Two were from Bean rods, one was a Hardie, and the other a Friend. These are shown in Figures IX, X, XI, and X11. numbers 4 and 6 discs were used with 50 feet of 3.8 inch hose with large fittings. In these tests the pressure gauge was fitted between the cutoff and the entrance to the tube of the rod. Three and six nozzle rods were used in all the tests. The Friend cutoff could not be used with the six nozzle rod when it had number 6 discs in it. Its small capacity caused the rapid flow of water to shut it off automatically. The amount of hose expansion at different pressures is shown in Table XVI. These figures are an average of four measurements taken at eighteen and twenty-four inches from one end of the hose, and are for high grade 3/8, 1/2, and 5/4 inch hose. The data in Table XVII_are similar to some of those in.Tab1e XI except that they are more complete. These tests were run with an eight nozzle rod to determine the pressure loss in the rod up to the nozzle fittings. Pressure readings ‘ were taken at the pump,at the entrance to the rod, and between the second tee and the nozzles. The air chamber pressures were 200, 250, 300, sec, ace, and 450 pounds, using so feet of 3/8 inch hose with large fittings. In another set of tests pressure readings were taken at five different points on the red, as shown in Figure XIII. The pressure at the cutoff was maintained at 300 pounds. In one test the fitting between the end of the tube and the first tee in the head was entirely eliminated. 13. Discussion of Results Disc Aperture Uniformly increasing the diameter of the disc aperture gave an almost equally uniform increase in the volume of delivery at each pressure. The increase, however, was less than the proportional increase in the area of the aperture. Doubling the diameter slightly more than doubled the quantity of delivery. is the aperture was gradually increased in size, there was a slightly more rapid increase in the volume of delivery at the same pressure at the gun. At 200 pounds pressure with disc size increases of 6 to 7, 7 to 8, 8 to 9, and 9 to 10, the increase in delivery .e. 0.83, 0.93, 1.15, and 1.53 gallons per minute respectively. (See Tables III, IV; V, VII, VIII, IX, etc., and Graph XI, for data on deliveries through different disc apertures.) Pressure Uniform.changes in pressure gave equally uniform changes in delivery. The amount of change was relatively small, however. Increasing the gun pressure from.200 to 400 pounds with disc sizes 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and 12 increased the deliveries 43$, 42$, 43%, 45%, 45%, 43%, and 44%, respec- tively. The differences shown are probably due to experimental error. (Refer to Tables VII, VIII, and IX, and Graph II, which show the effects on delivery of increased pressure). When compared with the pump pressures the percentage of difference would be less, and would be much more variable because of the variable pressure losses in the hose. 14. The rate of delivery is only indirectly dependent upon the pump pressure. It is the pressure of the solution after it gets to the gun that is important. If the pressure at the gun is known it is possible to calculate the gallons per minute delivery, from.Graph XI. It doesn't make any difference what type, length, or size of hose is used, nor what the air chamber pressure is. The volume of delivery depends directly on what the pressure is after it gets to the gun, and the size of the disc aperture. Diameter of Hose There is much less spray delivery with hose of small diameters than with those of larger size. In compar- ing the capacity of the 3/8 and 1/2 inch hose this difference became noticeable with deliveries around four gallons a minute. The difference between the 1/2 and 3/4 inch hose is much less marked, and did not become excessive until deliveries of about ten gallons a minute were encountered. These differences in delivery might well be expected when a comparison of the pressure losses with different discs at various pressures is made, as in Graph IV. For instance, with a pump pressure of 400 pounds and using a number 10 disc there was a decrease in pressure at the gun of 130 pounds with a 3/8 inch hose, 50 pounds with a 1/2 inch hose, and ac pounds with a 3/4 inch hose. Type of 3036 Fittings When the large hose fittings (See Fig.IV and Table VI) were substituted for the standard ones, there was a marked increase in the volumes of delivery, with a corresponding decrease in the pressure loss in the hose. With the 3/4 inch hose there was practically no change, presumably because the standard fittings were already sufficiently large to accommodate the flow of water without excessive friction. With the 3/8 and 1/2 inch hose the improved results were so great as to be worthy of notice. The 3/8 inch hose increased its output up to approximately that of the 1/2 inch hose with standard fittings. This means that if under given deliveries the 1/2 inch hose is ordinarily recommended, it would be equally satisfactory to use lighter and cheaper 3/8 inch hose with large fittings. Similarly, the 1/2 inch hose with large fittings is practically the equal of a 3/4 inch hose for the deliveries in the range of this experiment, up to sixteen gallons a minute. Comparisons of the pressure losses between hose equipped with standard and those with large fittings are shown in Tables III, IV, and V, and Graphs VIII, IX, and X. The expected differences in volume of delivery are also shown for the 3/8 and 1/2 inch hose, and there are almost no differences with the 3/4 inch hose. At a 350 pound air chamber pressure with a number 10 disc the deliveries with standard and then large fittings were 7.28 and 8.26 gallons for a 3/8 inch hose, 8.28 and 8.64 gallons for a 1/2 inch hose, and 8.69 and 8.65 gaLlons for a 3/4 inch hose. 16. Hess Expansion It is a well known fact that spray hose expands and shortens up when under pressure. From the figures given in Table XVI it can be readily seen that the amoung of increase is so little as to have almost no effect on increasing the carrying capacity of the hose. When the pressure was increased from 150 to 450 pounds the increase in outside diameter for the 3/8 inch hose was 0.024 inches, for the 1/2 inch hose 0;027 inches, and for the 3/4 inch hose 0.047 inches. Length of Hose In tests with both 50 feet and 12 1/2 feet of 3/8 inch hose under similar conditions it was shown that most of the pressure loss in hose of those lengths was due to friction at the couplings and not to friction in the hose itself. A comparison of Graphs VIII and.XII brings out this point. There are almost the same number of pounds of pressure lost between the two tests of standard and large fittings with 50 feet of hose as with 12 1/2 feet. Decreasing the length of the hose 75% decreased the pressure loss only about 25% to 30% with both standard and large fittings. For instance with a pump pressure of 350 pounds there was a pressure loss of 170 pounds with 50 feet of 3/8 inch hose and 130 pounds with 12 1/2 feet of similar hose. number of Nozzles MMltiple nozzle rods are now being used in order to get a fine spray of good drive that will at the same time cover large areas quickly. A red with four nozzles having number 6 discs will not deliver quite four times as much solution as 17. a gun having one number 6 disc. There will be more friction loss in the rod due to the necessarily much.nmre rapid flow through it. A rod delivering the same volume of spray as a gun will require a greater pressure because there is more friction in it, especially around the nozzles. However, if the gun is partly closed sores to produce a more desirable type of spray, the additional friction around the disc aperture will tend to make the gun and rod more marly equal. Table XI and Graph XIII show the differences in delivery for various rods at the same air chamber pressures. These results, though, are hardly a fair test for the larger deliveries because as mentioned before, the 3/8 inch hose was too small. Pressures taken at the rod rather than at the pump offer a ' fairer basis of comparison in this instance. For a delivery of 12 112 gallons a minute through an eight nozzle rod with number 5 discs, a pressure at the rod of 220 pounds was re- quired, while for asimilar delivery through a gun with a number 14 disc only 200 pounds was needed. Size of waterways in Rods Since some multiple nozzle rods are made of larger tubing.than others, two sizes were tested for the pressure losses in them, and the resulting deliveries. It was found that with number 4 discs there were almost no noticeable variations, but when the volume was increased by using number 6 discs there was a marked difference in delivery and in pressure loss through the tubes (Graph XIV shows the deliveries for the different rods and Table XII gives the pressure losses in the tubes, as well as the delivery figures). ‘Using four 18. number 6 discs at a pressure of 350 pounds at the rod there was a loss of 20 pounds at the outer end of a 5/8 inch tube, and a loss of 90 pounds with a 5/16 inch tube. A similar test to show the amount of pressure loss in eight nozzle rods from.the entrance of the rod to the nozzle section revealed rather high losses. (See Table XVII). Using number 6 discs at a rod pressure of 215 pounds, 75 pounds was lost in the rod. The narrow waterways and the several angles in the pipes are responsible for the excessive pressure loss. By eliminating one fitting through the use of a different type of tee, a pressure loss of 25 pounds at that point was avoided, with a pressure of 300 pounds at the cutoff. (See Figure XIII). Nozzle Whirl-Plates It makes quite a noticeable difference in.mu1tiple nozzle rods as to whether the whirl-plates have six or only four openings. (See Figure XIV). Naturally, there is more friction when the water has to flow through fewer holes. If the desire is to have a spray of the more spreading type with less drive, produced by having only four holes in the whirl- plate, it has its useful place. Otherwise the six hole type is better because of its saving in.pressure and increased delivery. (Table XIII and Graph XV show the results of these tests). The best spray rod used was a combination of nozzles and whirl-plates made by one manufacturer, and pipe and cutoff made by another. 19. Cutoffs There is a wide difference between the varied cutoffs used on spraying equipment. The waterways in some are narrow and crooked, whfle in others they are large and straight. A comparison of the deliveries through four types (See Figures IX to XII) is shown in Tables XIV and XV'and in Graphs XVI and XVII. For small deliveries, as with the three nozzle rods there were but slight differences. When the volume of de- livery was increased by using six nozzles, the factor of friction in the cutoff became more noticeable. For instance, at a pump pressure of 450 pounds, using number 4 discs the pressures Just beyond the cutoff for the four types was 400 pounds, 400 pounds, 390 pounds, and 370 pounds. Conclusion All these tests serve to emphasize the fact that there are exceptionally wide ranges of pressures and rates of applications frcn.which to choose in carrying out a spraying program. The variety of fixtures and appliances is almost as great, so it takes careful study and consideration to make use of the most desirable conditions for any particular pur- pose. Some types of equipment are much better than others in conserving the pump pressures, and it seems that there is still considerable room for improvement in even the best that is now available. 20. Summary 1. Spraying pressures and volumes of delivery vary directly with the pump pressures and the size of disc apertures used. 2. The pressure at the nozzle rather than that at the pump is important in effective spraying. '5. For small deliveries 3/8 inch hose is Just as good as the larger sizes, but for greater deliveries, larger hose should be used. 4. There is more pressure lost at the hose fittings than in the hose itself for lengths of around 50 feet or less. 5. The larger the hose fittings, the less is the loss of pressure from friction there. 6. Expansion of the hose when under pressure has little part in increasing the volume of delivery. 7. Increasing the number of nozzles on a rod increases the volume of delivery and at the same time reduces the spray- ing pressure. 8. multiple nozzle rods require slightly more pressure for a given delivery than spray guns do. 9. Constrictions and angles in rods and guns cause heavy pressure losses when operating at high capacities. 10. The proportion of the original pressure that is lost between the pump and the nozzles depends upon the size of hose and hose fittings, type of cutoff, size of tubing in the rod, angles and constrictions in the tubing, size and number of holes in the whirl-plates, and size of disc apertures. 21. Acknowledgments The writer is greatly indebted to Professor W. 0. Button for his planning and assisting throughout the work, and to Professor V. R. Gardner and Dr. J: W. Crist for suggestions and criticism-of the manuscript, and to the thn Bean Manufacturing Company for the use of some of their equipment. l. 3. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 22. Literature Cited Anderson, 0. G. and Roth, F. C. Insecticides and Fungicides, Spraying and Dusting Equipment. John Wiley and Sons, Inc. 1923. Daugherty, R. L. Hydraulics. MbGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc. 1916. Ellis, George A. werk Done By and Power Required For Fire Streams. Clark W. Bryan & Company. 1878. Garver, Harry L. The Stationary Spray Plant. lashington College Station Bulletin 212. 1927, Hough, W. S. Orchard Spraying and Spraying Equipment. Virginia Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 260. 1928. Hughes, Hector J. and Safford, Arthur T. iHydraulics. The Macmillan Company. 1914. mason, A. Freeman. Spraying, Dusting, and Fumigating of Plants. ' The macmillan Company. 1928. IMorris, 0. M3 Stationary Spray Plants. Washington College action P0pular Bulletin 125. 1924. Meses, B. D. and Duruz,‘W. P. Stationary Spray Plants in California. California Bulletin 406. 1926. ". w . -- r! -15. l narile spray Jun Row JOSE C LANSING MI. LCM» K :J: ; ,‘m‘c . ‘ - , n r.“ "f -1. ‘ . ‘t v . a Pressure gauge an -ltEllMS ”2. m... i r: :23.” {3.x .. 1.. , - . .1 :. . 5 . n4 “L.” 7.3,. .....: _ as; 1.3 .III ‘. I; m mm? .. $3 0 ‘(fi ”7 ‘7 W-..~t. ~—4- ‘ I ~ ‘— L) . 2. - -- A wt. “ 'r‘ fl 7‘ 7" a ‘ fi ‘1-. o “531 0; do“ -our-Louqle “01 "b N kn ‘ -‘ fl -‘- ' ‘ f. ' Y ‘ T “j _ ;1_. 0 ”5a; 0; “arwle WOQF-LOZZlB 301 gig. 10 Eean Lhree anl Tour-102213 god Cutoff Fig. 11 Bean Six and Eight-£02219 ;od Cutoff goomosfiessvm qk‘Oue‘VOd No.5 Disc-3 "‘1 41¢. 14 ?ean and Iariie "hirl-Jlates .T. ,0 .l. | :35 re; - t— \ I o s . ‘ V v A . w a v _. _ m a w ,v 4. m . + m , m M W N _f .7 . M . m a m M . M m w W p _ H A . M . m W W ‘ m M a n, x a 4 w r . M r , H H _ 6 3 FHN . m _ ‘ h f .. . H “.1 W H M ,. m m ‘ . fl . _ _ . .n +— s , \; n. A e ‘i .r L w r 1“ .I .| \M... _ n s é _ .u A I . . m »_ D m . _ m _ ‘ I . A w . w _ _ w 14.11111. » L vuflk > 3?. I § r1 I (II + ._ . w ‘ w . \ I . 3, fl ” n r r \w V” ‘4! db 4D ”on: per‘ Milaw‘o , ‘+ 3 l {g 93 >15 h armo— -—-¢« )- o m v F _. 5 \ . . H E 3 Y K .V x - ii; ,-:m~.uLn ., » ‘hWnWhuwmé - M i} h- Wax , . ._ A a Emw E. (Ste E i ‘ END? 3:. 80%. W DA V»? \N t2: knmsfiwhqnmm {EM 3% .h . . ...-..--.I-..la IE.{L.\. z ...... TIEI_..\\--:-aiwls,.i.: ‘ — 'Illll‘t p v-||..\ll| lvl .‘i‘lé I}. Iv |-?|I‘l|l.lll|l:-41\i: 4 ' u. . . . A I I i . . ,_ ._.,_ ‘A—9—~_-—.‘ w ._ _ ~—... - _._$_._ +.—-¢—- 4 -«p. . -..r h--.- «a QR L: Easing» u Sm m3. t mks K61 58R 5 b~ _. .- _ M _ 1 H . . m ~ iiiia W 1 w W 1 1+ - r + 1 . 1 1 “ w}-+1IJ-, fizitIJTJIV I ..r 1 +1. WT r w ‘ L II I m . m 13%in ._ -, .2. 1 . .a - w _ h 333i Eng“? 1 N. 3%“ J.- whxww 1 w .1 w.” L_ , w ,- _ \N ._ _ _ >3 \ . kx >3 1 . h -_ E1 ,, I _- T s: E -.- i m. . w W . MI 11 A w M w m. . a w h u” «a. - w .1 M .. m M I. A w. M . . u . a m . . ; . 1 1 . M Ilili i}. .rb J p r u! w W [ Q .cuho . «.3 .fi H $6 quad _ a and H 53 _ . . ; 3509369 V332)“ : , _ 1 P. 1528333 whoa-Ed . _ , w 093“qume ow Maw-Egan; LE 5%“ fianbwwsmm Kbfisfim 3K REM-$1- @4323 7--- 1...“--p. -w—fi—m __F4.—.A._-..____T__4» A ,7--.—.J_—+--- Eng MI 9. 13.2.? E 1.1. nkuinm1 8..“ m :33 #21qu 1w. QNWG w 8» «$3» 0 Ewa- W haw - _ 3 . 7, _ , $8 3min Burnamuflh 5.01 , ‘ 1 , ; ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ b33365 I , ' v -- ‘w b» RE, E Q» E» g» «at .Ew : x _\ . 9. PM mtg H L . h . r w H H _ p g . .. F r L b. .T . . .. . . M . _ w . _ c . , . _ . * .M f L m _ . _ .. n _ _ .. H * > h > T . a r. . . W E. .. M .M ~Q - r a .m M . _ _ , . m m ., . . W n u _ . n _ _ ._ ., . .. .r S h 3w on N at fl - " “D J \. at.“wmmfikeamnTWSRETSmwmw L . w W . l . 1. -p—o -— p- - "p- -_..._._.._1.__ ._—_.- -mdy-_.- . . ... _ . 6.3 Non: pier Mina/‘45 N! ‘F .k N. WEE. 5m «EQQITEERQT .1... iv M M _., w , W » . I . . n . M . m . . __ m w \\..........,I..\. . WV 3 Ewe M {.Lrl- . LT Ii _ blnlll‘llll‘L a: --i u s Li: ». . W . k . . H. o _ x?» QESE 3.. brow»: an. x“. _ . w A . \wmtfimfi Em Wfi m. oh \wbmfifiumifib SAW»: QRQQTbFSfixQQW _ Law mgaémw 3.3 ER kamEc. a 3%. be in in.» m. . L “4..--.. - "a"... -- p .— « . L . . 7 7 M _ .br.-..|l ....... i - 11.--- 1.”-.. - -L-- .. - .. .T --- I. 1..-... . m .g . w . a m _ m .. . F _ M .. h. m w H u h . . _ .. h w m _. W m . . . _ -- H w M _ ,. a H, . . _ , w H F. p r w 1. r H _ w . . 35+Q- m p m A .. ._ _ . . S - W .. ._. $ , H r k h , n . .. L 9 U n. 3 Q w .. _ w N! . _ . . . M U Q. ~ ._ .L\I1 T. u , .. ‘H S. v Pwnm -—--——.- ¢.--—-- Ed ”on 3 per Ml'nui'e. Gd ”ML per- Mmui‘e. - l -.-'-— M m i-----.l.w--- NE...“ RENE? :9 $8.an“ T..- W -- - w m - - - _ * -- -. - w u w n D - _% p L H - .. we a . .. . «.3. w ._ x3. , m . .. 3:. $3335 xv mmiw - . W . H L? 8533?». Elfin}... ; w W- _ - w nwexxu w I. _ .H _ .fl . L A W H “ FEE-Em g 3.58m w N. m2: % mam a? .m _ . M * ...- _. x336: 3. Mg.“ thwmm Did?“ N. Emebmrg-ww a». Sloxu - -! h L? quSAwmw mug KER? _ . . H w ._ w m M w. w y m m A _ m . _ a , w w - -- - 1---..- --------- --- I T--.- . .. Ti---- -- :1 - 3..-. a--- l..- m--- - - -I - - L .1 -..- .M L TABLE III. Spray Gun Deliveries at Constant.Air Chaflber Pressures. Hose Disc Pressure at Pressure at the Gun Pressure Lost Delivery in Gel. per Min. Size Size Air ChamberlStandard Large Fit- Standard Large Standard Large Fittingslgiggs Fitti srrit. Fittings Fittiqgg%» 50 4 200 200 0 1.11 lost 250 250 250 0 0 1 . 26 1 . 26 or 300 500 0 1.39 3/8 350 350 350 o o 1.47 1.4.7 inch 400 400 0 1.59 450 450 450 0 0 1.68 1.68 6 200 195 5 2.29 250 240 250 10 0 2.54 2.58 300 290 10 2.78 550 340 550 - 10 O 3.02 5.04 400 580 20 5.21 450 425 440 25 10 3.40 3.44 7 200 185 15 3.02 1 men 99:; 9.50 25 O 3.41 3.53 TABLE III. Spray Gun Deliveries at Constant Air Chamber Pressures. Hose Disc Pressure at Pressure at the Gun Pressure Lost Delivery in 061. periMih. Size Size Air Chamber Standard Large Fit- Standard Large Standard Large Fittings tings Fittings Fit. Fittings Fittings 50 4 200 200 0 1.11 Feet 250 250 250 0 0 1.26 1.26 of 500 500 0 1.59 5/8 350 350 550 o o 1.47 1.47 inch 400 400 0 1.59 450 450 450 0 O 1.68 1.68 6 200 195 5 2.29 250 240 250 10 0 2.54 2.58 500 290 10 2.78 550 540 550 - 10 0 5.02 5.04 400 580 20 5.21 450 425 440 25 10 5.40 5.44 7 200 185 15 5.02 250 225 250 25 0 5.41 5.55 500 270 50 5.74 550 520 540 50 10 4.06 4.10 400 565 55 4.55 450 405 450 45 20 4.55 4.66 8 200 170 50 5.85 250 215 245 55 5 4.27 4.58 500 260 40 4.69 550 295 550 55 20 5.07 5.56 400 545 55 5.45 450 580 420 70 50 5.75 6.11 9 200 150 50 4.48 250 185 255 65 15 4.94 5.75 500 220 80 5.54 550 265 520 85 50 6.11 6.85 400 500 100 6.55 450 550 410 120 40 6.89 7.69 10 200 140 60 0.45 250 175 220 75 50 6.15 7.08 500 205 95 6.72 550 240 500 110 50 7.28 8.26 400 270 150 7.81 450 510 587 140 65 8.55 9.46 12 200 100 100 6.55 250 150 185 120 65 7,45 9.15 300 155 . 145 8.28 550 180 260 170 90 8.69 11.05 400 205 195 9.71 450 255 555 215 115 10.56 12.57 14 200 75 125 7.45 250 95 155 155 95 8.29 10.95 500 115 185 9.50 550 155 215 215 155 10.14 12.96 400 155 245 10.87 450 175 275 275 175 11.65 14.87 16 200 55 145 8.06 250 70 120 180 150 9.10 12.57 500 85 215 10.21 550 100 175 250 175 11.05 15.10 400 110 290 11.85 450 125 525 12.58 ”me—a A TABLE IV. Spray Gun Deliveries at Constant Air Chamber Pressures. ibse Insc Pressure at Pressure at the Gun Pressure Lost Delivery in Gal. per Min. Sims Size .11r Chamber Standard Large Fit- Standar ILarge Standard Large .11.-1._..1-n. Fittings tings Fittings Fit. Fittings Fittings 50 4 200 200 0 1.11 Feet 250 250 250 0 () 1.26 1.26 of 300 500 0 1.58 1/2' 550 550 250 0 0 1.47 1.47 indi 400 400 O 1.59 450 450 250 0 O 1.68 1.68 6 200 200 0 2.51 250 250 250 0 0 2.58 2.58 500 500 O 2.84 550 550 550 0 0 5.06 5.06 400 400 0 5.29 450 450 450 O 0 5.48 5.48 7 200 195 5 5.14 250 245 250 5 0 5.49 5.56 500 295 5 5.85 550 545 550 5 O 4.18 4.22 400 . 590 10 4.48 450 440 450 10 O 4.70 4.79 8 200 190 10 4.00 250 240 250 10 0 4.46 4.64 500 290 10 5.00 550 555 550 15 0 5.55 5.52 400 580 20 5.69 450 450 450 20 O 6.12 6.24 9 200 185 15 4.9. 250 250 245 20 5 5.60 5.87 500 275 25 6.25 550 520 545 50 5 6.75 7.04 400 565 55 7.25 450 410 445 40 5 7.68 8.01 10 200 175 25 6.15 250 215 240 55 10 6.89 7.52 500 260 - 4O 7 .66 it» 550 505 550 45 20 8.28 s.s4 J;‘ 400 550 50 8.90 450 595 420 55 50 9.45 9.91 12 200 150 50 . 8.25 250 190 220 60 50 9.27 10.0 500 250 70 10.19 550 270 505 80 45 11.24 11.89 400 510 90 , 12.04 450 540 400 110 50 12.69 15.85 , 14 200 140 so 10.25 250 170 200 80 50 11.50 12.59 500 200 100 12.59 550 240 285 110 65 15.59 14.95 400 270 150 14.49 450 295 155 - 15.55 ----- 05 95 11.50 16 :28 155 180 115 70 15.07 15.27 500 160 140 14.40 350 185 ....... 165 -- 15 .75 """"'" 400 Exceeds "' """ . 450 pump ““’ "‘ " --------- L“ Capacity 1 TABLE V. Spray Gun Deliveries at Constant Air Chamber Pressures. Hose Disc Pressure a Pressure at the Gun Pressure Lost Delivery in Gal. per Min Size Size Air Chamber Standard Large Fit- Standard Large 8tandard Large Fittings tings Fittings Fit. Fittings Fittings 50 4 200 200 0 1.11 Feet 250 250 250 0 0 1.26 1.26 of 500 500 0 1.58 23/4 550 550 550 o o 1 .45 1 .48 Inch 400 400 0 1.59 450 450 450 0 O 1.68 1.68 6 200 200 0 1.92 250 250 250 0 0 2.51 2.51 500 500 0 2.59 550 550 550 0 0 2.85 2.85 400 400 0 5.07 450 450 450 0 0 5.29 5.29 7 200 200 0 5.15 250 250 250 0 5.51 5.50 500 500 0 5.86 550 550 550 0 0 4.19 4.18 400 595 5 4.48 450 445 445 5 5 4.76 4.78 8 200 195 5 4.05 250 245 245 5 5 4.56 4.52 500 295 5 4.99 550 540 540 10 10 5.45 5.42 400 585 15 5.80 450 455 455 15 15 6.20 6.20 9 200 _ 195 5 5.18 250 245 245 5 5 5.84 5.82 500 290 10 6.44 550 540 540 10 10 6.96 6.96 400 585 15 7.47 450 450 450 20 20 7.90 7.89 10 200 '190 10 6.54 250 240 240 10 10 7.55 7.28 500 285 15 8.02 550 555 555 15 15 8.69 8.65 400 580 20 9.55 450 450 425 20 25 9.98 9.85 12 200 185 15 - 9.15 - 250 255 255 15 15 10.58 10.18 500 275 25 11.47 550 525 525 25 25 12.40 12.52 400 570 50 ‘ 15.25 450 415 415 55 55 14.11 14.04 14 200 175 25 11.65 250 215 215 55 55 12.95 12.92 500 260 . 40 14.25 550 500 500 50 50 15.48 15.46 400 Exceeds -- ————— 450 pump -—- -- -— ---------- Capacity 16 200 155 45 14.50 250 195 195 55 55 16.02 15.91 500 Exceeds -- ----- 550 pump --- -— -- ---------- 400 ‘ Sapacity —- ~--—- 450 -- -- -- ----- ----- TABLE VI. Diameters of Hose Fittings. Standard Fittings Female Male Hose Size Pipe End Hose End Gun 8nd Hose End 5/8 Inch .250 Inch .250 Inch .226 Inch .205 Inch 1/2 Inch .565 .524 .505 .567 13/4 Inch .453 .591 .575 .598 Large Fittings 3/8 111011 0328 0297 0520 .289 1/2 Inch .406 .405 .405 .406 5/4 Inch .664 .648 .672 .652 1.1711ij VII. Spray Gun Deliveries at Constant Gun Pressures 5/8 Inch Hose 50 Feet Standard Fittings Disc Gun Air Chamber Gallons Disc “bun Air Chamber Gallons 8128 Pressure Pressure per Minute Size Pressure wfressure per Minute 4 150 150 .95 10 150 220 5.70 200 200 1.11 200 500 6.72 250 250 1.26 250 570 7.49 500 500 1.59 500 440 8.28 550 550 1.47 550 —-— _--_ 400 400 1.59 400 --- —--- 6 150 160 1.98 12 150 500 8.20 200 215 2.55 200 400 9.55 250 265 2.61 250 --- ---- 500 515 2.82 500 --- ---- 550 570 5.06 550 -—— -_-- 400 420 5.28 400 --- ~--— 7 150 165 2.71 14 150 595 10.65 200 220 5.19 200 --- ----- 250 280 5.57 250 --- ----- 500 555 5.91 500 --- ----- 550 590 4.22 550 --- _-_-- 400 450 4.51 400 --- ---_- 8 150 175 5.48 16 150 --- ..... 200 255 4.06 200 --- -_-_- 250 295 4.59 250 --— _____ 500 550 5.04 500 -—- _____ 550 415 5.46 550 ~-- ..... 400 --- 4:00 "" """"" 9 150 200 4.48 200 275 5.24 250 555 5.95 500 400 6.55 550 -~- "“' 400’ --- -1-_ <_______,.___1._—-———-————"’5" TQBLE VIII. Spray Gun Deliveries at Constant Gun Pressures 1/2 Inch Hose 50 Feet Standard Fittings [use gun nir Chamber Gallons Disc Gun Air Chamber Gallons Size .1ressure Pressure per.Minute Size Pressure Pressure per Minute 4 150 150 .95 10 150 180 5.69 200 200 1.11 200 255 6.75 250 250 1.26 250 290 7.51 500 500 1.58 500 550 8.29 400 400 1.59 400 --_ 6 150 150 1.92“ 12 150 200 8.25 200 200 2.51 200 265 9.52 250 250 2.58 250 525 10.78 000 500 2.84 500 585 11.84 550 550 5.06 550 --- 400 400 5.29 400 --- 7 150 155 2.69 14 150 250 10.65 200 205 5.14 200 510 12.47 250 260 5.52- 250 580 15.94 500 510 5.88 . 500 —-- 550 560 4.19 550 --- 400 410 4.49 400 --- 8 150 160 5.50 16 150 , 280 15.77 200 210 4.07 200 ~-- 250 265 4.65 250 --- 500 520 5.08 500 --- 550 575 5.49 550 --- 400 425 5.88 400 --- 9 150 165 4.45 200 220 5.22 250 275 5.90 500 550 6.57 550 585 7.11 400 440 7.68 TABLE IX. Spray Gun Deliveries at Constant Gun Pressures 5/4 Inch Hose 50 Feet Standard Fittings 5150 Gun Air Chamber Gallons Disc Gun Air Chamber Gallons Size Pressure Pressure per Minute Size Pressure Pressure per Minute 4 150 150 .95 10 150 160 5.65 200 200 1.11 200 210 6.69 250 250 1.26 250 265 7.45 500 500 1.58 500 515 8.22 550 550 1.48 550 570 8.91 400 400 1.59 400 425 9.56 6 150 150 '1.92 12 150 165 8,25 200 200 2.51 200 215 9.52 250 250 2.59 250 250 10.78 , 500 500 2.55 500 535 11'83 550 550 3.07 550 580 i: 3: 00 4:30 o 400 400 5.29 4 - 70 10.62 7 150 150 2.69 l4 150 1 12 47 200 200 5.15 200 225 . 250 5.51 250 280 15.92 :33 500 5.56 500 550 15.45 550 550 4.19 550 -—- 400 405 4.50 400 --- ‘ 190 3 o s 150 150 :.:g 16 :38 ___ 1 77 goo 205 o ___ 250 255 4.64 :28 _ _ 500 505 5.05 60 ‘ 550 560 5.52 500 "“ 400 410 5.94 40 “- 200 205 5024 250 255 5-95 550 560 ‘7 .10 f 1.1.1.44 ~- r--—""""'"‘ . ‘1: TABLE X. Iressure Tests Jitn a Short Hose 12 1/2 Feet of 5/8 Inch nose €180 eiir Chamber - Gun Eressure Loss in Pressure ulZG irressure standard Fit. 3 Large flit. Standard Fit. 3 Large Fit. 4 250 250 250 0 O 550 550 550 O 0 450 450 450 0 0 6 250 245 250 5 0 550 540 550 10 0 450 425 450 25 0 7 250 240 250 10 0 550 555 550 15 0 450 415 450 55 0 8 250 250 250 20 O 550 525 550 25 0 450 405 445 45 5 9 250 220 245 50 5 550 510 540 40 10 450 580 425 70 25 10 250 i 200 ' 255 50 15 55 280 55 70 20 450 550 400 120 50 12 250 165 210 35 40 550 220 295 150 55 450 275 565 175 85 14 250 150 175 120 75 550 170 245 180 105 450 205 -—— 245 ~-- 16 250 100 ' 150 150 100 550 150 ——— 220 --- 450 ~-- ~-— -—- --- T5812 XI. Spray Delivery With multiple Nozzle Rods 5/8 Inch Hose, 50 Feet, Large Fittings Number Size Air Chamber Pressure at .Efi%fifiififi;thifijlfifi;*l of of Pressure the Rod Loes to per Nozzles Discs 7 gthe Rod ”n Minute _fl 5 9 4 250 245 5 5.59 *w 550 540 10 4.29 450 450 20 4.79 5 5 ' 250 250 20 5.24 550 520 50 6.52 450 ' 410 40 7.25 5 6 250 ‘ ' 220 h 30 6.64 550 305 45 7.96' 450 580 70 9.01 4 4 250 240 10 , 4.67 ' 550 525 25 5.55 1 450 415 55 ' 5.2 ‘ 4 5 250 215 55 ' 6.09 550 290 60 ‘ 7.26 450 ' , 380 70 8.29 ifiBlE XI. Cont. 15mmer Size Air Chamber Pressure at Pressure Gallons of of Pressure the Hod Loss to per N°Z%$2§1§Q§§9§__ the Hod iMinute 4 6 250 210 40 8.14 550 270 80 9.58 450 550 100 10.88 6 4 250 210 40 6.57 550 295 55 7.75 450 580 70 8.80 6 5 250 185 65 8.88 550 255 95 10.66 450 555 115 12.26 6 6 250 155 95 10.61 550 215 155 12.69 450 275‘ 175 14.27 8 4 250 200 50 8.02 550 280 70 9.48 450 560 90 10.97 8 5 250 160 90 10.50 550 220 150 12.49 450 290 160 14.50 6 6 250 150 120 11.86 I 550 185 165 14.26 450 Exceeds pump capacity TABLE XII. Comparison of Spray Rod Pipes 50 Feet of 5/8 Inch Hose Large Fittings Pipe NUmber g Size Pressure at Pressure Pressure Gallons Diameter of of Air Chamber at at lower per F_* Nozzles Discs Rod and of pipe Minute ‘ 5/8 In. 4 4 550 525 515 . 5.60 5/16 4 4 550 555 010 6.55 5/8 4 4 450 420 410 6.57 5/16 4 4 450 420 400 6.26 “ ' 5/8 4 6 550 275 260 10.02 5/16 4 6 550 275 200 9.58 :4 5/5 . 4 6 450 . 550 550 11.51 5/16 ' 4 6 450 550 260 10.85 Hardie pipe 5/5 Inch diameter and 5 feet long. Bean pipe 5/16 Inch diameter and 4 feet long. TABLE XIII. Effect of Whirl Plates on Delivery 1. Hardie Rod with Bean Whirl-plates 2. Bean Rod with Bean fihirl-plates 5. Hardie Rod with Hardie Whirl-plates 4. Bean Mod with Hardie Whirl-plates 5/8 Inch Hose, 50 Feet, Large Fittings No. 5 Discs Holes in Whirl Plates vary in Size from 9/64 to 10/64 Inch Combination Air Chamber Pressure Gallons per Number Pressure at Rod Minute 1 250 205 6.56 2 250 205 6.04 5 250 210 6.02 4 250 205 5.65 1 550 295 7.70 2 ‘ 550 500 7.15 5 550 500 7.08 4 550 500 6.74 l 450 580 9.04 2 450 580 8.50 5 450 580 8.47 4 450 580 8.02 inBLE XIV. Water Delivered Through Different Cutoffs 1. Hardie Cutoff, as used on their Multiple Nozzle Rods 2. Bean Cutoff, as need on their 6 and 8 Nozzle Rods 5. Friend Cutoff 4. Bean Cutoff, as used on their 5 and 4 Nozzle Rods Make of .' Number of Size of Pressure at the Pressure at Gallons per Cutoff ’ Nozzles Discs Air Chamber the Rod Minute 1 5 4 550 550 4.50 2 5 4 550 550 4.29 5 ‘ 5 4 550 550 4.24 4 5 4 550 550 4.25” l 5 4 450 420 4.80 ; 2 5 4 450 420 4.79 i 5 5 4 450 420 4.77 4 5 4 450 420 4.76 l 5 6 550 505 8.05 2 5 6 550 505 7.96 5 5 6 550 295 7.81 I 4 5 6 550 290 7.75 l 5 6 450 580 9.15 2 5 6 450 580 9.01 5 5 6 450 575 8.88 4 5 6 450 560 8.68 TABLE XV. fiater Delivered 1hr0ugh Different Cutoffs 1. Hardie Cutof 2. Bean Cutoff 5. Friend Cutoff 4. Bean Cutoff Make of N0. of Size of Pressure at Pressure Gallons per Cutoff Nozzles Discs Air Chamber cat Rod Minute 1 6 4 550 505 7.82 2 6 4 550 505 7.79 5 6 4 550 295 7.69 4 6 4 550 285 7.57 1 6 4 450 400 8.92 2 6 4 450 400 8.88 5 6 4 450 590 8.78 4 6 4 450 570 8.57 1 6 6 550 215 12.91 2 6 6 550 215 12.79 5 6 6 550 4 6 6 550 175 11.81 1 6 6 450 275 14.87 2 6 6 450 270 14.65 5 6 6 450 A 6 6 450 250 15.55 14515 XVI. Hose Diameter, Showing Expansion for Various Pressures Average Outside Diameter Bressure 5/8 Inch 1/2 Inch 5/4 Inch 0 .844 Inch .965 Inch 1.575 Inch 150 .898 1.020 1.469 200 .906 1.051 1.477 250 .914 1.059 1.488 500 .914 1.045 1.496 550 .914 1.045 1.504 400 .922 1.047 1.508 .450 .922 1.047 1.516 E TABLE III. Spray Gun Deliveries at Constant Air Chamber Pressures. Hose Disc Pressure at Pressure at the Gun Pressure Lost Delivery in Gal. per Min. Size Size Air Chamber Standard Large Fit- Standard Large Standard Large Fittings tings Fitti ,s Fit. Fittings Fittings l r 50 4 200 200 0 1.11 fleet 250 250 250 0 0 1.26 1.26 or 300 800 0 1.39 3/8 350 350 350 0 o 1.47 1.47 inch 400 400 O 1.59 450 450 450 0 0 1.68 1.68 6 200 195 5 2.29 250 240 250 10 O 2.54 2.58 300 290 10 2.78 350 340 350 - 10 O 3.02 3.04 400 380 20 3.21 450 425 440 25 10 3.40 3.44 7 200 185 15 3.02 i can 995‘. 9.50 25 O 5.41 3.53 TABLE XVII. Pressure Tests With Eight Nozzle Rod 3/8 Inch Hose Large Fittings Disc Pressure at+ Pressure at Pressure Pressure at Gallons Size Air Chamber Entranceto rod Lost inmd The Nozzles per Minute 4 200 165 30 135 7.10 4 250 200 30 170 8.02 4 300 235 35 200 8.77 4 350 280 40 240 9.48 4 400 320 35 285 10.21 4 450 360 40 320 10.97 6 200 105 35 70 10.24 6 250 130 45 85 11.86 6 300 155 55 100 13.05 6 350 185 65 120 14.26 6 400 215 75 140 15.25 6 450 Exceeds pump capacity --- ----- 3/4 Inch Hose Pressure Readings Disc At Entrance At E3670?’ At Entrance to At Entrance intfé- Size To Red Tube First Tee to Secmd tee ymdseccnitee I II III IV V 5 300 265 250 5 300 Eliminate tip to '265 260 5 300 290 tube . 275 5 300 290 285 5 300 250* 5 300 275** * For Normal Rod ** With Tube Tip Eliminated a a“, *; liq -' W1?” ;"- 'I -" IT ' 'J 61%. ‘5 p'lpx' ‘ '5 , . -. - '- . ~ I -. I. ','-,v _ " ~‘.' . .', ,- LKKJ“ . ‘ .| '. ;" fi_ _ I. “ ‘k‘xd 4- “» . .I ,- ’4’ ' {h~ ‘ at" ..,‘,‘ - .q .'l I .. -.v ‘. 1‘. a ' v 1‘ ‘.V‘ .l' .1" ‘ 11”: ‘ o ‘ ’. I v 3“. ‘1': l‘ a) “-0“. c'J-‘v I‘:>"’-‘ 1 |\ x '. ‘11"...1'. . ' .' ‘ 1" .1 . - y. u_ ’I J,‘,{‘V‘y."“.“ '» ‘3’; 1‘37; . ' 4 }' f ' h\l J " - \V‘ I 3304- ., " "S .. .1 .tirq, . “,0 ' _‘f . t. in. .I ~." I-' 'w“ A“ ’fi‘ro' . ”I k 5_."- wk 11 .* 3 T‘.'_ ‘1}.1‘ ' {er ._-.a'| "tt“"'\“. 3": ;\:", I 1 ('51... -;a.'-:'..J" - .‘ ‘, ’ .. 4 -, 9‘ ~‘ {$“f'k \ 47., lfikrl‘ '1'l"ci‘l;h" ..",' . P‘ 7' ,v‘“ . t .» I I'.".'.- .‘J '1“. l . l _5 ’ ' q‘. .'0- I ‘ '5. “.1“ "‘ ‘J‘: "1 . . )Q' ; ' { I). ~- -‘ 0' “ 91'. .1..qu ' ' In" 0 1'3)": ..‘ .[f' — x ” K... p . P ‘1 . l MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY LIB 11 1111 1111111111 110:” L