Alan, you are about 1 1/2 hurs away from me so TDS might be similar. My TDS is around 160 ppm. At this level it is more economical in the long run to get an RO/DI unit. If you just want to experiment with pure water cleaning you could check out my ’Testing The Waters’ series on converting a backpack and using Unger’s wfp conversion kit. I bought distilled water for that series but bought water is really too expensive when compared to a system. You could rent a DI tank as well as a better option than purchasing water.
If you ever want to venture up to T.O. I could give you some hands on demonstration of my gear.
I like the idea of a pre-wash with regular tap water and ecover then final rinse with DI water. I am new to the forum as well and planning on purchasing WF equipment in the near future. Would this method make sense for most jobs:
Step 1) Clean ALL exterior windows on a home with WFP and tap water, use ecover (or whatever soap you like) where necessary
Step 2) Go around the home with backpack of DI water, made on site with DI tank, and light scrub/rinse all windows previously cleaned with tap water to get spot free finish.
I like this idea as it seems to reduce the need for DI water. You may be able to get around the house on one backpack of DI water. Downside is it may add time as you would be circling the house twice. Any thoughts/experience?
Yes you would really add time to the job and time is money. Isn’t time savings one good reason to go WFP anyway?
Not trying to be a big jerk here, but why are we always trying to nickel and dime our equipment? Especially if it is really an investment that will truly have a positive effect on our bottom end. Believe me, I was the same way. But if you are already running a WC biz you will not regret investing in a pure water set up. Use straight pure water and move on to the next job and make more $ in the day. Pure water pays for itself in time saved. JMO
Sent from my iPhone using Window Cleaning Resource mobile app
I would suggest doing one side/section of the house at a time. If you have very hard water, you probably wouldn’t want to let that sit on the glass too long, plus you could probably cut down on running around. But see what works for you.
You could use a standard 30ft pole with a nylex or truck wash brush, fill your window cleaning bucket with 3 gallons of pure water and a couple of squirts of Ecover or GG4. Pre Scrub a few windows with this then follow up with your reg wfp for a quick scrub and rinse.
Couldn’t agree more…
I am on a search for the fastest/best quality WFP window cleaning and it seems to me a larger WFP tube diameter will get more rinsing power on the glass. Caveat, I do mostly large commercial panes which are 60-80% hydrophobic. So I need that big volume of water to rinse faster and with more power.
Bottom line is if I am getting a faster, better rinse then I can move more quickly to the next pane and make more money over time. Big money.
I get it the resin needs changing more, but more jobs due to faster turnaround negates that issue.
Remember its the brush with agitation that does the cleaning not the water flow rate. 1/2 gpm is sufficient to clean a window. If you are dealing with hydrophobic glass then you need more jets closer together to get a fast rinse. We have several brushes that allow you to use 4 or 6 Water Fed Pole Brushes - Tucker, XERO, IPC Eagle, and more – WindowCleaner.com
It would seem a larger volume of water would do the trick.
However, 5/16 hose with 100psi 12v pump from a tank runs two poles with plenty of water or one pole with a lots of pressure and water. Over the top water stream brushes (wagtail jet stream for one) is the way to go for commercial hudrophobic glass.
May I suggest looking at different options? Perhaps checking out other set ups before making a final decision on changing your set up and pole hose diameter.
Something to keep in mind: multiple jetted brushes will not work well without the pressure to push the water you need through the pole hose to the brush. One mistake I had made years back. IMO this is one reason why some are pushing larger diameter hose, the pure water system the currently own or are buying cannot push enough PSI for smaller 5/16 hose.
(There is a reason why when you by a tank set up from different companies they often come with 2gpm 100psi pump. It works awesome)
Yes @John… it is the brush with agitation AND water flow rate which cleans glass… both working together. Brush agitation with water scrubs the dirt and holding the brush away from the glass the flow rate rinses the glass…
So how do we clean a window quicker? By increasing the speed of brush agitation and increasing flow rate of water right? Well, most of us are maxed out on the brush agitation speed so we can only increase the flow rate… Increasing flow rate helps in both phases of the cleaning process: 1) brushing: a greater volume of water will carry away more completely loosened soil and contaminants 2) final rinse: a greater volume of water will carry down the window in a more powerful wave of water (hydrophilic glass) and amore powerful fan jet action (hydrophobic glass).
The same principle of greater gpm applies in pressure washing.
A machine at 2 gallons-per-minute will not clean as fast as a 4gpm washer. They can both operate at 3500psi but they will not clean as fast. Due primarily to the amount of rinsing power available through gpm.
So a wfp at 1/2gpm will not clean as fast as a wfp at 2 or 3gpm will it?
All this being said, my obsession with this topic comes from the fact that almost all my work is large, commercial, mostly hydrophobic glass. I understand that for guys who do all residential this 0.5gpm may be sufficient for all them small windows. Plus, most residential glass is hydrophilic. Nice n easy.
Most of my glass is beastly hydrophobic and if I want to do a good job quicker I am dead set on getting a greater gpm up the hose. And what I am searching for is what tube diameter will get me the greatest gpm? So far 1/4 has been 75% better in terms of water force out the brush than the standard 3/16. I suspect a 3/8id tube will kick out that much more water flow and power.
Let me explain brush agitation. The greatest agitation is on the upward stroke and the downward stroke will remove water and dirt. So you do not need to remover the brush from the glass if you use a nylon brush which is monofilament. If you have jets placed proper on the brush block then the downward stroke will cause a wall of water to remove all the dirt that was loosened on the upward stroke. To increase your speed you need to increase your brush size and jets. To much water flow can cause backwash that will cause drip down or runs. For example a 24 inch brush with 6 jets will be faster than a 18 inch brush with 4 jets. The newest invention is what is called a rinse bar. It is a bar with jets every inch and works great for Hydrophopic glass like this one https://shopwindowcleaningresource.com/wagtail-wave.html
It is my belief that in the future all brushes will adapt to the rinse bar verses jets
Good description of maintenance clean (most probably residential - smaller panes/mostly hydrophilic glass). Most of my work is 1X per year window cleaning… commercial/institutional, large panes, mostly hydrophobic. The significant amount of soils and contaminants on my windows are indeed loosened up and partially rinsed away with the complete 2 sets across the glass of brush stroke… however I need to lift the brush off the glass to get a perfect rinse. I use Tucker nylon, dual trim, mono btw.
This I agree with… with the condition that water volume is also increased per jet.
The wfp industry has thus far progressed using 3/16id pole hose which provides a good balance of rinsing power vs conserving filtered water. What if guys started thinking bigger than saving money on deionized water and started thinking about cleaning windows faster? I am sure the next logical step would be to increase water volume for a faster/better rinse.
One note about the rinse. How are you getting overspray with your brush resting on the glass during rinsing? Bounce and splatter can only happen when brush is held back further than 6 inch or so… Also, of course there will be bounce and splatter when the jet orifices are too small. Widen them up and you get a nice fat stream of water… more volume, more power, less unnecessary spray.
There is a lot to explore here… I plan on building my own custom lengths of brush this year from 24" to 36". Currently my widest is the standard 18" Tucker.
It just never straightened out…always wanted to just coil up.
