|
Forums36
Topics42,113
Posts571,661
Members19,114
| |
Most Online13,012 Jun 7th, 2026
|
|
|
0 members (),
1,792
guests, and
104
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 1,507 Likes: 24
Lunker
|
|
Lunker
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 1,507 Likes: 24 |
I truly hope your setup works as intended. I'm very interested in your test-trial results. The concept is ideal; with no on-board mix-tank and what is effectively a closed-system that minimizes potential applicator-exposure. A true win-win in for both efficiency and safety. My efforts with a similar system didn't pan out as I hoped. Adding any type of downstream restriction; such as a fire-hose nozzle or connecting to smaller dropper-hoses, caused the pressure to equalize throughout the system's piping - which disabled the venturi-inductor's "draw" from the concentrate-reservoir. Should your venturi fail to draw fluid from the concentrate-reservoir (while the downstream ribbed-hose is coupled to the transom-mounted dropper-hose boom), maybe try disconnecting the ribbed-hose from the boom's tee-feed - since that would be the point of a potential restriction - and then see if induction from the concentrate-reservoir is achieved. Yes, those ribbed suction-hoses are indeed pricey (often $4-$6/ft). They're typically used where the fluids within are under a vacuum rather than pressure. The integrated ribs prevent the hose's collapse under a vacuum.
Kelly Duffie Cypress, TX
|
|
|
Moderated by Bill Cody, Bruce Condello, catmandoo, Chris Steelman, Dave Davidson1, esshup, ewest, FireIsHot, Omaha, Sunil, teehjaeh57
|
|