THIS is Why We Invest in Science

Users who are viewing this thread

CityGirl

Active Member
Messages
1,207
Reaction score
2
Tokenz
0.01z

See that picture above? It shows a new type of rocket engine design. Usually, fuel is pumped into a chamber where the chemicals ignite and are blown out the other end, creating thrust. The design pictured above does this in a new way: as the fuel is pumped into the chamber, it’s spun up, creating a vortex. This focuses the flow, keeping it closer to the center of the chamber. In this way, when the fuel ignite, it keeps the walls of the chamber cooler.
So what, right?

Here’s what: using this technology — developed for rockets for NASA, remember — engineers designed a way to pump water more quickly and efficiently for fire suppression. The result is nothing short of astonishing:
One series of tests using empty houses at Vandenberg Air Force Base compared [this new] system with a 20-gallon-per-minute, 1,400 pound-per-square-inch (psi) discharge capability (at the pump) versus a standard 100-gallon-per-minute, 125 psi standard hand line—the kind that typically takes a few firemen to control. The standard line extinguished a set fire in a living room in 1 minute and 45 seconds using 220 gallons of water. The [new] system extinguished an identical fire in 17.3 seconds using 13.6 gallons—with a hose requiring only one person to manage.
In other words, this new system put out a fire more quickly, using less water, and — critically — with fewer firefighters needed to operate the hose. This frees up needed firefighters to do other important tasks on the job, and therefore makes fighting fires faster and safer.
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2012/03/21/this-is-why-we-invest-in-science-this/http://www.sti.nasa.gov/tto/Spinoff2011/ps_5.html
 
  • 10
    Replies
  • 941
    Views
  • 0
    Participant count
    Participants list

36gamer

Member
Messages
204
Reaction score
0
Tokenz
0.00z
That is pretty cool. I plan on going into the fire fighting career though, so this will probably make there be less of a need for fire fighters (due to less men having to control the hose), so it may be harder for me to get a job. Damn science.
 

Alien Allen

Froggy the Prick
Messages
16,633
Reaction score
22
Tokenz
1,206.42z
I shall have to ask my son who is an Lt. on the FD if he has heard of this.

One drawback I see is that extreme pressure. That would be a concern for hoses bursting and what comes in contact with that stream.
 

Accountable

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,962
Reaction score
1
Tokenz
0.00z

See that picture above? It shows a new type of rocket engine design. Usually, fuel is pumped into a chamber where the chemicals ignite and are blown out the other end, creating thrust. The design pictured above does this in a new way: as the fuel is pumped into the chamber, it’s spun up, creating a vortex. This focuses the flow, keeping it closer to the center of the chamber. In this way, when the fuel ignite, it keeps the walls of the chamber cooler.
So what, right?

Here’s what: using this technology — developed for rockets for NASA, remember — engineers designed a way to pump water more quickly and efficiently for fire suppression. The result is nothing short of astonishing:
One series of tests using empty houses at Vandenberg Air Force Base compared [this new] system with a 20-gallon-per-minute, 1,400 pound-per-square-inch (psi) discharge capability (at the pump) versus a standard 100-gallon-per-minute, 125 psi standard hand line—the kind that typically takes a few firemen to control. The standard line extinguished a set fire in a living room in 1 minute and 45 seconds using 220 gallons of water. The [new] system extinguished an identical fire in 17.3 seconds using 13.6 gallons—with a hose requiring only one person to manage.
In other words, this new system put out a fire more quickly, using less water, and — critically — with fewer firefighters needed to operate the hose. This frees up needed firefighters to do other important tasks on the job, and therefore makes fighting fires faster and safer.
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2012/03/21/this-is-why-we-invest-in-science-this/

NNOOOOOoooo!!! It's a job killer. The unions will never go for it. Sarcasm.gif
 

36gamer

Member
Messages
204
Reaction score
0
Tokenz
0.00z
I shall have to ask my son who is an Lt. on the FD if he has heard of this.

One drawback I see is that extreme pressure. That would be a concern for hoses bursting and what comes in contact with that stream.
or possibly just tear a hole through the side of the house and damage things in the surroundings.
 
80,526Threads
2,194,677Messages
5,014Members
Back
Top