Aparently an unglided wand performs better than a glided wand

**SeriousHeat** · 07-03-2009, 03:43 AM

Originally Posted by Matt Strader

I bet it was operator error

HAHA..... You are actually right!

**Ara Klujian** · 07-03-2009, 04:57 AM

I've handed my wand to a best friend. He couldn't move it 1 stroke and said this tough. Glides are like training wheels. Come to this side of the floor where we can move this with grace and eloquence without assistance from training wheels. Is this you? Can you move this wand without a glide or slide? If so ,you are regulating like it means something. Some people have ailments that the glide or slide will help. But a young buck should be all about that agitation in my opinion. Agitation and dry times! Stray from lazy results. Learn how we have been doing it for decades.

**Ara Klujian** · 07-03-2009, 06:10 AM

I've had big guys come to me and say they need a larger wand. So Igive them a bigger wand and they say ooooh its too heavy... I like this 1.5 Aw29. GIVE ME A BREAK. And you cant use a feather touch then expect to use a superior PC valve and have cleaners like it.

**wandwizard** · 07-04-2009, 02:56 AM

Here is a word for the day with it's definition.
Ergonomics Definition: Ergonomics is defined as the science related to man and his work, embodying the anatomic, physiologic, and mechanical principles affecting the efficient use of human energy.
Examples: Safe lifting techniques, proper posture, appropriate seating position,and adaptive equipment are only a few of the many examples of ergonomics in the workplace.

I've pushed and pulled a wand for a very long time. I think I did my first carpet job around 1980 using a small drag wand. I started my own business with a Castex portable in 1987. I've used a variety of wands with portables and truck mounts. Would you like to know what they all have in common? At the end of the day they make me hurt! Sometimes hurt really bad. Pain in my shoulders. Pain in my elbows. Pain in my back. Pain in my legs. Pain in my hands. Pain in my neck!!! I purchased my 3,300. RX-20 to make it so I didn't have to use a wand as my sole source of cleaning. I'm so glad I did!

Here is my point. Anyone who can make a wand safer and easier to use is my friend and the friend of all carpet cleaners. Yes, we must have good recovery, but we also must have wands that don't break our backs, make our elbows, wrist, and hands sore, and in general makes our job easier. This is not about how much of a he-man I am because I can pull and push a wand thats literally locked down to the carpet.(not a good thing btw) This is about making our industry safer with fewer work related injuries that can put you out of a job before you know what hit you. I was a hospital corpsman or medic in the Navy for 4 years, spent mostly with the Marines on Parris Island, S.C. and I know just how quickly an injury can incapacitate you. Repeated stress on certain parts of the body can cause you to develop problems over time that can actually prevent you from doing your job and not just for a day, week, or month, but ever again!

I've about talked myself into getting a glide, but since I have the RX-20 I don't need it near as much. My wand is mainly used to edge out the rooms or to do smaller jobs and I let my RX-20 do the heavy work for me most of the time.

You manufacturers of glides, keep it up. Try and make the best glides you can that give the best recovery and easiest movement. You are valuable to our industry. Wand makers, do everything you can to make the wand as ergonomic as humanly possible. I don't need or want carpal tunnel or a slipped disk!

**Duane Oxley** · 07-04-2009, 11:25 AM

Originally Posted by Ara Klujian

... testing proved that lift was more responsible for removing water from the carpet than airflow.

I don't see it that way. IMO, there is another way of interpreting the results...

Testing did indicate the importance of lift (i.e., how much force the airflow is pulled with). But lift without airflow is no good, either. (Get a lock on some CGD and you can see this for yourself.)

Airflow is important as well. In fact, it's equally important.

So the question is, how do maximize both?

**Ara Klujian** · 07-04-2009, 07:21 PM

Duane, Maybe you didn't read what I said above. I stated since carpet is porous airflow is still introduced. And when I clean commercial I'm looking for that lock. I dont call it lock I call it grab. If I tilt my wand to break the seal I leave water down. I'm not gonna argue with you be cause we will go back and forth about this and probably make a TMF record for number of posts. But I will say this. I never get any wicking issues on commercial that people speak of and I swear on christ. Let me take a wild guess. You sell them right?

**Bobby** · 07-04-2009, 07:57 PM

If a glided wand does not help dry carpets faster why did Harris Research fight so hard to keep anyone but Chem Dry from using them? I also run 4 to the door with a 4.8 CDS I do get faster dry times than with 2" hose and no glide I don't know what to make of all the back and forth here I just know what works best for me. I also am a bit sceptical cause most of you guys invloved in the test are or seem to be anti 4 to door and glides. Or am I wrong if so I apologize not trying to start something.

**Ara Klujian** · 07-04-2009, 08:12 PM

Bobby I wanted four to the door to work better. Ask Rob Allen as I would talk to him about it in side conversations getting advise and asking him questions about it.

**Ara Klujian** · 07-04-2009, 08:31 PM

The proof is in the bucket. How was I able to pull 1/2 gallon more than a glided wand? I'll tell you. I applied more pressure to the wand on the dry stroke. Rather than letting a glide work off airflow. I guess if God came down from Heaven and said glides are less effective, people would still argue with Him.

**Duane Oxley** · 07-05-2009, 12:06 AM

Originally Posted by Ara Klujian

Duane, Maybe you didn't read what I said above. I stated since carpet is porous airflow is still introduced. And when I clean commercial I'm looking for that lock. I dont call it lock I call it grab.

Wow... You're right Ara. I didn't read any of that anywhere when I posted. (Hmmm. I looked and still don't see it.)

Truly flat, CGD (commercial glue- down) is a PITR no matter how you scrub it. I used it as an example specifically because it's unique in that it's often like cleaning cardboard, and speaking of getting a "lock" on it is a good way to emphasize the importance of a balance of flow and lift.

When I cleaned, that "grab", as you call it (which is a good way to say it), was important to me, too. It let me know that I wasn't just skimming over the surface, but actually was pulling airflow through them. And that "grab" is missing with a glide. I, personally, don't like losing touch with the feel of the wand on the carpet when I clean.

Originally Posted by Ara Klujian

Let me take a wild guess. You sell them right?

What, wands...? I do sell wands.

"No.", I don't sell glides of any kind, unless a customer insists that I get them for him. (It's happened twice... Once, the guy HATED the glide and returned it. The second time, the guy kept the glide.)

Personally, I'm NOT sold on glides. And I've tried them from Ken and Greenbean.

**dgardner** · 07-05-2009, 02:18 AM

I read and follow these tests and ensuing discussion with interest. I appreciate the work that the group has done, but one comment caught my eye:

Originally Posted by Ara Klujian

The proof is in the bucket. How was I able to pull 1/2 gallon more than a glided wand? I'll tell you. I applied more pressure to the wand on the dry stroke. Rather than letting a glide work off airflow. I guess if God came down from Heaven and said glides are less effective, people would still argue with Him.

Does that indicate glided wands are more/less effective than naked ones? I imagine more pressure applied to a glided wand would recover more solution too.

I have a suggestion. For future tests (if there ever are any), weight the wand heads down with sandbags or bags of lead shot. As much weight as you want, but the same weight for every test/every wand. The operator is to use one hand only, to grasp the wand and trigger the valve. He/she is not to apply leverage or even touch the forward handle.

Good science is all about eliminating variables that can skew the results.

**idreadnought** · 07-05-2009, 05:27 AM

Dgardner, I agree completely and you beat my too that point. He mentions his aggressive pressure he placed on the wand. He mentioned that the type of pressure he placed on the wand was only used during water extraction and cases that fast dry times were needed. A test that didn't use the same variables in each test is an inacurate test. Sorry this test of glides must be more consistent for me to be convinced. I could skew a test nearly any way I wanted it if you allowed me to adjust the variables of the test.

**Duane Oxley** · 07-05-2009, 11:17 AM

The best approach is to test one thing at a time.

**Ara Klujian** · 07-05-2009, 04:53 PM

Originally Posted by Duane Oxley

Wow... You're right Ara. I didn't read any of that anywhere when I posted. (Hmmm. I looked and still don't see it.)

Truly flat, CGD (commercial glue- down) is a PITR no matter how you scrub it. I used it as an example specifically because it's unique in that it's often like cleaning cardboard, and speaking of getting a "lock" on it is a good way to emphasize the importance of a balance of flow and lift.

When I cleaned, that "grab", as you call it (which is a good way to say it), was important to me, too. It let me know that I wasn't just skimming over the surface, but actually was pulling airflow through them. And that "grab" is missing with a glide. I, personally, don't like losing touch with the feel of the wand on the carpet when I clean.

What, wands...? I do sell wands.

"No.", I don't sell glides of any kind, unless a customer insists that I get them for him. (It's happened twice... Once, the guy HATED the glide and returned it. The second time, the guy kept the glide.)

Personally, I'm NOT sold on glides. And I've tried them from Ken and Greenbean.

Once again I misinterpreted what you were trying to say I apologise. And my statments on glides must have been in the 4 to the door video. http://www.truckmountforums.com/foru...nicks-bbq.html

**Ara Klujian** · 07-05-2009, 05:08 PM

Originally Posted by dgardner

I read and follow these tests and ensuing discussion with interest. I appreciate the work that the group has done, but one comment caught my eye:

Does that indicate glided wands are more/less effective than naked ones? I imagine more pressure applied to a glided wand would recover more solution too.

I have a suggestion. For future tests (if there ever are any), weight the wand heads down with sandbags or bags of lead shot. As much weight as you want, but the same weight for every test/every wand. The operator is to use one hand only, to grasp the wand and trigger the valve. He/she is not to apply leverage or even touch the forward handle.

Good science is all about eliminating variables that can skew the results.

One of the main factors for using a glide is the assumption that more airflow is the reason behind its success. Glides are suppose to rely on airflow to recover more water. I proved it was more lift that pulls water water from carpet. Airflow still being required. Plus, so many people say pushing down harder is pointless. This was the test: You clean your way with the glide and I'll clean my way without the glide. Lets see who pulls more water. Your idea of usind weights is a good idea but I cant imagine pushing the wand forward with one hand on dry carpet with good grab or lock.

**dgardner** · 07-05-2009, 08:31 PM

Originally Posted by Ara Klujian

Your idea of usind weights is a good idea but I cant imagine pushing the wand forward with one hand on dry carpet with good grab or lock.

Agreed, you wouldn't ever clean carpets that way, it would just be a way to insure accurate testing when comparing two wands, glides, etc. That way the operator couldn't (even subconsciously) skew the results. The weights would simulate the down pressure you would normally put on the forward handle.

I imagine a big guy like you would be able to muscle your way through a 4X8 piece of carpet with one hand...

**AllCleanExtreme** · 07-05-2009, 08:50 PM

To each thier own,,,,,,,, What makes you comfortable/ or able to Wand period. Injury glide could keep you in the game, Ara like is old School, and that is great as well..... I just say usw what is working for you, try a few tests on your own equipment draw your own conclusions you will know what "your setup" is doing.

**Duane Oxley** · 07-06-2009, 10:32 AM

Originally Posted by Ara Klujian

Once again I misinterpreted what you were trying to say I apologise. [/URL]

Not a problem, Ara. As we know, that kind of thing is prone to happen on bulletin boards more than in person.

I should have "opened up" with something like, "I tend to agree with your glide vs. non- glide statement...", just to set the stage, so to speak.

I hope that you can make it to the event I'm planning for next month. My driveway at the shop is over 100 feet long. And it continues for another 50 or so beyond me. On Saturdays, there are no businesses open in the building we're in, so we can use the entire length of the driveway to stretch the hoses out straight and rule out that variable for testing purposes, etc.

**wandwizard** · 07-07-2009, 05:01 AM

Ara, I'm only making this final post to make sure you understand that I am actually agreeing with you and your results in my previous post. Most all of the wands I've ever used were unglided and I get excellent recovery from my current wand. What I don't agree with you about is that you seem to take the stance that doing it "old school" is better. This is why I posted what I said about ergonomics. The older I get the more I feel the need to make my job as easy as I can get it. I'm 53 years old and pushing a wand is not my idea of fun. People who do carpet cleaning and really put in a lot of hours a day are very susceptible to the types of injuries I spoke about in my previous post. Yes it is important to recover water, but it's also important that you don't get a slipped disk in your back or carpal tunnel syndrome while doing it. Unless you are not made out of flesh and blood any carpet cleaner is going to go home after some jobs with a sore back, hands, elbows, and other body parts will hurt. Anything that can alleviate those kinds of problems is a good thing imho. I am a sole proprietor w/o any employees. I have preferred it that way for a long time. You may be strong as an ox and very healthy right now, but I'm here to tell you that can all change in an instant and you will never be the same again. I've seen it too many times. I do care very much how much water I recover from the carpet and until I can find a glide that recovers near as much as my unglided wand I will not use them. My RX-20 locks down to the floor plenty well and gives me very good lift with fast dry times, but I used only a wand for many, many years. Anything that can make this job easier, especially for aging carpet cleaners, or any carpet cleaner for that matter, is a good thing as long as it doesn't interfere with the cleaning itself.

**Ara Klujian** · 07-07-2009, 05:51 AM

Wandwizard, Maybe its time for me to be more open minded like my father. I mean I like to try new things, but if they dont pass my approval in the shop, they dont make it to the field. I supose one day it will catch up to me. Honestly though, with these new glides and slides anyone can clean carpet no problem. Without the glides it takes skill, effort, knowledge etc. With the glides it makes it seem like our job is easy. I kind of like it when stranger grabs the wand and tries to push it and he can't. And then says "wow, you make it look so easy but its hard as heck."