Why just wfp tops?

« **on:** January 09, 2006, 08:50:34 pm »

I'm new to wfp, so I'm curious.

I read a lot on here from guys who just do the upstairs wfp.
Then downstairs trad.
Why?

Pj

« **Reply #1 on:** January 09, 2006, 09:02:19 pm »

I just do tops with wfp to make the water last longer as i work out of an estate car but thinking of getting a trailer

regards

Brett

« **Reply #2 on:** January 09, 2006, 09:03:23 pm »

something I did as a way of introducing the customers to it. My reckoning was if you gave them dry clear glass at the bottom which they were used to and where they are doing most of their "looking out of" by the time they have decided or even thought of checking out the tops, they would be virtually dry and acceptable. When I moved onto the bottom windows with WFP, I was ready to pounce with " well, your top windows have been OK haven`t they?" but in all honesty, I have had no problems at all.

I often think that we are happy to clean windows at a height where we cannot see right up close to the finished product and trust the results due to our knowledge of WFP and yet, when we are able to clean bottom windows with a short pole, in full control both physically and visually of how we are cleaning the glass, we seem to lose our trust in the system and its results.
The only thing I would say is that bottom windows have had a battering of all manner of home-made and commercial cleaning products thrown over them over the years by the home-owners because they can reach them. This sometimes makes it very difficult to achieve a good sheeted rinse on the glass.

« **Reply #3 on:** January 09, 2006, 09:06:11 pm »

4 reasons for me

1. i can carry 250 L's in 10 25L barrels, but i only carry 6 now, use 4 of them on a normal day, so i dont use that much water

2. I sold he customer the idea of WFP with the WaH Directive and the safety asspect of it, so that only applies to upstairs

3. i do it by hand cause i know that the downstairs will be a top notch job

4. the time factor, i dont think many of my customers would be happy with me being "on-site" for 10 mins and saying "thats 9 quid please luv"

« **Reply #4 on:** January 09, 2006, 10:19:44 pm »

i prefer it this way
i like wfp upstairs but like traditional downstairs

unless downstairs frames need cleaning or its leaded

thanx

gary

« **Reply #5 on:** January 09, 2006, 10:43:15 pm »

Im bone idle to be honest , i do tops and bottems , the way i see it is if you have the hose out then use the darn thing , i use more water but hey when you see the return who cares !
My customers dont say a word about it , they love it , it was only a basic entry level system , but i cannot fault it , not a spot , ever

Rich P @ F

« **Reply #6 on:** January 09, 2006, 11:02:30 pm »

I've got to totally agree with Pj here.

If you've spent so much money on an alternative method, then why still do it the previous way?

If I got wfp(not that I ever would), then I'd replace my old method.
I'd only do it that way.

It's extra work if you're having to prepare and load two separate lots of kit.

Filling a bucket and barrels and washing scrims. Madness. :

Rog.

« **Reply #7 on:** January 09, 2006, 11:09:01 pm »

Quote from: Squeaky Clean. on January 09, 2006, 11:02:30 pm

Filling a bucket and barrels and washing scrims. Madness. :

Rog.

Rog, i will just make a comment here, its not to try and start a arguement, its just so others dont think its a valid point

I spend 10 mins a night filling my barrels, i start to fill one then unload my batteries from the van while that fills, 2 barrel i take my work box in the house (its got my books in it) 3rd barrel, i take the first 2 barrels to the car again, 4th barrel i just look pretty

as i only do half the scrim work, i wash mine every week ( i have about 20 scrims), load them into the machine and jobs done, hardly a major job

« **Reply #8 on:** January 09, 2006, 11:18:08 pm »

Yeah, that's fair enough Matt.

As long as you're comfortable with all that.
It's more than I could be bothered with when I get home, but that's another topic.

Like you said, no arguements!

Cheers.

« **Reply #9 on:** January 10, 2006, 11:29:50 am »

does anyone think its quicker doing bottoms with the pole. tops are quicker obviously.
but i cnt help thinking sometimes thst i would be quicker with trad methods on the bottom. especially when you have to do the frames to make a good job.

« **Reply #10 on:** January 10, 2006, 11:37:37 am »

Squeeky its like when the squeegee hit town, nobody wanted it but gradually everyone added it to their arsenal, wfp is not about replacement more evolution.

« **Reply #11 on:** January 10, 2006, 11:40:37 am »

Hi Pj,

We only went residential with wfp in July this year after using it for commercial for 4 years or so.

For us the whole point of going wfp was safety, speed and reducing the tools we needed.

We do 100% of our work now with wfp (Omnitrolley). Hubby just wheels the trolley and the pole around the back does tops and drops down and does the bottoms before he would have had the chance to change tools over to trad to do the bottoms only. Repeats it for the front and goes on to the next one. No belt, no bucket, no cloths and so far very few complaints.

By his reconing he does and extra 4 or 5 houses a day because he does it all wfp.

Personal choice though and its whatever suits the cleaner and the client. My opinion is though - why spend the money on wfp and do half the trad way.

Yes you use more water and that may be a logistical problem for some, we have a 1000 ltr tank on the van which we fill from and use approx 400-500 litres per day.

Happy cleaning Pea Jay, try it both ways and see what suits YOU.

Sarah

« **Reply #12 on:** January 10, 2006, 11:47:20 am »

I do it all wfp - I'm probably 2x quicker downstairs and 3x quicker upstairs than when using trad. With saying that its also the laziness thing in me that just says no to the scrim coming out too often

« **Reply #13 on:** January 10, 2006, 12:12:52 pm »

Quote from: Jeff Brimble on January 10, 2006, 11:37:37 am

Squeeky its like when the squeegee hit town, nobody wanted it but gradually everyone added it to their arsenal, wfp is not about replacement more evolution.

Well it's not really the same, as the squeegee was just a few quid and just a different way of drying the window other than chamios.
You're talking hundreds on a totally different method, so not everyone is going to change.
Anyway evolution generally means when something gets better.... :

I didn't think this topic was about what's better anyway, there's been plenty of boring threads on that already.

Rog.

« **Reply #14 on:** January 10, 2006, 12:20:46 pm »

mm, I'm rained off at the moment, so I think I'll do a time and motion study on myself cleaning my own windows.
The upstairs I know is quicker, but I'm going to time each window on the downstairs with WFP, then time each one whilst I do it trad.
I'll be interested to see what if any difference there is on time taken with downstairs windows that are straight forward to get to.

Wherever possible I always do the entire house WFP, even bungalows.

Ian

« **Reply #15 on:** January 10, 2006, 01:39:54 pm »

ok,

Results of time and motion studies

First off I did the downstairs traditional.

Timed on the kitchen door, which is a half georgian one-10 panes of glass. 2 min 45sec
rest of downstairs windows (bar 1 that needed a pointer ladder to get too and I couldn't be bothered $:-\$ ) which is another 4 windows-3 of which are the sadolin stained, 2 panes of glass type window, and the other one also has just 2 panes of glass, but the one pane is an opening light along the top.

Including the door, which makes 5 windows, time taken was; 6.06 min

Did whole house with WFP (apart from back) 5 upstairs windows (2 panes per window) and 7 downstairs windows (including the whole of the front door and the window I would have needed a pointer to get at.

Time taken 4.40 min

1 minute and 26 seconds faster for 7 extra windows.

Individual time for a single window.

28 seconds trad
11 seconds WFP

The same ground floor window.

Niether method was done at race speed, but trad was done at a 'busy' pace, frame wasn't cleaned, sill had light wipe over, edges had a very quick detail.

WFP was at normal working speed using roughly 2l per min and included everything.

Must say that I was genuinely surprised just how much faster WFP was on a ground floor window.

Ian

« **Reply #16 on:** January 10, 2006, 01:46:28 pm »

yeah, I thought I was twice as quick downstairs but 11secs compared to 28 and the frame done also - wfp rests its case m'laud

« **Reply #17 on:** January 10, 2006, 01:49:03 pm »

4min40 was that doing tops then going back to do bottoms after dripping time ? or all in one go ?

« **Reply #18 on:** January 10, 2006, 03:02:32 pm »

Hi Jeff,
All the tops done first, then back to the the window beneath the first upstairs window cleaned and then all the downstairs cleaned.

4min 40 was for both upstairs and down.

Not big windows to be sure, 2 panes per window, but it was still 7 more windows cleaned in less time than it took me to clean the 5 downstairs ones traditional.

Take off the 2min 45sec for the half georgian and that makes a big difference in time for the trad work, but it was only a 15 second job for the WFP.

Ian

« **Reply #19 on:** January 10, 2006, 03:24:50 pm »

I mix and match. Sometimes I do tops only, other times the whole thing.

Generally I work with Wor Lass and she follows behind doing the bottoms traditionally. I can get to five or six houses ahead of her and we communicate via hand-held 'walkie talkies' if needed.

Once I finish the 'tops', I'll pack up the WFP gear and go knocking on those doors that haven't yet paid Wor Lass, or leave chits if they're out.

Then I'll get stuck in and finish off the bottoms with Wor Lass; traditionally.

It's really quick. Far quicker than me using a ladder.

Normally I drop her off at home at 2.30 pm so she can walk the dog and collect the Little Un from school and I'll load up with more water and do tops and bottoms with WFP.

« **Reply #20 on:** January 10, 2006, 03:34:49 pm »

i do all windows wfp up and down all the time and only use trad for insides.
bought my round(some of it) of a chap who was trad and immediately told the customers that i use wfp.told them all they may get a few streaks first clean but would be better the next time, had about 5 complaints out of about 300 and all were happy when i went back and poled over them again.
its much quicker doing the bottoms wfp and you can even wash the upvc sorrounds in less time than it takes to do windows trad.
even the little old ladies come out(getting drips down the back of the neck!) and tell me how impressed they are with that "pure water thingy" and they also remark on how quick and safe it is. bless 'em

« **Reply #21 on:** January 10, 2006, 03:40:08 pm »

Because I still need to save water (I find it no effort to keep the belt on with blade and app.) I will usually do front doors and when low on water some patio doors trad - especially if the water running on the ground might freeze. (Accident avoidance)

« **Reply #22 on:** January 10, 2006, 03:57:12 pm »

Quote from: Malc(G)old on January 10, 2006, 03:40:08 pm

Because I still need to save water (I find it no effort to keep the belt on with blade and app.) I will usually do front doors and when low on water some patio doors trad - especially if the water running on the ground might freeze. (Accident avoidance)

when water conservation is not a problem you will find it so much easier and quicker, only prob i have is brushing the cobwebs off my squeegee!

« **Reply #23 on:** January 10, 2006, 05:59:27 pm »

Quote from: Ian_Giles on January 10, 2006, 01:39:54 pm

ok,

Results of time and motion studies

First off I did the downstairs traditional.

Timed on the kitchen door, which is a half georgian one-10 panes of glass. 2 min 45sec
rest of downstairs windows (bar 1 that needed a pointer ladder to get too and I couldn't be bothered $:-\$ ) which is another 4 windows-3 of which are the sadolin stained, 2 panes of glass type window, and the other one also has just 2 panes of glass, but the one pane is an opening light along the top.

Including the door, which makes 5 windows, time taken was; 6.06 min

Did whole house with WFP (apart from back) 5 upstairs windows (2 panes per window) and 7 downstairs windows (including the whole of the front door and the window I would have needed a pointer to get at.

Time taken 4.40 min

1 minute and 26 seconds faster for 7 extra windows.

Individual time for a single window.

28 seconds trad
11 seconds WFP

The same ground floor window.

Niether method was done at race speed, but trad was done at a 'busy' pace, frame wasn't cleaned, sill had light wipe over, edges had a very quick detail.

WFP was at normal working speed using roughly 2l per min and included everything.

Must say that I was genuinely surprised just how much faster WFP was on a ground floor window.

Ian

Oh Ian, you are a donkey sometimes... :

I know how mucky your windows are, they're like mine.

If you'd got the dirt off with the detergent first, then you were wfp'ing a clean window...of course it's quick!

If you'd done wfp first it would have taken ages to get dirt off and left spots and runs as you have wooden frames.

I think maybe try two windows the same?

Rog.

« **Reply #24 on:** January 10, 2006, 06:34:53 pm »

Well I thought I'd comment now.

Thanks for taking such an interest guys, especially experiments too! I didn't expect time trials.
Good forum this.

Well my reasons are a bit like Rich from P@F: Once I've got all set up, hoses connected, pump on, pole sorted...I just can't be bothered to start with mop & squeegee. It's laziness more than anything. Mind you, strangely I do find I am quicker with the pole even on ground floor stuff, and not so tired, or aching. Plus I've sold customers on this as my preferred method now. So they're getting used to it. Job done! onto the next one.

Pj

« **Reply #25 on:** January 10, 2006, 06:41:36 pm »

HOORAY FOR PJ !
Im glad to see im not the only lazy one out here !

Rich P @ F

« **Reply #26 on:** January 10, 2006, 06:57:23 pm »

Laziness is a powerful motivator

« **Reply #27 on:** January 10, 2006, 07:45:38 pm »

Rog,

The individual times were done after the windows were already cleaned.

The windows downstairs may have been done first with trad methods, but the 7 extra windows were all equally dirty, and were all upstairs too, and I was still way quicker.
Also on the frames of the downstairs ones, were various cobwebs and spider eggs, not removed with trad as I didn't do the frames, extra time was taken with the WFP to remove these.
The first time clean took more than 11 seconds per window with he WFP.
The first clean with trad also took longer than the 28 seconds.

the comparative times were on clean, identical windows.

Ian

« **Reply #28 on:** January 10, 2006, 08:14:16 pm »

Ian

what were the results like ?? ??

« **Reply #29 on:** January 10, 2006, 08:19:07 pm »

Quote from: Squeaky Clean

If you'd done wfp first it would have taken ages to get dirt off and left spots and runs as you have wooden frames.

Rog.

Rog,

You make me laugh mate.

« **Reply #30 on:** January 10, 2006, 08:20:34 pm »

Ian

do you have a family??

I think you may be taking this all abit too seriously..!!

« **Reply #31 on:** January 10, 2006, 09:08:08 pm »

Steve K , im glad you said it , hes a mod you know ! ! ! !
I thought i was anal about things , but Ian is the master !
But when all is said and done , you have to admire him for the dedication !
SLURP , SLURP ,SLURP !

Saying that , i wonder how many of us will be out there in the morning with a stopwatch !

Rich P @ F

« **Reply #32 on:** January 10, 2006, 11:12:36 pm »

I also mix and match.

As i have my son with me i do the tops withs wfp he does the bottom traditional.
If we have a row of houses i go along all of them doing tops and when i get to the last one i work my way back doing bottoms with wfp and meet my son somewhere on the way back.

If im on my own i WFP lot or if its leaded i wfp the lot my son just does the front door

Paul

« **Reply #33 on:** January 11, 2006, 07:44:46 am »

Matt,

On the windows the results were fine, not a spot in sight.

The kitchen door was another matter though, with the WFP it came out crap! Spots everywhere $:-\$

The reason for this being that it is in a poor state of repair and desperately needs a coat of paint

a lot of bare wood (is, or was, a varnished door) due to weathering.

Steve,

I do get anal about these things

Or pedantic perhaps, I enjoy doing time and motion type experiments, sometimes you may feel you are really flying with the method you are using to work with.
But you drag out the old stopwatch and compare methods, the results may often surprise you.

Ian

« **Reply #34 on:** January 11, 2006, 07:48:06 am »

I did once and me and her have been in seperate beds since

« **Reply #35 on:** January 12, 2006, 07:05:30 pm »

HI ALL
THIS IS MY FIRST TIME ON THIS SITE SO

I HAVE JUST ORDERED A WFP SYSTEM COMING IN 3 WEEKS TIME,
I AM ABIT UNSURE OF HOW MUCH WATER I WILL BE USING
I DO ABOUT 10 TO 12 ,3 BED HOUSES ABOUT 6 HOURS OF CLEANING TIME.
THE GUY THAT MAKES THE WFP SAYS HE USES ABOUT 6 TO7 25LT OF WATER DOES THIS SOUND ABOUT RIGHT?
PLUS DO YOU LOT THINK I CAN MAKE ENOUGH WATER THE RO DI FILTER MAKE 300LTS IN 24 HR
ONE MORE THING A LOT OF MY HOUSES I DO HAVE LOCKED GATES SO I WILL HAVE TO GET OVER THEM
AND RUN A HOSE ROUND TO THE BACK DO YOU THINK A 30 MTR HOSE ON A REEL WILL BE OK
THANKS
YOU LOT
I LOVE THIS SITE STU THE WFP WALLY

« **Reply #36 on:** January 12, 2006, 07:09:33 pm »

Quote from: stuart howes on January 12, 2006, 07:05:30 pm

HI ALL
THIS IS MY FIRST TIME ON THIS SITE SO
I HAVE JUST ORDERED A WFP SYSTEM COMING IN 3 WEEKS TIME,
I AM ABIT UNSURE OF HOW MUCH WATER I WILL BE USING
I DO ABOUT 10 TO 12 ,3 BED HOUSES ABOUT 6 HOURS OF CLEANING TIME.
THE GUY THAT MAKES THE WFP SAYS HE USES ABOUT 6 TO7 25LT OF WATER DOES THIS SOUND ABOUT RIGHT?
PLUS DO YOU LOT THINK I CAN MAKE ENOUGH WATER THE RO DI FILTER MAKE 300LTS IN 24 HR
ONE MORE THING A LOT OF MY HOUSES I DO HAVE LOCKED GATES SO I WILL HAVE TO GET OVER THEM
AND RUN A HOSE ROUND TO THE BACK DO YOU THINK A 30 MTR HOSE ON A REEL WILL BE OK
THANKS
YOU LOT
I LOVE THIS SITE STU THE WFP WALLY

Hi Stu,welcome to the site all the best with your new system believe me you won`t go back,it`s all up hill from here with no climbing

,Gaz

« **Reply #37 on:** January 12, 2006, 07:11:37 pm »

no
No
and no

I think you answered the question yourself

« **Reply #38 on:** January 13, 2006, 06:22:34 am »

Hi Stu and welcome to the forum

You should really have stuck your post into a separate topic of your own!

For the work you have your R/O - DI setup is more than enough for your needs.

If you are using 25l containers, would it be right to presume you are using a trolley system?

If you are working out of the back of a vehicle, and not using a trolley then you really need 50m of hose + the pole hose too, 30m won't always be enough....then again that does depend on the work you have of course $:-\$

Most people will use approx 15 litres of water per standard semi, considerably more on the first clean though.

Ian