Interested In Advertising? | Contact Us Here
Warning!

 

Welcome to Clean It Up; the UK`s largest cleaning forum with over 34,000 members

 

Please login or register to post and reply to topics.      

 

Forgot your password? Click here

Steve Carpenter

  • Posts: 28
Re: Comments and Views on CFR
« Reply #20 on: April 22, 2006, 12:26:24 pm »
As a representative of the main agent here for the CFR system I thought I’d set the record straight. CFR have sold a ‘heated’ extractor for many years (since 1985). The CFR Altra Heat 400 had a built-in 2400-watt in-line heater. Up until 3 years ago CFR extractors operated with a single 3-stage vacuum. The CFR Paramount 25 & CFR Paramount 40 (400 psi or 1000 psi pump options) and CFR Pro 750 (750 psi pump) still do!

CFR’s recycling solutions differ from conventional surfactants available in the fact that they do not liquefy soils, they separate soil from fibres so that solids sink to the bottom of the solution/recovery tank and oily soils float. Even when super heated water is used with the system soils are not liquefied with CFR’s detergent chemistry. We have never said use cold water to rinse with! Hot water assists the cleaning process and evaporates quickly. However, if hot water is not available then because of CFR’s unique rinsing/recovery action you will still get the desired cleaning result.

The filtration system engineered by CFR effectively filters “and cleans” the recovered solution back into the solution tank for continuous use.  The filtration system, not unlike water filtration systems passes the solution through an extensive set of filters which are designed to remove soil from the solution allowing it to be used again.  The system filters with 99%+ effectiveness and reuses the cleaning solution up to 7 times without the need to empty and refill. 

For example, the CFR Pro 400 Station with a tank capacity of 28 litres and its recycling ability actually offers the operator up to 196 litres of useable cleaning solution in real terms.  The larger Paramount Series offers 662-1060 litre working capacity depending on the particular model. 

The CFR Work Stations offers much higher productivity without the need to continually empty and refill.  For example, it is possible to clean 200 plus metres of heavily soiled carpet with one tank full (CFR Pro 400).  In the domestic environment however, a three-piece suite and the carpets in a 3-4-bedroom house can easily be cleaned without emptying the tank.
 
With the CFR system, solution is always “in transit” while the solution from conventional extractors takes a “one way trip” into the carpet and up to 40% of it never makes it back to the machine due to gravitational pull.  With CFR however, the solution is passed through the carpet fibres at such high speeds that gravity has no effect on the solution.  Less than 10% of CFR solution is left in the carpet as a result of surface tension… and this starts to evaporate almost immediately.

One of the reasons CFR now supplies twin vacs and heat is simply through UK customer demand. Many customers couldn’t understand how the system could operate with such high pressure (up to a 1000 psi) and only have one vacuum.

Regards

Steve Carpenter     

therapist

Re: Comments and Views on CFR
« Reply #21 on: April 22, 2006, 12:34:30 pm »
Well written and clear response, to clarify the points raised by many who were unsure, or unconvinced........

I have always admired the system and have frequently said so, on here.

rob m

Liahona

Re: Comments and Views on CFR
« Reply #22 on: April 22, 2006, 12:57:09 pm »
Steve, it was indeed a very good post. However cfr at least in the U.S. has always promoted using cold water. As for your comment on the adjustments made to the machine for U.K. users........ as the adjustments then make a better machine is it fair to say they will keep making the adjustments untill they are similar to other machines out there......just an observation....... Also and I know this is being picky.....if you are using even as little ae 1% of soiled water to clean with then surely you wouldnt get the same result as using 0% of soiled water. If you have 10 gallons, 9 clean and 1 soiled and you went to clean carpets, how could you get the same results as using 10 gallons of clean water........ Lastly and always my point, when cfr accept a clean off challenge with my machine and or others as wishing to participate, then I will take them seriously, untill then how can I?.... Come on cfr and cfr users, if your machines are that good then lets see them work side by side under test conditions.

stains-away

Re: Comments and Views on CFR
« Reply #23 on: April 22, 2006, 01:22:28 pm »
Just one point,i dont know much about cfr (only what ive read on forums)


The filtration system engineered by CFR effectively filters “and cleans” the recovered solution back into the solution tank for continuous use. The filtration system, not unlike water filtration systems passes the solution through an extensive set of filters which are designed to remove soil from the solution allowing it to be used again. The system filters with 99%+ effectiveness and reuses the cleaning solution up to 7 times without the need to empty and refill.

For example, the CFR Pro 400 Station with a tank capacity of 28 litres and its recycling ability actually offers the operator up to 196 litres of useable cleaning solution in real terms. The larger Paramount Series offers 662-1060 litre working capacity depending on the particular model. 


If the machine recovers 90% of solution put down then on after the tank has done one cycle the initial 28 litres =25,2 litres recovered, after the 2nd cycle =22.68 litres, 3rd =20.41, 4th =18.37, 5th =16.53, 6th =14.88, and finally 7th =13.39 litres, add these together and the final figure i come up with is 159.46 litres from a single tank,not the 196 quoted,  Andy




Re: Comments and Views on CFR
« Reply #24 on: April 22, 2006, 01:43:29 pm »
...If the machine recovers 90% of solution put down...

Andy, as I understood Steve was saying that more than 90% is recovered.

...Less than 10% of CFR solution is left in the carpet...

Regards,

Arthur

Steve Carpenter

  • Posts: 28
Re: Comments and Views on CFR
« Reply #25 on: April 22, 2006, 01:45:24 pm »
Hi Liahona,

I understand what you are saying, and as a professional carpet cleaner with 17 years experience I had the same reservations about the system when first introduced to it. Like many others I like to dissect and verify information given about products before making a commitment to purchasing them. I will say though that the common misconception with the CFR system is that it cleans with ‘dirty water’ simply isn’t true, because if it were the case then you would make little impact on a soiled carpet.

With regard to independently testing The CFR system, this has been carried out both in the states (test cases available on CFR’s website) and here in the UK by Dr. Eric Brown and Paul Bakker of Cleaning Research International. They confirmed the systems ‘claimed’ recovery rate of 96% plus, and it’s recycling ability.

Regardless of system used though we cannot guarantee to remove all of the soiling from carpets and at best we are only offering a cosmetic clean. However, CFR’s tooling will recover more soiling from a carpet so that it is left cleaner than conventional systems.

Some manufacturers of conventional carpet extraction systems also say that recycling the cleaning solution is bad because it puts dirty water back into the carpet.  This gives you a picture of dumping the contents of an extractor’s recovery tank back into the carpet… but, this is a false picture as CFR’s patented filtration system removes virtually all of the suspended solids from the solution before it is reapplied.  In fact, once the soil saturation level within the solution reaches the point where it loses its cleaning effectiveness; the CFR Work Station automatically shuts down, telling you that it is time to change to new solution. 

Over the last 6 years I have attended many Carpet Cleaners get togethers and have demonstrated the effectiveness of the CFR system, so if you want to organise a ‘Cleanitup’ get together in the near future then I would be more than happy to attend.

Regards

Steve Carpenter
   

Re: Comments and Views on CFR
« Reply #26 on: April 22, 2006, 01:57:11 pm »
...With regard to independently testing The CFR system, this has been carried out both in the states (test cases available on CFR’s website) ...

Steve,

I have studied the CFR website, but could not find info about CFR OZONE machine.  What I was actually looking for independent test reports of how "CFR OZONE" works/disinfects the carpet.  Could you post a link to such reports here or e-mail them to me.

Thank you,

Regards,

Arthur

stains-away

Re: Comments and Views on CFR
« Reply #27 on: April 22, 2006, 01:59:10 pm »
Arthur, most machine manufacturers state that 80-90% of water is recovered, as you will know the recovery rate will vary slightly according to fabric type and depth, although i have never monitored closely my recovery rates i do notice slightly lower recovery on some carpet types,do you monitor recovery on your jobs Arthur?
 
                                                                                                                      Andy

Martin S

  • Posts: 455
Re: Comments and Views on CFR
« Reply #28 on: April 22, 2006, 02:31:16 pm »
Thanks Steve.  I'd hoped you were 'lurking', to clarify those points.

Regards
Martin

Re: Comments and Views on CFR
« Reply #29 on: April 22, 2006, 02:41:37 pm »
...most machine manufacturers state that 80-90% of water is recovered...

Andy,

So far I have been thinking that the best way to find out the real recovery rate is by camparing solution and recovery tanks of carpet cleaning machines.  For examle take a look at Advantage - solution tank is 67 litres, waste tank is 35 litres or Karcher Puzzi 400 - fresh water tank 45 litres and dirty water tank 18 liters or Galaxy Carpet Cleaner -  solution tank is 18 litres, waste tank is 12 litres.

However, I have found that some carpet cleaning machine's (Ninja or Steam Pro 2000) solution and recovery tanks are the same size or very similar size, but it would not mean that recovery rate is 100%.

As far as CFR recovery rate is concerned I am satisfyed with Steve respond, plus he is refering to an independant test conducted in the UK by Dr. Eric Brown and Paul Bakker of Cleaning Research International.  I have seen CFR at work at 500 PSI and can tell that carpet was damp not wet.

Regards,
Arthur

Mark Roberts

  • Posts: 390
Re: Comments and Views on CFR
« Reply #30 on: April 22, 2006, 03:22:35 pm »
So Arthur if my solution tank holds say 50L and my waste 25L when ive finished cleaning and I have used 25L from the solution tank and have 25L in the waste that would mean I have 100% recovery rate. Its nothing too do with how much the tanks hold? You read too much just buy one!

Quote
CFR’s recycling solutions differ from conventional surfactants available in the fact that they do not liquefy soils, they separate soil from fibres so that solids sink to the bottom of the solution/recovery tank and oily soils float. Even when super heated water is used with the system soils are not liquefied with CFR’s detergent chemistry.
Steve are you saying only clean with CFR 's own chems then. What happens when you use Ms?

I enjoyed using my cfr, but im glad to be back using a 'normal' machine. I do remember cleaning quite a dirty carpet with ms then at the next customers house the first two strokes of the wand on a cream berber filled the carpet with dirt, that was dirt in the solution line from the previous house even though i had cleaned the machine and changed the water at the previous house.. It took a while to sort that berber which bugged me. I think that was the start of the end for me. Amtech have great customer care though which is a credit.

stains-away

Re: Comments and Views on CFR
« Reply #31 on: April 22, 2006, 03:43:21 pm »
...most machine manufacturers state that 80-90% of water is recovered...

Andy,

So far I have been thinking that the best way to find out the real recovery rate is by comparing solution and recovery tanks of carpet cleaning machines.  For examle take a look at Advantage - solution tank is 67 litres, waste tank is 35 litres or Karcher Puzzi 400 - fresh water tank 45 litres and dirty water tank 18 liters or Galaxy Carpet Cleaner -  solution tank is 18 litres, waste tank is 12 litres.

However, I have found that some carpet cleaning machine's (Ninja or Steam Pro 2000) solution and recovery tanks are the same size or very similar size, but it would not mean that recovery rate is 100%.

As far as CFR recovery rate is concerned I am satisfyed with Steve respond, plus he is refering to an independant test conducted in the UK by Dr. Eric Brown and Paul Bakker of Cleaning Research International.  I have seen CFR at work at 500 PSI and can tell that carpet was damp not wet.

Regards,
Arthur

The size of the recovery tank was not part of the question, nor was there any implication that the size of recovery tank gave any indication to a machines recovery capabilities,the question was do you ever monitor your recovery rates during cleaning?

While i do not doubt any claims made by anybody with regards performance without seeing the full situation myself i don't accept them either, the recovery rate varies slightly from job to job, dependant as i said on the material being cleaned,drying times will change according to temperature, humidity and airflow on the job, the operators wand technique will also effect recovery, Andy

Re: Comments and Views on CFR
« Reply #32 on: April 22, 2006, 03:43:54 pm »
So Arthur if my solution tank holds say 50L and my waste 25L when ive finished cleaning and I have used 25L from the solution tank and have 25L in the waste that would mean I have 100% recovery rate...
 

Yes, Mark, that would mean you have 100% recovery, but not one carpet cleaning machine can achieve it, because carpet/upholstery absorbs a part of what you spray in, that is common sense.  The common sense would not allow CC equipment producer to manufacture a machine where waste tank would have to be emptied before solution tank was empty.

...You read too much just buy one!...

Mark, could you advice which portable is the best on the market at this moment?

Thank you,

Regards,

Arthur

Re: Comments and Views on CFR
« Reply #33 on: April 22, 2006, 03:50:51 pm »
Andy,
Have I ever mentioned that I got this or this result?  No I have not.  I believe I have never ever posted confusing posts.  I am going to buy a CC machine after attending a hand on training organised by an experienced CC.
Regards,
Arthur

stains-away

Re: Comments and Views on CFR
« Reply #34 on: April 22, 2006, 04:09:39 pm »
I didnt suggest that you had posted anything confusing Arthur,I was just wondering why you were explaining the virtues of the cfr when you havent had chance to look its performance over a period of time involving the cleaning of differing types of materials in various situations,i personally dont own and have never had experience of driving a ferrari, and as such wouldnt be able to give what might be considered a fair opinion on them, same with skodas, i hope you see where im coming from,on the other hand i do own a 1970 1100cc mk1 escort and would love to point out that it does 600mph, 200mpg and never wears out tyres as it hovers 3 inches from the ground, if you need a good car i can sell it to you for £3,000,000, just my opinion as a saloon bar pundit, Andy ;D

garyj

Re: Comments and Views on CFR
« Reply #35 on: April 22, 2006, 04:12:33 pm »
Arthur, have you cleaned a carpet on your own yet? What did you use?

Mark Roberts

  • Posts: 390
Re: Comments and Views on CFR
« Reply #36 on: April 22, 2006, 04:18:53 pm »
Yes Arther so once you know how much you have used in the solution tank and how much you have recovered in the waste tank you can work out your recovery rate(minus pre-spray). The waste tank is normally always smaller, normally because of components underneath the tank and because of the intakes for vacuum are in there. The size of tanks is irrelevant which was the point of my post above.
Operator technique as Andy points out is probably one of the biggest factors along with type of machine, type of carpet, psi used,  and lots of other variables.
As for the best machine, only you can decide that. It will depend on your market, and what you feel is important. Everyone has a favorite machine, as long as it suits them and makes them good money then its a good machine. Go out with as many cc's as you can, have a go with as many different machines as possible, only then will you know which is best for you. You wont find your best machine by reading these boards only whats available ;) For me it was a toss up between the latest Ninga and a Scopion, i went with a scorpion and am more than pleased. I hope you find a machine that suits you and not these boards!

therapist

Re: Comments and Views on CFR
« Reply #37 on: April 22, 2006, 06:48:59 pm »
I 'm not sure, but it seems like, a least couple of months, since Arthur started posting pedantic nonesense and even admitted, '  he's only thinkinking about carpet cleaning '

Seems to me, if someone is only able to see the Black and White, they will never be happy and to my mind are NEGATIVE !

If you want success, you seek out and mix with positive individuals who, basically are, do'ers rather than talkers, or thinkers.

All this gent' does is cause argument and cloud issues rather than contribute in a constructive way to debate.

As I've said before.

I can't figure out exactly where he's coming from........but, then I live in the real world and trust my judgement enough, to ' get out and get on with it '

ROB M

Re: Comments and Views on CFR
« Reply #38 on: April 22, 2006, 08:42:28 pm »
...Arthur started posting pedantic nonesense ...

Rob, I would like you to quote  ::) an example of the above.

--------------------

Added later:

In the mean time here are two of your nonsense posts

Regards,

Arthur




Re: Comments and Views on CFR
« Reply #39 on: April 22, 2006, 09:48:16 pm »
...Arthur,I was just wondering why you were explaining the virtues of the cfr...

Andy, before buying anything, which cost several hundreds pounds (digital camera, camcorder, computer or car), I do a comprehensive research.  The same applies to a carpet cleaning machine. 

There is nothing magic about CFR, but their wand is different then others and mainly (not just) because of the wand construction they can achieve such high recovery. 

Now, without any real experience I feel I can say what I have said here on the forum because I of the theoretical knowledge I have gained.  However, Andy, if you read my posts, you will see that I still asking a lot of questions about carpet cleaning.  So despite I am sure about some aspects of carpet cleaning process/equipment, I still learning, but not teaching.

Regards,

Arthur