July i, 1909.] 



THE INDIA RUBBER WORLD 



371 



Rubber Lined Cotton Fire Hose. 



THERE was a time when rubber-lined cotton fire hose was 

 produced by coating one side of a flat woven fabric, similar 

 to a cotton belt fabric, with rubber, and afterward riveting 

 the edges together so as to make a hose tube. Later, the same 

 kind of hose was made by riveting the edges of uncoated fabric, 

 lining the fabric tube so produced by drawing a rubber tube 

 through it, and steaming the two tubes together. 



Earnest endeavors were made to produce a rubber-lined cotton 

 fire hose with the aid of seamless multiple fabrics woven on 

 straight looms. But difficulties of producing a satisfactory hose 

 fabric tube which would sustain high pressures by weaving it in 

 an unnatural flat form were found to be inherent in the process, 

 and when circular woven fabrics appeared the flat hose process 

 was abandoned. 



When the "Eureka" circular woven hose was brought out the 

 patents on such fabrics were infringed by parties who claimed 

 that the patents were invalid, on the ground that as seamless 

 multiple fabrics had been produced on straight looms, no inven- 

 tion was required to produce similar fabrics on a circular loom. 

 After comparing the merits of the two methods of producing 

 seamless fire hose fabrics — namely, by weaving in expanded 

 form such as hose assumes when in use, or in flat form, so that 

 fabric is necessarily distorted when in use — a United States cir- 

 cuit court decided that the circular method of weaving was so 

 far superior to the flat that the advantages entitled the inventor 

 "to the benefits of all good results," and (to quote from the de- 

 cision) "that this is considerable is evidenced by the fact that 

 fire hose thus constructed has driven all the older forms from 

 the market." The victory of the circular method was so com- 

 plete that there were no more efforts to produce a flat woven, 

 multiple hose fabric for many years. 



In October, 1875, a section of Eureka fire hose was tested to 

 700 pounds without injury — a strength before unknown in fire 

 hose — and immediately after a similar section was submitted 

 with a proposal to supply 5,000 feet to the New York fire de- 

 partment. As the facilities of the company at that time were 

 limited, the proposal was made for but 5,000 feet, though the 

 department had advertised for a larger amount, but the ad- 

 vantages of the hose over the leather, riveted cotton, and rubber 

 hose then in use were so evident that not only was the 5,000 feet 

 ordered, but additional orders were given for Eureka with suflS- 

 cient time allowance to permit of its production. The reputation 

 of Eureka hose was at once established. 



In 1876, after an investigation of the merits of various kinds 

 of fire hose, a special board of naval officers recommended that 

 "Paragon" hose, a hose similar to Eureka except that it is of 

 one ply less, should be adopted as the navy department standard. 

 As a result Paragon was used exclusively by the navy depart- 

 ment until 1885, when it was represented to the government that 

 one maker should not have a monopoly of naval hose trade, and 

 the business was thrown open to public bidding. During the nine 

 years that Paragon was supplied there was no complaint what- 

 ever from the department of unsatisfactory hose — a condition 

 which has not always prevailed since. 



Eureka and its companion Paragon since 1875 have gone into 

 all sections of the United States and Canada, and the name 

 "Eureka" is well and favorably known in various parts of Cen- 

 tral and South America, and of Europe, Asia, Africa and Aus- 

 tralia. Hose of the same make is also extensively used by rail- 

 roads and other large corporations. Not only have these brands 

 been used so extensively, but by reason of their cost of manu- 

 facture and superior quality have brought good prices, proving 

 that it was merit and not initial cheapness that brought the de- 

 mand. 



In 1903 appeared the first so-called "high grade" fire hose 

 .specification of the New York fire department, and with the 

 advent of such specification came an era of trouble with hose in 

 the department. This specification imposed as a condition that 

 a piece of rubber tubing 2 inches long should be capable of 

 stretching to 14 inches ; then when immediately released and a 

 new 2 inches marked, this 2 inches should stretch to 14 inches, 

 and after being held for ten minutes and released, the marks 

 should return within ten minutes to within 2l4 inches of each 

 other. In more or less modified forms those requirements con- 

 tinued for several years. When the first specification referred to 

 was issued the Eureka Fire Hose Manufacturing Co. wrote con- 

 cerning it : 



We h.ive received the New York hose specifications. The rubber 

 specification is cxtr.iordinary. It does ' not seem fair that hose makers 

 should be required to guarantee hose for a term of years, and yet to 

 put into it linings in which they lack confidence. To produce the cxtra- 

 oi^dinary degree of elasticity and resilience that this specification de- 

 mands, considerations of durability and adaptability of the rubber for 

 hose lining purposes must be made subservient to the necessity of pro- 

 ducing tubes that will comply with excessive laboratory requirements. 

 - - - To meet the requirements of the New York specification will 

 lead to no gain in quality, and indeed, to the probability of a decrease 

 in durability, beside which we would be using a tube which has never 

 withstood the test of long and severe service, and about the lasting 

 qualities of which we would therefore know comparatively little. 



This letter may now be considered historic, as it was prophetic 

 at the time of its issue. It is a fact that most of the criticisms of 

 hose supplied by leading manufacturers to the New York fire de- 

 partment under the so-called high grade specifications were caused 

 by the compliance of such manufacturers with arbitrary and 

 unpractical requirements — a compliance that invariably increased 

 the cost of producing the hose with injury to the product. The 

 original belief of hose manufacturers, with a rubber lining tube, 

 no matter how good the quality of rubber compound may be, is 

 liable to be injured by a vulcanization that will insure a strict 

 compliance with stretch and return requirements that existed for 

 several years in New York department specifications, is con- 

 firmed by the experience of the department with rubber linings 

 made to conform to that specification. 



If a manufacturer, rather than to decline bidding for hose con- 

 tracts in the New York department, consented, no matter how 

 reluctantly, to furnish hose under such specifications, he was of 

 course, legally responsible for any defects that might develop, 

 even though they were directly due to strict compliance with 

 terms of specification that such manufacturer had protested 

 against, but certainly there is some question as to his moral 

 obligation, especially when it is tonsidered that he would have 

 preferred to furnish hose that he knew to be right, and which 

 would have brought him credit instead of criticism, and which 

 would also have cost less to produce than the hose which he 

 was compelled to furnish by specification requirements. 



When it is sometimes claimed that rubber fire hose possesses 

 certain advantages over cotton hose, it evidently is forgotten that 

 the hose most largely used in the best fire departments prior to 

 the introduction of Eureka hose was rubber, and that it was 

 chiefly in competition with rubber hose that Eureka made its 

 success during its earlier years; and also that Eureka was re- 

 ceived and used with equal favor in the warm weather of the 

 South and the cold, wintry seasons of the North. It was cer- 

 tainly not simply because "the rubber hose cost appreciably more 

 than cotton rubber lined hose" that rubber hose was so largely 

 superseded, for in those early days Eureka was a high-priced 

 hose. The rubber hose of those times, it may be added, was gen- 

 erally a first class article of its kind, made by manufacturers who 

 aimed to produce the best hose that could be produced. 



