( This comparison is not full and it’s indicative. There could be other properties which are not listed here, could not be compared or there are no sufficient data at the moment . )
| Technological properties | System flush through outlet or fire hydrant | Flushing with added sponge pieces | Flushing with injected compressed air | Flushing with injected, pulsating compressed air | Cleaning with added ice pieces | High pressure water jet cleaning | Chemical treatment and flushing | Cleaning with a pig | Cleaning with sponge | Hydro-Gel technology |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Generally known, penetration so far | well known, widespread | well known, not widespread | well known, not widespread | well known, not widespread | little known, not widespread | known, but did not work for the purpose | known, but did not work due to increased risk | well known, not widespread | Well known, widespread | new high technology, with excellent references |
| Multifunctional method | no | no | no | no | no | no | no | no | no | yes, can be tailored to the individual case* |
| Need to disrupt system integrity | no | yes, in case of jamming | no | no | yes, in case of jamming | yes, every time | no | yes, every time | yes, most of the time | no |
| Need for special cleaning joint | not needed | not needed | not needed | not needed | not needed | only works with disrupting the system | not needed | only works with disrupting the system | Needed, or disruption needed | not needed |
| Risk of jamming | none | in case of small diameters | none | none | increased risk in case of small diameters | cannot be employed | none | present | present | none, cannot cause jams |
| Passing through narrowing or curves | not applicable | very limited | yes | yes | very limited | no | yes | no | no | yes |
| Removal of sediments | local | yes | yes | yes | yes | yes | yes | yes | yes | yes |
| Removal of bacterial membrane | no | slightly | partially | partially | slightly | yes | yes | yes | yes | yes |
| Removal of lime and strongly adherent materials | no | no | no | no | no | no | yes, depending on the applied chemical, time consuming | yes, depending on the type of pig used | no | no |
| Range of applicable diameters | not applicable with large diameters | not applicable with large and small diameters | not applicable with large diameters | not applicable with large diameters | not applicable with large and small diameters | not applicable with small diameters | not economical with large diameters | not applicable with small diameters, not economical with large diameters | not applicable with small diameters, not economical with large diameters | can be applied effectively from the smallest to the crawlable sizes |
| Max. length of cleaning potential | only at the vicinity of the tapping | only short sections | only short sections | only short sections | only short sections | only short sections | only short sections | more kilometers even | more kilometers even | tens of kilometers even |
| Health risks | none | risk of infection from the outside because of added sponge and disruption | risk of infection from the outside because of the air + secondary contamination | risk of infection from the outside because of the air + secondary contamination | risk of infection from the outside because of added ice and disruption | risk of infection from the outside because of disruption | elevated risk because of the used chemicals | risk of infection from the outside because of disruption | risk of infection from the outside because of disruption | no risks, harmless to health |
| Disinfection | applied at the center, or with mobile device | separate step after the cleaning | separate step after the cleaning | separate step after the cleaning | separate step after the cleaning | separate step after the cleaning | separate step after the cleaning | separate step after the cleaning | separate step after the cleaning | one step, done together with the cleaning |
| Long term benevolent effects | none | none | none | none | none | not known | slightly | none | none | inhibits bacteria repopulation |
| Water conservation | highly water wasting | water wasting | moderately water-saving | moderately water-saving | water wasting | water-saving | water wasting | moderately water-saving | moderately water-saving | water-saving |
| Wastes need to be treated | none | contaminated sponge pieces | none | none | none | none | used chemicals (hazardous materials) | none | contaminated sponge pieces | none |
| Known disadvantages so far | highly water wasting, only partial results | risk of infection because of the remaining sponge pieces | the residual air causes bacterial and operational problems | the residual air causes bacterial and operational problems | not really effective, risk of jamming | not cost effective, can only be applied at limited places | medical and environmental risk | risk of jamming, risk of infection due to disruption | risk of jamming, risk of infection due to disruption | there are not known disadvantages |
You can scroll horisontaly through the table with the scrollbar
The Olajipari Karbantartó Fejlesztő és Tervező Kft. (OKFT Ltd.), as the inventor of the Hydro-Gel has exclusive rights of the technology.
Any activity which includes the patent-protected Hydro-Gel technology, connected equipment and tools can only be done with the prior, written permission of OKFT Ltd.
The exclusive manufacturer of the equipment, tools and the material Hydro-Gel is the OKFT Ltd. Head office: Jura Ipari Park 22/A., H-6750 Algyő, Hungary
2015 © OKFT