Air purifier?

Status
Not open for further replies.

WussRedXLi

Greater Supremacy Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2001
Messages
94,427
Reaction score
11,176
Ok.....after 20 mins, the pm2.5 reduction for the 2pcs of 3M filtrere is 88%. RH was 70% start, 50+ end.

20mins PF75 OEM electrostatic reduction was 81%.
However RH was 67% start and 71% end. Did not trigger the AC compressor. 10% less efficient than the 3M.

Will retest tonight. May make a difference due to RH.
 

faithl3ss

Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2009
Messages
362
Reaction score
0
Yeah it's strange. Air sterilizing and air purifying is different.

This thread is air purification meaning taking the dust out from the air. Anti microbial don't dissolve air particles ya?

yup, you are right. air purifier do help to airborne dust particles.

just a little sharing more of the anti-microbial
it is a nano coating with 6 chemistry mechanism combination of anti-static, ionizing, germicide, photo catalyst, super hydropilic and anti-pheromones. can be apply for home, car or office.

it eliminating invisible treats in air & on surface by photocatalysis(light) & nano metal oxide (dark) for unlimited functioning time, energized hydroxyl(OH-) for effective organic compound decomposition & strong bonding to surface for long lasting effect.

basically it relies on photo-catalyst to decompose germs & TVOC under light while using germicide with the same effect in the dark, microorganisms carry negative charge while the coasted surfaces carries a positive charge. with "electromagnetic" attraction, the microbes oxidize & dies instantly. :s22:
 

Asakura

Great Supremacy Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2004
Messages
59,248
Reaction score
575
so this anti-microbial coating gonna take care of the PM2.5 particles in the air that's why the claim "no need air purifier" ?

and the decomposed germs and oxidized microbes go where ar?
 
Last edited:

faithl3ss

Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2009
Messages
362
Reaction score
0
let's me put it in the simply way.

what i mean was i feel coating is good enough.
what i mention no need air purifier - is base on myself(personally point of view). everyone view differently. Neither i say air purifier is not good. hence don't misunderstood me.

the result is the same, but work of the process is different.

as coating is only on surface as i mentioned previously . air purifier is on airborne.
if you have a baby, your baby is touch the table, wall, all kind of surface. all the bacterial, germs, virus are still on the surface which can't be air purifier cannot purifier that out.

that's why ppl also use hand sanitizer, they dont put their hand to air purifier cos that does't help.

This is whereby coating on the surface will help. airborne dust sooner or later will touch on the surface just the matter or times. seldom ppl on their air purifier 24/7.
 

faithl3ss

Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2009
Messages
362
Reaction score
0
2 more example here:

1)majority of family car owner would choose to car groomer to do steaming for benefit of eliminating all the bacterial, virus and germs rather than getting air purifier in car, especially they have a baby.

2) why during time there is virus on the area, the management will get ppl down to spray around the area for eliminating the virus and etc..

P.S
my explanation is not very good over here. so bear with me. hahah
 

Lucky177

Master Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2002
Messages
4,232
Reaction score
77
If u are referring to virus, bacterial and germs, won't a plasmacluster or those negative ioniser will do a better job? It not only covers the entire "air" coverage, when the ions touches the walls, it will also deactivate those that "sticks" on the walls by children hands etc. No?

Sent from Android Mobile using GAGT
 

faithl3ss

Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2009
Messages
362
Reaction score
0
so this anti-microbial coating gonna take care of the PM2.5 particles in the air that's why the claim "no need air purifier" ?

and the decomposed germs and oxidized microbes go where ar?

something like that.

those virus and germs etc.. will be decomposed and converted to H2O and CO2:s13:

basically we are apply the combine 6 chemistry mechanism of anti-static, ionizing, germicide, photo catalyst and super hydrophilic and anti-pheromones iinto anti-microbial solution (AMS). nano coating which assist to the surface always 'cleaner' in most of the times and condition. besides, we add on the total solution with combination of ultra fine filter devices with support of UvC & ionizer to filter the air quality, especially the PM2.5
 
Last edited:

WussRedXLi

Greater Supremacy Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2001
Messages
94,427
Reaction score
11,176
If u are referring to virus, bacterial and germs, won't a plasmacluster or those negative ioniser will do a better job? It not only covers the entire "air" coverage, when the ions touches the walls, it will also deactivate those that "sticks" on the walls by children hands etc. No?

Sent from Android Mobile using GAGT

Technically plasmacluster and other ion technology takes time. Technically it does affect object surfaces.
Later i post the woof woof socks video.

The video i just posted stated a figure of 13 sqm area, 2hrs to bring it down 99% for Influenza virus with a single plasmacluster module...is it the same one used in our air purifiers? Dont know.

HEPA can filter it much faster, if we reference it to say pm0.1 or pm0.3

Objects, i think best is still to wash hands with soap or hand sanitizer.

Anyway, home environment not so critical ba...immunity plays a huge part.

If really got ultra special needs like super-immunosuppressed due to organ transplant or major op, then maybe need special units like the IQAir. Coz folks may be taking drugs to supress the immune system to reduce rejection.
 
Last edited:

WussRedXLi

Greater Supremacy Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2001
Messages
94,427
Reaction score
11,176
As promised. Same thing can be expected for viruses.

Scent molecules are even smaller than viruses. Viruses measured in nanometers. Scent molecules measured in angstroms.

 

WussRedXLi

Greater Supremacy Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2001
Messages
94,427
Reaction score
11,176
OT a bit. But interesting read about masks.


Although we only had a taste of in 2009 (due to the relatively mild nature of the pandemic H1N1 virus), one of the realities we’d face with any severe respiratory outbreak would be coping with a finite supply of disposable PPEs (Personal Protective Equipment) for Health Care Workers (HCWs), such as N95 masks, gloves, and gloves.


While much would depend upon the severity, infectiousness, and duration of a pandemic wave, at one time the HHS estimated the nation would need 30 billion masks (27 billion surgical, 5 Billion N95) to deal with a major pandemic (see Time Magazine A New Pandemic Fear: A Shortage of Surgical Masks).


Our Strategic National Stockpile reportedly contains well over 100 million N95 and surgical masks (see Caught With Our Masks Down), but the demand for PPEs during a serious pandemic would far exceed the available supply.

In May of 2008 - in OSHA's Proposed Guidance On Respirators And Facemasks, we looked at their preliminary estimates of mask use by hospital and EMS/First Responders in a single pandemic wave.

The numbers of HCW's that will be working during a pandemic are unknown, but according to the CDC, there are 18 million Health Care Workers in this country. It is probably safe to assume that many HCW's who now have limited contact with critically ill patients would be called upon to treat flu victims during an emergency.


If just 1/3rd of these health-care workers were to provide direct care during a pandemic, and each required 480 N95 masks, then we'd need nearly 3 billion masks. And of course there will be plenty of non-HCW related positions that would presumably involve potential virus exposure (police, firefighters, national guard, etc).


Whatever the actual demand for masks and respirators would end up being during a severe pandemic, it will very likely exceed the available supply.
s
 

WussRedXLi

Greater Supremacy Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2001
Messages
94,427
Reaction score
11,176
Since got new members reading this thread now, I'd like to share again Chai Jing's review for the situation in China and how bad air pollution can affect you.

SG is not like that level, but the effects are still real for some months in SG for those in the susceptible group like kids/elderly/sick/ops.

 

Lucky177

Master Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2002
Messages
4,232
Reaction score
77
I think just get air purifier (hepa filter type) for the haze period will do.

For other reasons, if really wanted to, if really wanted to go into such an extend, I rather go for this one (Japan) instead of other devices or coatings or whatsoever.

Reltec's IG-E1J Ion Generator and Mi Energy ET22 - negative ion invented by Ph.D Noboru Horiguchi.

Reltec negative ioniser

Just my own opinion.

Sent from Android Mobile using GAGT
 
Last edited:

WussRedXLi

Greater Supremacy Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2001
Messages
94,427
Reaction score
11,176
For those "connoisseurs" erm I mean people who need ultra clean air -

http://www.mintie.com/assets/img/resources/ASHRAE_Article-on-VentilationChanges.pdf

Airborne Infection Isolation Rooms
Airborne infection isolation (AII)
rooms remain at 12 ACH. Recent research3
using CFD analysis concluded that 10
total ACH was the recommended ventilation
rate. Higher rates of ventilation did
not decrease the exposure of persons in
the room to airborne infectious agents.
Because 10 ACH was considered to be
“close” to the now well-accepted 12 ACH
recommended by the Centers for Disease
Control (CDC),4 the Guidelines remain at
12 ACH. The CFD modeling provided a
substantiating basis for the CDC Guidelines’
recommendation of 12 ACH. It also
dispels an inference of the CDC Guidelines
that suggests that increasing air exchange
rates above 12 ACH will provide
additional benefit.
 

WussRedXLi

Greater Supremacy Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2001
Messages
94,427
Reaction score
11,176
Was playing around with my air purifiers.

Room 2.6 x 3.1m x 2.8m ceiling (very small, new BTO ba) = 22.6m3.
Cabinet 1.55 x 0.61 x 2.8 = 2.64 m3
Cupboard 1.8 x 1.24 x 0.36 = 0.8m3
Misc items take it as 1 m3
Residual airspace = 18 m3

Air purifiers Samsung AX40 with taobao RMB35 thinner 25mm thick filter (not the RMB110 45mm thick filter), based on measured airspeed drop from original filter, I reckon it's 250 m3/hr. (original spec is 323 m3/hr)

LG PS-S209 air purifier = 160 m3/hr
Total airflow = 410 m3/hr.
Measured efficiency at 0.5 microns = ~ 95% thereabouts.

So, air changes per hr, ACH = 410/18 = 22.8 ACH.

Starting air quality at 0 hours = 8000 particles per L @ 0.5 microns, about 5 ug/m3 for PM2.5. It's not really accurate, but just take it as a frame of reference

I switched on the Samsung AX40, LG PS-S209 and also the Sharp A28 @ 160m3/hr. So that's 570 m3/hr. Within 30 mins I was hitting 300 - 600ish particles per litre @ 0.5 microns. After 1hr went to sleep last night and switched off the Sharp A28 (coz it's not as energy efficient as the other 2).

Woke up after 2hrs to pee. I switched on the laser particle counter and saw 30-90 parcticles per litre range for 0.5 microns. That's very low, usually hovers around 200-300ish.

This morning woke up, saw that it is hitting 0 particles consistently 50% of the time and 30-60 range for particles/L @ 0.5 microns.

Jin power.

Conclusion, airflow really rules.
Airflow is a major part of the equation in the CADR. Now of course % efficiency is the other component, but seriously 95%, 98.5%, 99%, 99.999997% doesn't make much of a difference, mathematically. 95% vs 99.99999% is absolutely nothing compared to a doubling of airflow (eg adding another air purifier)

I have long known or rather suspected this, but have not tested it in real life hence did not advocate it as much.

Now I can confidently say that airflow rules. How do you get it to flow as much as possible at the last possible energy consumption at lowest noise at lowest cost in terms of AP unit cost and filter replacement costs in real life, is another consideration.
 
Last edited:

WussRedXLi

Greater Supremacy Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2001
Messages
94,427
Reaction score
11,176
So, airflow or CADR rules.

Practical consideration - I guess there could be a very small user group out there who needs the cleanest possible air. Good examples would be those whose young kids 3 months to 6 years who went to fix their antrioventricular heart block, hole in the heart issues. Or elderly > 60 years old for angioplasticy, bypass, suffered ischemia stroke etc. During the recovery stage, at least for the next 12 months, it is likely that you'd need ultra high quality filtered air.

Now, you don't have to spend ~ 2k for a IQAir Healthpro, Amway Atmosphere or Blueair 650E. The replacement filters ranges from $300 - 600 per change

My belief is that 2 or even 3 cheaper air purifiers can easily outperform that.
Eg 2 x Samsung AX40. 646m3/hr operating 24/7. Plus a 3M Filtrete (esp the purple colour one), in a 9000 BTU/hr FCU probably provides something like 60 m3/hr CADR and it also claims that it handles 0.01 microns, which is believable for electrostatic filter media, just maybe not at a high efficiency rate.
 

Asakura

Great Supremacy Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2004
Messages
59,248
Reaction score
575
i was looking at iqair for quite a while. but i think the bulky unit will be troublesome to move around, especially at night wanna close door to sleep. morning wanna shift out again to use for the whole house.

buying 2-3 units of ax40 i can have them each in different rooms.
 

Lucky177

Master Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2002
Messages
4,232
Reaction score
77
Yes. I also believe airflow plays a very important part.

That's probably also explains why my hepa filter of the honeywell turns extremely black as compared to my previously old sharp purifier that has a much lower airflow (for the same period of usage time) .

Sent from Android Mobile using GAGT
 

WussRedXLi

Greater Supremacy Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2001
Messages
94,427
Reaction score
11,176
Science Fair Winner Designs Device To Cut Virus Spread On Planes



When 17-year-old Raymond Wang saw the Ebola outbreak on the news last year, it got him thinking about viruses and how they spread around the world, especially on airplanes.

He dug into the literature, and found some disconcerting studies. For instance, one study estimated that a person sick with H1N1 swine flu has the potential to infect 17 others during a 17 hour flight.

Wang thought commercial airlines could do better. So he went to work.

Using computer simulations, Wang designed a device that can potentially curb disease transmission on planes by optimally directing airflow in a cabin.






Wang, a junior at St. Georges School in Vancouver, predicts the device can "improve the availability of fresh air in the cabin by 190 percent and reduce the concentration of airborne germs by 55 times."

And oh yeah, the device won the teen $75,000 — and the top prize — at this years Intel International Science and Engineering Fair in Pittsburgh in May.

All jetliners these days have air filters (called HEPA) that remove more than 99.97 of particles in the air, including bacteria and viruses.

That reduces the spread of diseases in a cabin immensely. But what if the air has a hard time reaching the filter? If somebody in your aisle sneezes, could the virus-packed air swirl around and hit you before it gets to the filter?

To figure that out, Wang created 32 simulations to track the movement of pathogens swirling around a Boeing 737 cabin. He also made a model of the cabin to confirm his simulations were correct.

He found that the traditional airflow in a cabin continuously throws around contaminated air without giving it a chance to be absorbed into the HEPA filter. Wang's device fixes this by creating "personalized breathing zones" for each passenger, he says. It's essentially a wall of air stopping infectious particles from traveling in your personal space.

So could this device actually reduce the spread of bacteria and viruses on a plane?

Maybe a little, says Dr. Mark Gendreau, aviation medicine specialist at Lahey Medical Center in Peabody, Mass.

"When you think about what needs to take place for someone to come down with an infectious illness, it blows your mind away — all the things that have to come into place," Gendreau says, "One of the big things is luck: Are you in the wrong place at the wrong time?"

Although Wang is on the right track with his device, Gendreau says, the issue is more complicated than just putting a device in the cabin's air system that will alter the ventilation pattern.

In most cases, how we get an infectious disease while travelling isn't through airborne particles, but by touching surfaces contaminated with large droplets that are expelled from the coughing, sneezing and talking of your sick aisle buddy.

And, Gendreau says, you don't have to wait for airlines to change their cabins if you want to keep from getting sick in the air.

"The big thing is the passengers' behavior when they travel — what things do they do that will put them at a greater risk that will bring infectious diseases to themselves?" he says.

At the top of Gendreau's list: Have good personal hygiene.

The next time you fly, he says, be sure to bring a lot of hand sanitizer and use it often if you want to stay healthy. You can follow more of his advice on how to avoid getting sick on the plane here.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Important Forum Advisory Note
This forum is moderated by volunteer moderators who will react only to members' feedback on posts. Moderators are not employees or representatives of HWZ Forums. Forum members and moderators are responsible for their own posts. Please refer to our Community Guidelines and Standards and Terms and Conditions for more information.
Top