[HN Gopher] Ceiling Air Purifier ___________________________________________________________________ Ceiling Air Purifier Author : pavel_lishin Score : 222 points Date : 2022-06-02 02:57 UTC (1 days ago) (HTM) web link (www.jefftk.com) (TXT) w3m dump (www.jefftk.com) | mgraczyk wrote: | "people often select purifiers based on their maximum flow" | | I don't know if that's really true. Looking at the top 20 or so | Air Purifiers on Amazon, almost none of them mention the CADR or | flow in the title, and very few of the reviews mention it. Most | talk about sound, "HEPA", "ozone-free" etc. | | My guess would be that people care much more about physical | appearance than maximum flow. I would personally not tape an | octagon of dirty air filters to my ceiling because that would be | look ridiculous and probably not filter as well as my beautiful, | silent $200 Winix box. | steve76 wrote: | maxk42 wrote: | Is nobody going to mention what a pain in the ass it would be to | change all those filters regularly? I love in a somewhat dry and | dusty area and need to change my filters (near the ground) every | two to three months. I'd hate to have to climb up a ladder to | change eight to nine filters that often. | jefftk wrote: | Unless your ceiling is very high you probably wouldn't need a | ladder to change the filters on a productized version of this. | Reach up, twist something to unlock, old filter slides out, | slide in new filter, twist to lock. Repeat for each filter | going around. Ten minutes every six months? | mxfh wrote: | Not to forget, you'll have a looming black octagon after 6 | weeks or so already depending on your environment. At least a | reminder, that the filters are doing something useful. | aarongray wrote: | I love the enthusiasm and DIY ingenuity here. That said, the post | is tagged with COVID-19. The COVID virus particles are .1 to .5 | microns in size, and these MERV-14 filters, while certainly | better than nothing, are not going to capture a significant | amount of these virus particles. A better approach is to not | filter the particles, but actually rip them apart at a molecular | level. This has the added benefit of destroying all sorts of | other contaminents that even high grade HEPA filters will miss, | such as mold mycotoxins. A system like the Molekule is a good | example of this approach. | | https://molekule.com/technology | picture wrote: | Is this legit? Their website feels kinda sketchy to me, with | the huge and somewhat tacky CG pictures, sweeping claims, | apparent SEM photography that just looks too good to be true | (could there really be _zero_ residue? and the background never | change, presumably over time span of at least minutes!) This | really reminds me of vaporware like WaterSeer, or one of the | recent "turn kitchen garbage into dry dust" appliances that | I've seen ads for | fossuser wrote: | Your intuition is correct - it's bullshit. | | -- | | In the summer of 2019, we purchased a Molekule Air (the | flagship model) and tested it. We bought an Air Mini that | fall and tested it in February 2020. At the time we tested | the Molekule Air, the company claimed that its | "scientifically-proven nanotechnology outperforms HEPA | filters in every category of pollutant." | | Our tests proved otherwise. And by mid-2020, that language | had been withdrawn, after many of the company's claims were | ruled against in a case before the National Advertising | Division and upheld in a later appeal before the National | Advertising Review Board. The Molekule Air turned in the | worst performance on particulates of any purifier, of any | size, of any price, that we have tested in the eight years | that we have been producing this guide. The Air Mini | outperformed it, but that's not saying much: It still | produced the second-worst performance we've ever seen. | | Guide author Tim Heffernan asked Molekule CEO Dilip Goswami | why the language was removed. He answered, "The point about | 'in all categories' is that we see a device that outperforms | across all of the categories. Right? So we're not trying to | say that individually, on any particular metric, we would be | number one. Right? What we're saying is, when you look across | all the categories, we outperform HEPA. Right? And that's | what we're attempting to convey with that. And so--it's fair | to say that we needed to re-examine some of the language to | make sure that it's saying what we're intending to say." | | https://www.nytimes.com/wirecutter/reviews/best-air- | purifier... | aarongray wrote: | Thanks for sharing some background on Molekule, I did not | know about this. | aarongray wrote: | That said though, the Molekule team themselves have said | that their device is not optimized for filtering | particulate matter, but rather for denaturing mold, | viruses, and bacteria. See: https://www.reddit.com/r/mole | kule/comments/6u7d5y/putting_mo... | | This is reflected as well in the testing on Molekule's | own website: https://molekule.cdn.prismic.io/molekule/4ec | 92005-d806-4991-... | | And, I will say that they have numerous tests by | independent labs. They did do some testing with their own | lab and with a lab affiliated with them, but this is far | from all the testing they have done. So to say that all | their tests were tainted or affiliated with them is | simply not true. See: https://molekule.com/papers | fossuser wrote: | Brownian motion affects how small particles move around at | small scales [0]. This is why HEPA filters can be effective | even against smaller particles (which bounce around and get | caught). | | Specifically about the Molekule - their claims seemed to be | empirically false and the device performed worse than a | standard HEPA filter (and they were resistant to allowing | independent tests at all). | | When the tests came out awful their responses were mostly | bullshit. [1] | | [0]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brownian_motion | | [1]: https://www.nytimes.com/wirecutter/reviews/best-air- | purifier... | blagie wrote: | Erm, this isn't quite correct: | | 1) MERV14 will capture 75%-84% of particles in the 0.3-1m | range. | | 2) A filter which captures 70% of particles with an air flow of | 100cfm will capture the same amount of virus as a filter which | captures 100% of particles with an air flow of 70cfm. Both will | clean the room just as fast. For air filters, lower filtration | + higher airflow is usually a better design option. Going from | 70% to 95% to 99.9% means you'll have a more expensive, power- | hungry, and more noisy product over one which just has a little | bit more air velocity [1]. | | 3) The rating is for 0.3m since that's the hardest size to | capture. A filter will actually capture more particles below | 0.3m. | | 4) COVID19 virus particles are around 0.1-0.2m, but that's | beside the point. They're travelling on water molecules. Those | are much bigger. | | 5) Even if there were a virus particle somehow floating around, | a viral load of one virus is very unlikely to get you sick. | | From an engineering standpoint, something around MERV14 is | almost certainly the sweet spot for a COVID19 room air filter. | | [1] High-filtrations makes sense in places like vacuums, face | masks, and other places where the goal is to have clean air | coming out. Vacuums shouldn't blow up dust. That's a different | engineering design goal than a room air filter. If you'd like | to see the impact of loading on a fan, put your hand behind | one, and hear how much noise goes up. MERV14 has a much lower | load than HEPA. | aarongray wrote: | 1) You're correct. | | 2) It will not clean the room just as fast, it will take | longer to clean the room. | | 4) COVID-19 particles do travel on water molecules, but they | are also airborne. The CDC has admitted this and there is a | growing body of research proving this to be true as well. | | 5) This has not been proven. | jefftk wrote: | _> > A filter which captures 70% of particles with an air | flow of 100cfm will capture the same amount of virus as a | filter which captures 100% of particles with an air flow of | 70cfm. Both will clean the room just as fast._ | | _> It will not clean the room just as fast, it will take | longer to clean the room._ | | Here are two different models: | | A. Air moves sequentially. First you filter all of the air | once, then you filter all of it another time etc. In this | model, a filter with 100% efficacy will get everything in a | single pass, and the CFM determines how long that pass | takes, while a filter with lower efficacy will never get it | all, but will get pretty close after a few passes. In this | model you want high filtration. | | B. Air moves randomly. At each minute, the purifier selects | air from the room at random, filters it, and spits it back | out. In this model, a filter with 100% efficacy at 70 CFM | is exactly equivalent to a filter with 70% efficacy at 100 | CFM, and you will often want to trade off efficacy for | flow. | | I think real rooms are generally much closer to (B) than | (A), though of course somewhere in the middle? | blagie wrote: | You're making statements with no backing, logic, or | argument behind them. | | 2) The percent of material removed by a filter per unit | time is the product of (1) filter efficiency with (2) what | percentage of a room's air passes per unit time. | | 4) "Airborne" is generally via microscopic droplets. The | CDC's guidance changed from large droplet transmission | (which is relatively short-distance and short-time) to | airborne. This doesn't mean individual viruses are floating | around without any H20. | | 5) No one credible believes 1 virus particle is likely to | infect you, except by very bad luck. Most citations give | claims in the 100-1000 particle range. Low initial | infectious dose also /appears/ to correspond to less | aggressive infections. This has not been rigorously proven | (and it's hard to do), but has a strong theoretical basis: | | - One virus particle is unlikely to make it past the mucous | layer, unless you're super-unlucky. | | - If it does, your innate immune system can usually handle | minor infections before they escalate. | | - If it can't, your adaptive immune system has more time to | respond. You're looking at a few days before it kicks in. | With a lower initial infectious dose, you'll still have | that much less virus when it kicks in. | | If you'd like to contradict any of this, please provide | citations. I'll read them. I'm glad to be proven wrong. | Perhaps I'll learn something. | jefftk wrote: | MERV-14 filters are rated for 75% efficacy in that range: | https://www.nafahq.org/understanding-merv-nafa-users-guide-t... | | The respiratory particles that transmit covid are a range of | sizes, but likely mostly a bit larger than that: | https://www.jefftk.com/p/how-big-are-covid-particles | mrfusion wrote: | Off topic but why did tic toc start showing me diy air filter | videos right after I read this article? | | Is there some kind of tracking? | atmartins wrote: | Yes. And it's on your home IP address. I see things based on | what others in my household have done with Tok Tok | mrfusion wrote: | So how would the tracking work exactly? Does this website | have trackers that other companies can access? | | Is there any way to block that? | ev1 wrote: | yes, this website loads the full adtech parade. | Havoc wrote: | I like the lateral thinking. I'm currently using a pretty ghetto | version as well - air filter is pointed at a open desktop case. | | I suspect the ideal version is an adaptation of the US central | HVAC model. i.e. Push clean air into the various rooms. | | ...but hard to retrofit. | harvie wrote: | Use static electricity to attract the dust from air, completely | quiet. | seanp2k2 wrote: | Cool idea but very low "wife approval factor". Just do the box | fan + MERV 13 air filter if you want something decent for <$50. | mreiner wrote: | I like your concept, can imagine it to look quite aesthetic. | | Consider you need to create a fair pressure gradient between the | two sides of the filter and it needs to be higher the more the | filter clogs up. AFAIK radial fans are more efficient for that | purpose. Downside is the noise. | | If you are running the ceiling fan anyway just for the turbulence | it creates on a hot day, it's probably fine even if just a small | percentage of the airflow is pulled through the filters, your | data certainly looks promising. | hinkley wrote: | That's why those filters are full of zigzags. The CFM/m2 is | very small, and so it can capture small particles instead of | them zipping through. Also takes longer for them to clog up. | Way longer than the oil change place wants you to think. The | test of a dirty filter is that it looks dark when backlit, not | when it is covered with surface lint. When they show your your | filter, take it out of their hands. | WesleyJohnson wrote: | Matthias Wandel's secondary YouTube channel has a lot of recent | videos about retail air purifiers compared to homemade ones using | box fans. I'm not up to snuff on the science of it all, but he | does a lot of cool comparisons on the effectiveness of each. | Worth a look if you're interested in this sort of thing. | | https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC3_AWXcf2K3l9ILVuQe-XwQ/vid... | polskibus wrote: | How do you measure PM 2.5 at home? Whats the best and cost | efficient way to do it? | mellavora wrote: | https://www.airgradient.com/diy/ | | Founder is very supportive, good product, easy to build | | The sensor will display PM2.5, CO2, Temperature and Humidity on | the display and can optionally send the data to any server for | data logging (e.g. the AirGradient platform or any other cloud | backend). | | Parts: Wemos D1 Mini USD 2.24 Wemos OLED display USD 2.47 | Plantower PMS5003 PM Sensor USD 13.89 Senseair S8 CO2 Sensor | USD 28.00 SHT30 or SHT31 Temperature and Humidity Sensor Module | USD 2.55 | ryankrage77 wrote: | I use a Nova SDS011 sensor connected a raspberry pi, then feed | the data into HomeAssistant with a python script and MQTT. | joelnc52 wrote: | We run one of these (https://www.adafruit.com/product/4632) off | of an Arduino Uno with a small LCD hat (w/ micro SD for logging | as well). I think that's the same sensor as in the outdoor | units that Purple Air sells. ~$150 for the whole setup, but | could definitely run that off a smaller / cheaper board, | display only. Going strong for 2+ years at this point. | jefftk wrote: | Details: https://www.jefftk.com/p/testing-air-purifiers | | I'm using a Temtop M2000 because it was the cheapest option I | found with per-minute data export: | https://temtopus.com/collections/temtop-co2-monitor/products... | nerdbaggy wrote: | It's not the cheapest but this is what I use | https://www.airthings.com/view-plus | Brajeshwar wrote: | Can we also please add a wi-fi access point to the ceiling fans? | I always thought that would be awesome. | jsight wrote: | That's kind of brilliant, tbh. The biggest downside that I can | think of is that they tend to be electrically noisy and fairly | space constrained. It'd have to be really small, but probably | possible. | hinkley wrote: | Might be easier to do on a fan with a light fixture. The part | that sticks down below the fan is a lot of dead space, and | farther from the motor. | coding123 wrote: | Jeff, is this for covid or more for prepping for the CA fire | season? | jefftk wrote: | Primarily thinking about covid, but would work for either | sudden_dystopia wrote: | Very cool. Now what can we do about the eyesore factor? | | Does this affect the fans cooling performance? The air blows more | straight down than diffuse I am assuming due to the shroud? | lkbm wrote: | If you push air down, it's going to displace the air below it | off to the sides, so I don't think it'll make a big difference. | | My main concern would be that the filters limit flow, and thus | it might be more likely to pull air up, causing a tight | vertical loop (air goes down, turns outwards, and then back up | while still inside the filter ring). | | I don't really have a solid mental model of how air flow works, | though. Some experimenting with the shape (and some colored | smoke, perhaps) could be interesting. What if the filters | tilted inwards to be slightly narrower than the fan's reach? Or | if they were shorter than the ceiling-to-fan distance and just | inside? Or does it help to put them further out? (Seems | unlikely, but would be a good thing to test.) | sandbx wrote: | it could be pretty if you light it well | pfisch wrote: | The cost of filter replacement would be absolutely insane. Also | filter replacement would be unpleasant. | bombcar wrote: | If you have a whole-home furnace you can often make it run the | fan even if cool/heat is off - and install a high power filter | and change it regularly and it'll filter the air reasonably well. | | The ecobee has a "minimum fan time per hour" setting - it can | also help to balance the air temperature. | post_break wrote: | My dad worked in AC his whole life. Do not put a constrictive | filter on your ac. He even recommends the cheap ugly ones as | they are the least restrictive. The AC is not meant to filter | air. The only reason it has filters is to keep large particles | out of the evaporator coils. | kube-system wrote: | You don't want to restict the total amount of flow, but with | more media _area_ you can have a tighter filter media with | the same (or even better!) total flow. | | A thicker filter and/or one with more pleats can filter | better _and_ be less restrictive at the same time. | | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RkjRKIRva58&t=454s | flybrand wrote: | 100% - lower merv filters, changed out more often, are the | way to go. | Johnny555 wrote: | When I upgraded my HVAC system, the installer recommended an | AprilAire filter box, I uses a 4" high pleated filter, each | MERV-13 filter has around 16 pleats, so if you unfolded it, | it'd be around 10 feet long. | | Comes with full warranty from the manufacturer, so I don't | think it's going to shorten the lifetype of the system. | | I wouldn't put a regular flat MERV-13 in an existing HVAC | system, but the pleated ones have so much more surface area | that they seem safer. | discreditable wrote: | I've had HVAC techs tell me not to use those thick filters | unless your system is designed for it. They make the fan work | harder to pull less air. This reduces how much air it can move. | itsoktocry wrote: | > _I 've had HVAC techs tell me not to use those thick | filters unless your system is designed for it._ | | Yeah, it will also shorten the lifespan of the motor since it | has to work harder. | | But is the cleaner air trade-off worth it? I think so. | larrywright wrote: | It's a trade off though, because good filters will keep | dust out of the HVAC systems innards, which according to | the techs I've talked to makes a difference in longevity. | mr337 wrote: | I have been told a different take. The amount of airflow | over the coils is important as the compressor system also | expects a certain thermal exchange (think air conditioning) | and thus a certain pressure on the return. | | Less air over the coils can inhibit the cooling properties, | this was conveyed to me as high "head" compression pressure | that can lead to premature compressor failure in the | outdoor AC part, the expensive part. This is more important | as the higher the SEER level, generally newer the system, | the more sensitive they are to this issue. HVAC tech sold | me with high head pressure expect failure of compressor in | a few years. | | Also you are running as efficient since the AC has to work | longer burning electricity. | malfist wrote: | I've always heard this, but I don't know that that's true. | The thing that dies first on an HVAC system isn't the | motor, it lasts a long damn time, it's the capacitor, or | contactor or some other fault not really related to the | motor work load. | | Plus, your "motor" isn't an engine, it's not variable | speed, it only has one "hardness" that it works at. It | might push less air with the thicker filter, but it's not | going to ramp up and consume more wattage or anything like | that. | foobarian wrote: | >Plus, your "motor" isn't an engine, it's not variable | speed, it only has one "hardness" that it works at. | | This is incorrect - electric motors draw more current | when under load. I would suggest researching this or | playing with some toy electric motors run from a battery | through a current meter. | bityard wrote: | > This is incorrect - electric motors draw more current | when under load. | | Which is a true statement but incomplete and therefore | misleading. A fan motor is under the highest load when it | is doing the most work. That is, moving the MOST air. If | you restrict airflow (e.g. with a dirty filter), the | motor is under less load and draws LESS current. A lot of | people get this wrong because it's counter-intuitive on | the surface of it. | | You can test this very easily with a box fan and a kill- | a-watt. Turn the fan on High in the center of the room | and read the power. Now move it against the wall. You | will hear the fan get louder because it is spinning | faster, because it's doing LESS work. The meter will also | show less power being drawn. | | It is true that a dirty filter restricts airflow through | the whole HVAC system. This extends the system's "on" | cycle, which reduces the whole system's efficiency. But | the popular claim that a dirty filter will burn out the | motor is bunk. | creaturemachine wrote: | That's true, but it's not so simple anymore. Furnace | blowers are all electrically commutated brushless DC | motors now, and will ramp to keep a constant torque. | malfist wrote: | I have a degree in electrical engineering, thank you for | telling me to do my research, I spent four years doing | that. | | Sure, some motors have characteristics that can be | tweaked to run at different work loads either with PWM, | or allowing them to pull more amps to drive higher loads. | Hell, you can even overvolt them and make them actually | work harder. | | That's not how HVACs work though. Have you ever opened | one up and did a repair? The circuitry is dead simple, | there's no current limiting setup or PWM to control how | much the motor is pulling or spinning, there's no CFM | measuring device to give the motor more volts or a higher | amp limit. | | The motor is simply pushing air. Air isn't something like | a solid load where a motor might lift something or move a | lever or gear, it's fluid. The motor is going to run at | max and be done. | bombcar wrote: | Modern furnaces have variable-speed fans - Blower Motor | Variable-speed constant airflow full-featured ECM | | https://www.bryant.com/en/us/products/gas-furnaces/987m/ | anarticle wrote: | The vast VAST majority of hvac systems are still bang | bang systems. | [deleted] | foobarian wrote: | > I have a degree in electrical engineering, thank you | for telling me to do my research, I spent four years | doing that. | | Apologies for the tone! | | > Have you ever opened one up and did a repair? | | Well funny you should ask, but yes! Two times. One time, | a power relay on the control module shorted and blew a | hole in the circuit board. Had to replace the control | module there. Another time, the start capacitor needed to | be replaced on the giant 2KW squirrel cage motor. I | removed the blower, disassembled it, lubricated moving | parts, and of course tested it out on a stand. That much | blowing power is quite impressive when right next to your | face. | devenson wrote: | Even a motor without a fancy control system will consume | more power under load. See: | | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counter- | electromotive_force | malfist wrote: | I'm not saying a motor turned off will consume the same | power as a motor turned on, that's foolish. | | Back pressure doesn't impact the load of a fan motor, at | least not as the scale we see in HVACs, we're not making | vacuum chambers. | foobarian wrote: | Maybe our disconnect is that we're talking about two | different things, one being the rated design point of the | blower system, which is presumably constant (though newer | systems seem to be more sophisticated), and the other | being the exact load and power consumption that depends | on backpressure. A higher backpressure will certainly | increase the motor power consumption on a classic | induction motor - if not by 100% then by some non-zero | amount. | | Anyway at the end of the day I agree with the original | characterization of wear and tear - motor and blower will | probably outlast most other components. In the case of | the one I mentioned this seemed to be true. You just may | end up paying a little more for the electricity to run | it. | bombcar wrote: | It's usually a misunderstanding of how furnaces "work" - | the blower motor does its thing and doesn't really "spin | up or spin down" depending on the load - it just moves | more or less air. | | The problem is (especially with older furnaces; modern | ones have safety features to prevent this) that if you | have too much back-pressure you don't get enough airflow | over the heat exchanger (or air conditioner coils) and it | can crack - allowing dangerous exhaust gasses into the | airflow (or freezing the coils for the AC which isn't as | bad). | | Once the heat exchanger is gone the furnace is basically | trash and has to be replaced (you can replace the heat | exchanger but it's rarely worth it). | danans wrote: | > The problem is (especially with older furnaces; modern | ones have safety features to prevent this) that if you | have too much back-pressure | | An everyday way in which people induce this scenario is | by shutting the heating vents in particular rooms because | they get too hot. Even on the newer furnaces, this | results in the automatic controls shutting off the burner | when the pressure and temperature gets too high, and then | the fan starts pushing around cold air. | | A secondary negative effect of this is that it | pressurizes the ducts causes them to leak more, resulting | in reduced efficiency, and also quicker failure. | | A well designed system which has been configured to | deliver the correct amount of heat to each room doesn't | experience the same issues. Unfortunately, most older | homes and even newer production built homes have poorly | designed HVAC systems. | | Heat pumps don't experience as many of these issues | because they just don't get air as hot, and instead rely | on higher throughput of lower temperature air to heat | spaces, but that makes them far more reliant on good duct | system design. | danans wrote: | > Plus, your "motor" isn't an engine, it's not variable | speed, it only has one "hardness" that it works at. | | Many newer AC motors are variable speed or at least | multi-speed. | [deleted] | bombcar wrote: | You can have them do a test and adjust the system depending | on the filter that's installed to make sure it's moving | enough air (though that is mainly important when heating to | prevent the heating element from overheating). | dr_orpheus wrote: | It is also important in the cooling cycle for two reasons. | | 1. If there is not enough air moving over the air- | conditioner coils there is the possibility that they will | ice over. This has a cascading effect where there is less | transfer through the coils and more ice builds up until the | whole thing is a block of ice. This most often happens | though when people buy condensers that are too big for | their system (the thinking being the bigger the better the | more cooling, but it is a balance within some tolerance) | but can also be done on the other side by reducing airflow | too much. | | 2. Less airflow can also mean too much condensation in the | air which can end up sitting in the ductwork and causing it | to rust out. This happened to my parents when they | installed extra filters in their HVAC system. I guess this | is similar cause as #1, just different potential effects. | SigmundA wrote: | A good system like an AprilAire [1] will have a 4" thick | filter vs the standard 1" thick filters. This allows much | more filter area than a standard filter allowing proper | airflow even with a finer more restrictive filter medium. | | You can't just swap filters, the 4" thick one usually go in | right before HVAC air handler intake rather than at returns. | I have had an AprilAire installed for over 10 years in my | HVAC when it was replaced last time, recommended by HVAC | installer, its has worked very well and I do have my blower | fan cycle constantly regardless of need for heat/cool to turn | over and filter air. | | 1. https://www.aprilaire.com/whole-house-products/air- | purifiers... | sha256sum wrote: | Great idea. What's worked for me is simply taking a 20"x20"x1" | filter and sliding it into the back cover of a standard $25 Lasko | box fan. Cheap, easy option for air filtration in the home. | sudden_dystopia wrote: | Can confirm, I have made like a dozen of these at this point. | Works great but is loud. Good white noise at night though. | sfteus wrote: | I did this for a cheap dust filter when demoing a ~7 cu ft | concrete shower pan in my house. Pretty incredible how much | material it pulled out of the air; I ended up running through | 3-4 filters total throughout the whole process. | euroclydon wrote: | I prefer to mount a high-power fan in the bathroom window for | demolition. | fady wrote: | Reminds me of this video that came from University of Michigan | during one of California's fire season when many fires were | ablaze and air quality was terrible: | | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kH5APw_SLUU | TedDoesntTalk wrote: | That's a great idea. What kind of filter do you use? | TurkishPoptart wrote: | Is that enough for allergens, smoke, and pet dander? I don't | care about virus filtration (which is not going to happen | anyway, if it's something I'm making out of cardboard and | duct-tape) | tgsovlerkhgsel wrote: | You're not getting a "guaranteed certified safe" | environment with cardboard and duct tape, but there is no | reason why you shouldn't be able to get a significant risk | reduction. | | You're trying to reduce the viral load in the air, not | build a BSL4 lab. | jefftk wrote: | If you're doing one filter per box fan, I'd go with a | MERV-14: https://www.jefftk.com/p/merv-filters-for-covid | formerkrogemp wrote: | This is very similar to what hobbyist mushroom growers use | in our setups to inoculate substrate in a 'sterile' | environment. Other methods include using sterile, hot oven | air, buying very expensive equipment, and making a still | air box at home with a plastic tote box. Good times. | titanomachy wrote: | In college we used to work under a bunsen flame, is that | not enough space? | formerkrogemp wrote: | I think a lot of those options are born out of | creativity. Inoculation typically happens from jar to jar | or from a jar to a block of substrate for instance. A | Bunsen burner would probably work well for many | applications in mycology. I only ever used one in cell | bio, and only a mini Bunsen in my mushroom hobby. | newsclues wrote: | Standard furnace filters, pick the level of filtration you | desire/can afford. | bombcar wrote: | I've had surprisingly good luck in my area finding brand- | new furnace filters at Goodwill for quite cheap. HEPA, too. | If you're making your own setup the size doesn't matter as | much so that can be a good way to go. | tiahura wrote: | https://www.uofmhealth.org/media/19281 | totetsu wrote: | Some really good discussion of this has happened on HN last | time California was on fire. | seanp2k2 wrote: | Given the wildfire risk for this summer[1], I'd say this | article is quite timely. | | 1. https://www.predictiveservices.nifc.gov/outlooks/monthly | _sea... | hinkley wrote: | Tends to burn out the motor though. | | Vornado used to sell an air filter that took two 10x20" house | filters. Before I discovered that model I was trying to build | my own using computer case fans (my intent was to hide the loud | box under furniture). | | Home Depot used to carry those in the 1500 classification which | was great, but those are getting harder to come by too, and | even the regional chain that had them doesn't as much anymore | and I have to use the 1200 or once in a while the super basic | ones. Or buy them from Amazon and fuck Amazon. | | Air filters became a rent seeking gambit before the term rent | seeking was even invented. We should just be able to use | furnace filters. And speaking of furnace filters, if you have | central air, do yourself a favor and change the filter | religiously. Also helps slow down accumulation of dust in your | ductwork, which makes it hard to ever get the house clean, | though you can hire someone to come out and vacuum them out. | They have something like a softer version of a chimney sweep's | brush with a longer handle. Last place we had them do that on | like day 2 to avoid any problems from the previous owners. | wang_li wrote: | The EPA disagrees with you regarding duct cleaning. It makes | sense since anything that is sitting in your duct can't be | removed by the airflow your hvac generates. If it could be | then it wouldn't be in there in the first place. | | https://www.epa.gov/indoor-air-quality-iaq/should-you- | have-a... | bredren wrote: | > Tends to burn out the motor though. | | Do you have data on this? Adding a fan shroud to the Corsi-R | supposedly does not increase energy usage or motor | temperature: | | https://www.texairfilters.com/how-to-improve-the- | efficiency-... | | I'm looking for data on the power usage and motor temperature | difference from a 20" Hurricane in normal operation, with a | 20" merv 14 on the back, a C-R and a Comparetto. | hinkley wrote: | Same author https://www.texairfilters.com/a-variation-on- | the-box-fan-wit... chose 4 filters due to higher | throughput. | | He has an addendum at the bottom where they tested the fans | and saw no problems with a single filter. I... don't | understand how they come to those conclusions based on the | charts in the paper. All of the fans were >10oC hotter and | one model went up by 20. 15C is a lot for cheap, planned | obsolescence consumer electronics. | kolencherry wrote: | Yes! This is the basis for the Corsi-Rosenthal Box [1]. Five | 20"x20"x1" filters and a box fan, with duct tape to seal the | edges. Not the prettiest, but it's effective. | | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corsi%E2%80%93Rosenthal_Box | TurkishPoptart wrote: | How is this significantly better than the parent comment of | attaching one filter to a box fan? | alexpw wrote: | > _An updated design, also known as a Comparetto Cube, [1] | uses four filters and a cardboard base that can sit directly | on the floor._ | | I never understood the purpose of the bottom filter in the | Corsi-Rosenthal Box, so it felt like a waste of a filter, but | I'm a big fan of the Comparetto Cube (no put intended). And 4 | packs of filters are readily available -- 20x20x2 is | suggested for the Comparetto Cube. | | [edit] Also, thank you. I couldn't recall the Corsi-Rosenthal | name/link, but thought of the wiki immediately. | | [1] https://www.thisoldhouse.com/green-home/22231148/diy-air- | fil... | happyopossum wrote: | > I never understood the purpose of the bottom filter in | the Corsi-Rosenthal Box | | It's for when the box fan is not sitting on the floor - | either raised up on feet (which many have), sitting in a | window, or hung somewhere. That said, you're right - 4 | packs are easier to come by and probably work nearly as | well in the real world. | KennyBlanken wrote: | It's easy to add "legs" to the C-R device - a few dollars | at most in wood dowels and no tools, for example. | Maximizing filter area is really important because flow vs | static pressure for a fan like this is usually | logarithmic...and static pressure rapidly rises as the | filters get used (their efficiency goes up, but flow | drops.) That's one reason you see a lot of squirrel fans | used in air filtration units; they can generate much more | static pressure. | | In theory, if you mounted it fan-down and placed some towel | or blankets underneath, you could also dampen a fair amount | of the noise coming from the fan. | | It's probably more effective and cheaper to get thicker | filters. A 20x20x5 filter has five times the filter surface | area of a 20x20x1 filter, but costs $36 - about 2-3x as | much as a 20x20x1. Two 20x20x5 filters would provide twice | the filter surface area. | | But...these solutions were all intended mostly for | emergency situations where purpose-built air filtration | units were in really constrained supply. Folks should | really just buy a regular air filtration unit that uses | much less electricity and is quieter, especially if it | auto-adjusts speed depending upon need. | jefftk wrote: | _> Folks should really just buy a regular air filtration | unit that uses much less electricity and is quieter_ | | This post is about how one of these made with a ceiling | fan can be much quieter than a regular air filtration | unit: "Testing my prototype, it has a CADR of ~180 CFM | and is only 33dB. By contrast, the Wirecutter's top- | recommended air purifier has a CADR of 233 CFM at 54 dB | or 110 CFM at 36 dB. With some tweaks it should be able | to match the commercial purifier's performance, without | being louder." | | _> especially if it auto-adjusts speed depending upon | need_ | | I see how that works for wildfire smoke, but how would it | work for covid? | bredren wrote: | I have been focused on HVAC / air purification recently. | | Its amazing to me that these designs are less than two | years old when the tech has been available for decades. | | One of the biggest problems with the C-R and comparetto is | that they are large and hideous to look at. | | I have been working on a design that makes the C-R or | comparetto or a smaller version than the 20" something that | can be attractive enough to hang in the corner of a room as | both an air purifier and room lighting. | donthellbanme wrote: | rapunkill wrote: | Not a new idea[1] I'm surprised it even has a name [1] | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uzpn09OIyqw | ark03 wrote: | My intuition says most airflow comes from the center(and drops | linearly towards the tip of the blade and picks up at the blade) | | i.e. there's no need to build a filter the size of the fan; you | can cover "most" of the airflow by using something similar but | extends 50-60% of blade length(pure guess) and the whole | arrangement can be above the rotating plane (so easier build?) | leobg wrote: | Isn't the dust just going to rain down on you as soon as you turn | the fan off? | jefftk wrote: | Mostly no: it's tiny particles that get embedded in the filter. | | One way to see this empirically is that pm2.5 levels don't go | up again after turning off the fan | blagie wrote: | I think people are missing the point. YES this is bad engineering | for a finished product: | | - The fan is not designed for high static pressure. It won't do | well pulling air through filters. | | - It's ugly. It will get uglier as filters get dirty. | | - It's expensive to replace filters. | | - Etc. | | But it's not a finished, industrial project. It's a prototype. | Those sorts of issues are universal for prototypes. They're easy | to address: | | - Switch to a rotor design with higher static pressure | | - Provide prefilters. Ideally, there's a nice cover, followed by | a washable pre-filter, followed by a carbon filter, followed by | the fancy high-filtration filter. | | With an appropriate frame, it could be beautiful -- nicer than a | normal fan. The filters could actually reduce noise. The frame | could guide air (much as in a Vornado), increasing airflow. | | Good job OP. It's a clever idea and a good design. It's a proof- | of-concept implementation, but that's the point of a proof-of- | concept. | | (Unless you like the DIY aesthetic, which some do) | Pxtl wrote: | If we're looking for a finished product, we're leaving a tool | on the shelf -- filters aren't the only option. Pipe the air | through a duct flooded with deadly UV-C and sterilize the air | instead of just filtering it. | jryb wrote: | This also creates ozone though, which is detrimental to human | health. Review here: | https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11356-017-9239-3 | hinkley wrote: | One way to reduce static pressure is to increase the number of | filters. I saw one design last year, during the fires, that was | a cube. Lasco fan on one side, and five filters tied into a box | shape. | | A couple problems. One, space - this thing was bigger than a | dorm fridge. Two, availability - no way you were finding five | filters during a wildfire. Three, etiquette - if you found five | filters that meant two other people weren't getting any at all. | Four, diminishing returns. Two filters reduce the pressure by | half. Another only reduces it by a third, and so on. | jefftk wrote: | _> Two, availability - no way you were finding five filters | during a wildfire. Three, etiquette - if you found five | filters that meant two other people weren't getting any at | all._ | | Filters last a long time unopened: buy them in advance and | store them until you need them, rotating stock. | hinkley wrote: | Sure, but that's hard to do when reading a tutorial that | was posted after the sky turned orange. | | Edit: To your point though, help out the distribution | networks by buying yourself an extra filter or two now, and | put it on the shopping list every time you use one. | turtlebits wrote: | This is just an air filter with more filters, the installation | location is part of the prototype, which is not practical at | all. | [deleted] | russnewcomer wrote: | I wonder if there is going to be an issue with the structural | integrity of the filters, since they are designed to rest on an | object rather than hang? Wouldn't think it would be a big issue, | but possibly? If you were wanting to do this long term, feels | like a series of light wood frames to support would not be too | expensive/difficult to construct or possibly 3d print, and have | advantage of reduced adhesive smell. | usefulcat wrote: | As long as the filters are adequately supported at the edges it | shouldn't be a problem. I know because my house has two 12x24 | HVAC filters which are only supported at the edges and are | almost certainly subject to much higher rates of airflow. | Kadin wrote: | Most filters (especially the 1" and thicker ones) are | surprisingly sturdy across most dimensions except for torsion. | | Thinking about 3D printing, you could probably print a nice | corner bit, that would hold the corner of 3 filters together | and square to each other. That would make the whole assembly | easier to put together and seal up with tape. | jaggederest wrote: | Very cool, if I was going to build something like this de novo I | would start with a squirrel cage fan. When you oversize them and | run them at low RPM they can produce a startling amount of | airflow with virtually no sound at all. You could also bump it up | to a MERV 16 with enough intake filter area. | UI_at_80x24 wrote: | I too am a fan of the squirrel cage fan, and have collected a | lot over the years. One excellent location to source them for | 'reuse' are photocopiers. Old analog copiers can have as many | as 4 fans while newer digital ones seem to have 2-3 depending | on size/capacity. Mostly DC too, but I have also come across | some big A/C fans. | | They almost always are designed for higher voltages (i.e. | 20+VDC) so when combined with a common 12VDC power source it's | already been stepped down. | | (source: used to work for a photocopier company, and when | people bought newer units, we would pickup the old units and | usually junk them.) | Kadin wrote: | Old furnaces nearly always have big-ish squirrel cage blowers | in them, and many are replaced before the fan motors fail for | various reasons. In my area they are a reasonably frequent | sight by the side of the road on bulk garbage day. If you get | there before the scrap metal guys do, you could easily nab a | blower. | | They're typically 120V single-speed devices, although some | newer ones may have variable-speed fans. Not 100% sure how | most of them vary the speed; my bet is that they just have | some capacitors switched inline with the fan motor to add | reactance to the circuit and slow it down. (That would | probably be how I would slow down a single-speed one to make | it quieter, at any rate.) | | There are a lot of projects online that you can find, showing | how to build fairly big workshop air cleaners with a furnace | blower and some cheap plywood/MDF/whatever. Basically you | just build a 5-sided box around the blower with a hole for | the outgoing air, and then mount a furnace filter on the open | face of the box. | tallanvor wrote: | There doesn't seem to be good control tests to say what | difference the filters really make - seems one was added in in | the comments, but it's missing important details (is the control | with everything off? What happens if the fan is running on medium | or high, etc.? | | And, of course, it's not really practical in that most people | really don't want to be sticking stuff on their ceiling, but it | could be an interesting experiment with more details provided. | SamBam wrote: | I was thinking the same thing. He has graphs for how quickly | the pm2.5 levels reduce compared with a commercial machine, but | not compared with running the fan alone, without filters. | | I believe that it is quite possible the majority of the air is | not going through the filters. It seems that much of the air | might spill out down the insides of the filters, rather than | being forced through. In that case, the graph could be equally | explained by the fan causing outside air to be sucked in. | sdflhasjd wrote: | It's not clear how this performs over having no fans and | filters at all. | flybrand wrote: | Agreed - and another wish list item would be a basic room air | purifier "RAP" off the shelf, sitting in the corner. | | OP will also want to track performance over time. How long | does it take the filters to load. | jefftk wrote: | The first chart in the post compares performance against a | RAP (Coway AP-1512HH Mighty, the Wirecutter's top pick): | https://www.jefftk.com/mighty-vs-ceiling-decay-big.png | jefftk wrote: | _> How long does it take the filters to load_ | | This is basically the same question as "how long does a | filter cube last". See | https://www.texairfilters.com/testing-the-efficiency-of- | merv... where they found performance was still good at 6m, | though decreasing at 10m. | dylan604 wrote: | What happens when someone flips the switch and reverse the | rotation of the fan? | SamBam wrote: | Ooh, it sucks the air through backward, dislodging the | particles, and showering the person below with dust. | 0daystock wrote: | That looks extremely cheap and ugly, I would be embarrassed to | have company over. I'll stick to my True HEPA Coways, which you | can get for roughly the same price as this DIY contraption. | lkbm wrote: | High ceilings will help. Next step would be to add paint the | joints and latticework (or run some colorful tape), and maybe | add some LEDs. | | Black light tape along the latticework, black light at the top | of the room. Other lighting is all dim lighting in the lower | half (warm lamps). | | I dunno. It'll be hard to make this not look weird unless you | do something crazy, like a drop ceiling so the fan and filters | are inset. If the aesthetics are important, I'd put it on the | home office (out of view from Zoom) rather than the living | room. | LinuxBender wrote: | I going for aesthetics I might just put them in the ceiling | and have what appears to be low profile vents that one might | not even notice. That would keep most of the noise in the | ceiling. One could build an enclosure that the HEPA filter | unit sits in and routes the intake/output to different | ceiling vents. | | With a little extra effort the filter could be swapped out by | removing/lowering the vent intake. | [deleted] | havblue wrote: | An ac filter is pretty gray after just a few months. Granted this | will take longer to get dirty but I suspect it will look ugly | before you know it. | SOLAR_FIELDS wrote: | A good reminder to change it at least. If this were a | purchasable product, I envision making the filters replaceable | and the frame compatible with some standard furnace filter | size, so that you can just run to the store and grab new | filters when you can visually see the filter needing | replacement. | | Contrast this with the furnace filter, which needs some other | mechanism (often, a schedule) to determine when to change the | filter since it's not readily visible on a daily basis. | sampo wrote: | I read on the internet, that HEPA filters actually just | filter better when they start getting clogged. But clogging | increases air resistance, so you need higher power level in | the fan to get the same throughput. So the economics | calculation is, the cost of new filters vs. the cost of | electricity of running the fan and eventually the cost of a | new fan. And the comfort factor is more noise when the fan is | running at higher power level. | | So running the filters a long time before replacing, might be | the cost-saving option. | DJBunnies wrote: | Did you see the tape? | jstream67 wrote: | Neat idea however air filter changes would be extremely expensive | as its about 5x the air filters of a conventional purifier - | which already seem to cost around 50-100 dollars to replace. | jefftk wrote: | The filters are MERV-14, not HEPA, so they're much cheaper | ("materials for one fan are nine MERV-14 filters for $110"). | See https://www.jefftk.com/p/merv-filters-for-covid for why | MERV-14. | eli wrote: | But they'd last 5x as long to move the same amount of overall | air, right? | post_break wrote: | I mean if it works, but it's also the ugliest thing I've seen. | It's up there with those plastic covers for furniture. A | standalone air purifier in the corner would be less noticeable | and ikea even makes a table with a hidden one: | https://www.ikea.com/us/en/p/starkvind-table-with-air-purifi... | | Aesthetics matter. Now if you could somehow make the blades the | filters, that would be badass. | flybrand wrote: | I agree - I love the enthusiasm for IAQ, the data is fantastic | - but find a conventional white good stand alone room air | purifier "RAP" and it will be as effective, better designed, | and likely in the same cost range once changeouts are | considered. ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2022-06-03 23:00 UTC)