"When social distancing isn't an option."
They quote a bunch of summaries about health effects of contaminated air from the pertinent scientific articles, implying they may be talking about this product. Looks phony.
Almost 160 simoleons.
Well, it might work. There were air-handler solutions to some old smoke-filled taverns that actually DID remove the aroma rather effectively, so particles in airborne form can be removed by that kind of tech.
It's better, though, if you construct entire rooms like a fume hood, and keep a steady airflow through your filters. And maybe every day ramp up the temperature to
170 F (which destroys COVID-19 in a matter of minutes). That way, no human contact is necessary with the viable virus during surface cleaning.
As a sucker who once owned an Ionic Breeze (Just for a few days! And it wasn't my fault!), soon as I saw Ionic Wind I thought "Uh-oh, it's Baack!"
See the models, any of them, wearing their R95 Respirators in the pics? There's no protective 5 cubic foot bubble around their heads. The ions apparently work with the electret component of the R95.
Study: How To Increase The Protection Factor
*Provided By Existing Facepiece Respirators*"The emission of unipolar electric ions *in the vicinity of the mask* was found to decrease the particle penetration *through the filter* ..."
The study by Indoor Air used a "breathing zone of a human manikin, which was placed in a relatively small (2.6 m3) walk-in chamber" and concluded that the pieces of junk were particularly efficient "inside confined spaces with a relatively high surface-to-volume ratio." Hmm, so surface area plays a role. That could explain the unhappy Ionic Breeze reviews I saw that mentioned airborne grime deposited onto drapes, walls, furniture.
Look at this funny sentence from International Journal of Molecular Sciences: "The system may be used to freshen indoor air and reduce PM concentration in addition to enriching oxygen content and indoor decoration at home, school, hospital, airport, and other indoor areas." Really, enriching indoor decoration! Their whole Abstract was written by a dolt.
Are you joking? How the hell could this prevent contact with pathogens? It might be effective when used in conjunction with the cone of silence.
What they don't mention is the device is almost certain to produce low levels of ozone which is a known mutagen and a suspected carcinogen and is very likely to exacerbate any respiratory problems you or anyone near you might have.
I'm pretty certain they won't allow them to be used in any medical facility. They should be banned.
The devices used to remove smoke from bars draw massive amounts of air over charged plates which attract the smoke particles due to electrostatic attraction. They do not create ions and do not create ozone. Totally different operation.
The tiny device is spewing more crap that you don't need and is ineffective at warding off any disease. Notice the disclaimers they provide about not preventing any disease. That is the one thing they aren't lying about.
"The SeLF generates a powerful ionic wind, creating an indoor 5 cubic foot shield of more than 7 million unipolar charged ions that prevents particles from entering your breathing space."
This claim of preventing "particles from entering your breathing space" might be actionable. Of course they don't say "all" particles. So I guess if it prevents two "particles from entering your breathing space" it is an accurate claim.
There's a wind alright. It is being blown out somebody's ass.
Why would any intelligent person give this the time of day?
-- Rick C. - Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging - Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
.
What that will do is to reduce the life of the electret as the ions come in to contact with the mask.
A high surface area to volume just means a small space.
Yes, charge particles are attracted to anything. But the device can't gene rate "unipolar charged ions" without something taking the opposite charge. Is that you? Does this device run all day building up a humongous static charge which is discharged when you turn it off... through YOU? Maybe it h as a thin ground strap that runs down to your shoes and you have to walk on a conductive floor like in electronic assembly?
Yes, but it was intended to be read by other dolts.
Reading this thing is like listening to Trump at a pandemic press conferenc e. Or Larkin talk about... well, most things. Pure BS.
-- Rick C. + Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging + Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
And/Or far-from-spherical space.
That sounds like Skybuck 2000's place. He gets shocks, and his appliances get fried, all the time. He got new plastic shoes + new sofa = ZAP!!
He seems like a competent guy who's messed up by a rosy "faith" in everything. I remember my Marine Biology teacher talking about large Sunfish. Oblivious, always a dumb smile on their face. Hit one with your boat and it bobs around smiling at you.
It's easy to make long-lived (+) ions but (-) ions are less stable. The ions are attracted to dust/droplets/viruses and stick them to nearby surfaces. So are loose electrons, but they drift faster and colllide/collect less. The 'unipolar' makes some sense.
Attraction means the collected particles are sticky, so there ought to be a filter present to take advantage of that. That's why you need airflow. And you want to dispose of (or at least disinfect) the filters often. The airflow in a room-sized space is the most important missing element in the scheme. There's just not a lot of breeze in an ionic breeze.
generate "unipolar charged ions" without something taking the opposite char ge.
ions are attracted to
ectrons, but
ense.
a filter present to
dispose of (or
e is the
breeze
Could you explain to me how a negative ion can be less stable? Both polari ties are attracted to dust by induced electrostatic polarization of the dus t. But that doesn't eliminate the charge.
The point is the device can't create either ion without collecting the oppo site charge somewhere. Where does that charge go? If this were a stationa ry generator (mains powered) the charge would go to ground. In a battery o perated device there's no place for it to go and it would build up a huge s tatic voltage over time. Potentially this could be a dangerous amount of c harge. Either that or the device would just stop generating ions.
-- Rick C. -- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging -- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
It's proportional-counter action; there's a heavy ion, and a light electron, created, and the electrons move faster so discharges to the ground quicker. There's a two-decays exponential current seen.
Charges are attracted to metal (the polarization of metals makes an equal and opposite 'image charge' in effect). So the fast-moving negative charges the metal plate (or any similar collector) rather than continuing to sweep up dusty bits.
larities are attracted to dust by induced electrostatic polarization of the dust. But that doesn't eliminate the charge.
on, created,
e's a two-decays
Doesn't the electron impact a molecule from the air before reaching "ground "? Would it not combine with an air molecule? Then it is moving at the sa me speed as positive ions.
Even if the electron doesn't collide and combine with an air molecule, it s till results in the same number of ions emitted. The fact that they move f aster doesn't mean they are in any way less effective at attaching to the v iral carriers. Their smaller size than an air ion is meaningless in the co ntext of intersecting a much larger target.
opposite charge somewhere.
and opposite
l plate (or any
What metal plate? The point is in such a small device if there is no charg e drained away it will build up to a point of having such a high static vol tage it would no longer be able to emit ions. They would all make U turns and never leave the device.
Think Van de Graaff generator. Or maybe you are familiar with a device cal led a vacuum tube. Electrostatic fields completely control the current flo w and a small voltage on the grid can shut off the current to the plate. A t least there the emitting electrode is connected to the rest of the circui t. Cut the wire from the cathode and see how long current flow through the tube. That is this ion emitter.
-- Rick C. -+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging -+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
No, an 'extra' electron doesn't spontaneously bond to a molecule. The only attractive forces are weak, and a collision that conserves both energy and momentum is usually a bounce.
The lifetime of the ion, not the birth rate, is the issue.
The fact that they move faster doesn't mean they are in any way less effective at attaching
Yes, of course it does; the key element of collecting particles from the air is dumping them in a safe place, and the electron can get to that collector site quickly, not wandering in random thermal motions. Slow ions do more work hours.
The point of the exercise is to put the virus particles somewhere safe; I'd use a metal collector because it's cheap, takes sterilization temperatures, and attracts charges. If you don't provide a collector, ion generation causes odd wall stains.
Wrong model; the very small particles suspended in air are in brownian motion, the 'current flow' is a slow drift inside a larger dilute gas of mainly non-charged particles.
How do you know this?
I don't agree. Consider rain. What matters is how many drops there are total crossing your outline, not how fast they do it.
You aren't making sense now. What collector site??? Once the ions leave the devices nothing they contact will be affected by the microscopic field from the device. If anything, they will be pushed away from the device toward the user's face.
Where is the collector site?
I don't have any idea what you are talking about. We were discussing the Ionic Wind device. You seem to be making your own. Where would you put this collector?
You do realize this is a worn device, right? The collector would have to be in the device drawing the virus particles to the person!
You still are not making sense. The brownian motion is irrelevant and vastly overpowered by the air currents and motion of the people. There is no current flow because there is only a cathode and no plate. This device is junk.
-- Rick C. +- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging +- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
From ion sources used for accelerators. It's easy to knock an electron off, hard to make one stick.
Raindrops aren't suspended and undergoing random motions in addition to moving downward. Fast drops take less hits from the side before they hit ground.
The streamline flow of air currents doesn't make particles bump. Brownian motion isn't airflow, it's thermal jostling.
I confirm that. It's an important consideration in accelerator design. We went through a major upgrade of the PS accelerator at CERN for that reason in the 1980s. Better vacuum system, removal of outgassing components and lots of other things. Even so, partially ionized ions only survive for seconds. Once they are fully ionized, things get easier.
Jeroen Belleman
he only attractive forces
usually a bounce.
off,
So you are talking about high energy electrons in a vacuum?
le, it still results in the same number of ions emitted.
e total crossing your outline, not how fast they do it.
oving
nd.
What are "hits from the side"??? Ions travel very, very short distances be fore hitting air molecules. As you say, they exhibit Brownian motion. The time it takes for the bullet to travel out of range is not the issue. Eac h ion will impact the same number of objects on its path away from the user . So both types of ions have the same chances of impacting a virus contain ing mucus micro-droplet.
Or are you suggesting the ions are the relatively stationary particle and t he mucus droplet is the fast moving bullet?
n motion, the 'current flow'
icles.
vastly overpowered by the air currents and motion of the people.
an motion isn't
Yes, but not relevant to the discussion in differentiating fast and slow io ns. They ALL move in zig zag paths impacting air molecules and jetsam very often.
This is getting old. None of it is relevant to the fact that the generator has no way of disposing of the opposite polarity ions that are not emitted . They would pile up on the unit giving it a very high electrostatic charg e like a Van de Graaff generator pulling the emitted ions right back with n o effect on the virus.
-- Rick C. ++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging ++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
Sure. And because electrons are light, a small E-field accelerates them to drift toward collection faster between collisions. The same E-field doesn't provide for (+) ion collection at the same average-drift-velocity. Electrons have high mobility, positive ions have low mobility. Just like electrons and holes in a semiconductor.
There is no E-field outside of the device and there is no collector.
I think you don't understand the device we are discussing. It's worn around the neck like an amulet warding off the evil spirits. It has no electrical contact with anything other than possibly the person wearing it which would be a bad thing.
Both ions have the same probability of impacting and affecting a virus laden droplet. I've described the process in detail. You seem to deflect and discuss irrelevant details as if they alone determined the result.
Both types of ions have the same impact which is to draw virus laden micro-droplets slowly, oh so slowly toward the person wearing the device.
Are we done with this?
-- Rick C. --- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging --- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
I'm sure we're not discussing the same thing; I'm not concerned with A device, I was describing a class of devices. Electrical fields ARE involved in any ionic device used as a filter. Trying to use 'ionic breeze' as an air mover was not what I was addressing.
Ok, try looking at the subject and check out the first post to see what I was discussing. Check out the post you first replied to and you will see your discussion was a left turn.
-- Rick C. --+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging --+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.