well, you would say that wouldnt you?
Exactly. so. You rellys were conned and passed the virus on along.
Thats what all the Ratners customers said too.
"You fink we is stpopid or summink, we wouldn't have gone back and spemt £330 on the earrings if the ring had been crap"
Talking of Dysons, the latest adverts talk about them being "digital". How the H??? can a vacuum cleaner be digital? It's an electric motor, that's conversion of electical energy into motion energy, ie /electrical/, *NOT* electronic, and very definitely not digital electronic.
JGH
Marketing bollox
Excellent bits of kit.
-- rbel
That statement of yours proves nothing at all and never has (in spite of whatever her name was).
Stop being a twerp, its unlike you.
Why would a 'relly' be better than anyone else? Had they tested all the current competition?
Again, what experience did you have of the current competition?
Bollox after marketing have got at it. Looks as if they are stepper motors to me.
Well, it's either on or off, isn't it? :-)
I think you'd need more than 2 poles to guarantee they rotated in one direction, rather than just vibrate back and forth at 1.7kHz
Not just cheap brushless DC motors with a cheap digital controller then?
probably has a sensor on the armature - you energise the pole that will 'kick' the armature in the right direction and then once spinning the two pole motor will keep going in the right way.
Its the same as model aircraft 'brushless' motors. Although those are three phase normally.
I liked this
"They are incredibly efficient too ? due in part to high tolerances. For example, the impeller spins at over 600mph with only 0.3mm clearance between the blade tip and the impeller housing"
1/. the "for example" gives absolutely no description of efficiency at all. In fact...2/. Things don't spin at 600mph. That's linear velocity and if that refers to the tip speed of the impeller...
3/. Mach 0.9 for an impeller is not only extraordinarily inefficient its inefficiency manifests as MASSIVE noise, too. You WILL get transonic airflow over parts of the blade.The model aircraft boys are chasing the ultimate power to weight, and heat is a problem so they do go to extremes. Essentially 90% efficiency to 95% means double the power for the same heat rise. However that in itself becomes a useless exercise as battery weight totally dominates past a certain point.
All of which confirms the suspicion that Dyson are long on bullshit and short on engineering.
Their technology is not selected to last, be tough, or be efficient: Its selected for the maximum ability to brand-differentiate from their rivals and construct an appealing narrative about the product.
Or as we used to say about Microsoft
"Designed to sell, working is a secondary issue"
Marginally better than a £2.50 Mabuchi motor as in a cordless drill. They may have spent £5 on it instead.
Probably just a brushless motor driven by digital (PWM) signals. In practice the inductance of the motor filters the drive waveform.
More than you probably want to know about motors here:
En el artículo , Andrew Gabriel escribió:
I find they collect the very fine dust that the cyclone doesn't trap (the same stuff that spews out of bagged cleaners but you can't see it because it's so fine).
indeed, but realistically they only last for a couple of washes, then seem to clog more quickly. Given that they sell for buttons, it's easier just to stick new ones in once a year or so.
The DC07 I have now was 20 quid second hand, it looks like new. I wouldn't pay for a new one. Would still have my original 15+ yr old DC01 if I had been able to get hold of the shoe plate.
Suppose I'm going to be accused of being a member of the Cult of Dysonology now.
My Panasonic has filters after the bag - same sort of idea. Washable, of course.
But it's only a filter, not filter and bag. And Dysons have washable filters, ours is it's orginal and I can't say I've noticed any difference in it's performance over the years.
They do take a bit of washing mind, it's more than just a quick rinse under the tap. They need repeated soaking and squeezing out to get the muck out of the core.
Mainly because the haters try to compare a cyclone cleaner with a bagged one.
If I was in the market for a new vacuum cleaner I'd look at what the other makers now offer and go for the one that had the features, ease of use, handling, weight, etc from any maker. It would not be a bagged cleaner though.
At the time we bought ours there was no domestic bagless vac.
The little dust it's managed to capture that is.
I think it says a lot that a bagged vac will take several full goes around the house to collect the same amount of muck as a cyclone does in one...
Well if you leave it wet in the cannister what do you expect? Take it out clean and dry it on top of the boiler no problem. B-)
Anyone remember the Charles? A certain office supply company used to sell them with a face on the front that looked a little bit like a certain member of the royal family.
Brian
HomeOwnersHub 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.