Dyson vortex vac

[shoehorn]

My argument is that with use,the vortex airflow will be disrupted by nicks and undulations caused by dirt and grit hitting the plastic cones at high velocity.
This will disrupt the airflow over the no longer smooth cones,over time and coupled with loss of motor performance there will be a reduction in efficiency.

My adversary believes that it would not make any difference at all.

Please feel free to stick in your 2 bobs worth,especially anyone with knowledge of this particular science.

[Simpo Two]

In theory it will, but whether it has a noticeable effect in reality is another matter.

[h0b0]

Dysons have filters. They clog up and performance reduces over time = Loss of suction over time.

[anonymous-user]

Read up on Boundary layers and Reynolds Numbers. Then do the sums.


(BTW, when operated normally, electric motors generally don't "loose efficiency" over time)

[IainT]

h0b0 said:

Dysons have filters. They clog up and performance reduces over time = Loss of suction over time.

Which are removable for cleaning, at least on the models we have, so long term there should be no change if maintained sensibly.

Certainly less of an issue than with bags which can clog up well before being full.

[h0b0]

IainT said:

h0b0 said:

Dysons have filters. They clog up and performance reduces over time = Loss of suction over time.

Which are removable for cleaning, at least on the models we have, so long term there should be no change if maintained sensibly.

Certainly less of an issue than with bags which can clog up well before being full.

I am a Dyson fan as I have 2 of them. But, clogging filters and clogging bags acting as filters are too similar IMO to say no loss of suction over time. I know I can clean them but I can change the filter (bag) on an ordinary vacuum and have the same out come. Is it different because you can clean the filter? What would you say if I marketed a disposable Dyson filter?

[IainT]

h0b0 said:

I am a Dyson fan as I have 2 of them. But, clogging filters and clogging bags acting as filters are too similar IMO to say no loss of suction over time. I know I can clean them but I can change the filter (bag) on an ordinary vacuum and have the same out come. Is it different because you can clean the filter? What would you say if I marketed a disposable Dyson filter?

I'd argue that bag clogging results in more marked power loss than the way the filters work in most Dysons. Then again, I've never owned a particularly good quality 'bag' vacuum.

I've only cleaned the filter in our hand-held once in 2 years and I really can't appreciate any loss of suction from it.

[h0b0]

IainT said:

h0b0 said:

I am a Dyson fan as I have 2 of them. But, clogging filters and clogging bags acting as filters are too similar IMO to say no loss of suction over time. I know I can clean them but I can change the filter (bag) on an ordinary vacuum and have the same out come. Is it different because you can clean the filter? What would you say if I marketed a disposable Dyson filter?

I'd argue that bag clogging results in more marked power loss than the way the filters work in most Dysons. Then again, I've never owned a particularly good quality 'bag' vacuum.

I've only cleaned the filter in our hand-held once in 2 years and I really can't appreciate any loss of suction from it.

We had the DC24 which is on the left in the picture below.


The DC24 was probably not the right vacuum for the house but it was bought when we had a 1400 square foot apartment. Having moved in to a newly built house the Dyson got totally clogged and the motor started to burn due to the filters being clogged and there being no suction. So, we bought the DC25 which is on the right. This has no issue with our new house. The point being, my Dyson nearly died because of loss of suction.

When the first Dysons were being brought into the county my father started selling them. We went through around 10 of them (personally) due to issues with them losing suction over time.As a result I couldn't recommend them as a vacuum cleaner. Now though, I am a fan because I was very impressed with the DC24. But, I can not get over the "No loss of suction" tag line because it is simply not true. Bag less yes. But they lose suction over time for the VERY same reason a bag vac does. Clogged filter. Just because they use a plastic cylinder instead of a bag does not change this fact.

[IainT]

h0b0 said:

But they lose suction over time for the VERY same reason a bag vac does. Clogged filter. Just because they use a plastic cylinder instead of a bag does not change this fact.

I'll bow to your experience. I've not had that issue, our two just have to deal with cat fluff and normal dust. We have an old equivalent to the DC39 Animal and a hand-held Animal (DC34). The handheld is the one that we use most.

It might just be that the filters clog less readily than traditional bags - I have to agree that the tag line sounds like it stretches credulity a little. There must be some truth in it though or they couldn't make the claim could they?

[scubadude]

I have a DC01, (Bought for Home now relegated to Factory) with only minimal maintenance since new it's still in perfect sucking order, still lift the carpet with glee and no perceivable reduction in power, perfectly happy with my 20year old cyclone thanks.

I did give it a good clean 2-3yrs ago, the inside where the Tornado of Dust happens was only very lightly scored despite hoovering up various nasty crap- screws, cat litter, stones etc.

[allegro]

Interesting article

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2307050/...

cant beat metal componenets for longevity, especialy for picking up coins, nails etc

[Russian Rocket]

have a Dyson


the vortex mechanism fills up with crap over time leading to loss of suction


and it is a pain to clean out, far harder than changing a bag.


IMO clever marketing but nothing special

[was8v]

IainT said:

I'll bow to your experience. I've not had that issue, our two just have to deal with cat fluff and normal dust. We have an old equivalent to the DC39 Animal and a hand-held Animal (DC34). The handheld is the one that we use most.

It might just be that the filters clog less readily than traditional bags - I have to agree that the tag line sounds like it stretches credulity a little. There must be some truth in it though or they couldn't make the claim could they?

I too have a similar vintage DC01. Its been used for all manner of vacuuming task including during a house renovation.

The filters quickly get clogged by plaster dust, but I just bin them and buy cheapies off ebay.

The thing has never missed a beat, all i've done it clean it a bit after the house renovation and replace filters whenever I empty it. Oh and I bought a second hand hose for it when it split.

The thing still sucks as well as it ever did! However it is also just as heavy and cumbersome as it ever was, so it might get replaced soon.

[Russian Rocket]

was8v said:

The thing still sucks as well as it ever did! However it is also just as heavy and cumbersome as it ever was, so it might get replaced soon.

the vacuum or mrs was8v

[h0b0]

was8v said:

However it is also just as heavy and cumbersome as it ever was, so it might get replaced soon.

This was one of the main reasons I bought 2. One is a fraction of the size of the other and is light as far as vacuum go. I'm in the US and Dysons are one of the few things that are more expensive here than in the UK. But, I get mine refurbished from Dyson for $200 each. Seams a bargain to me.