Author Topic: The Airing  (Read 56804 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline jadew

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 312
  • Country: ro
Re: The Airing
« Reply #25 on: June 23, 2015, 06:01:21 AM »
Obvious scam.
 

Online edy

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1451
  • Country: ca
    • DevHackMod Channel
Re: The Airing
« Reply #26 on: June 25, 2015, 11:59:00 AM »
$668,000 in 10 days... over 6x their funding goal ("Flexible" funding which apparently means even if they didn't reach $100,000 they could keep whatever they took in). Makes you wonder, if they had taken in $70,000 would they have still had enough for all the R&D to make a go of it?

I am enjoying to watch this campaign. Thanks to the original poster for announcing it here. 21 days left... I can't wait to see what happens. This will be a fun one to watch.
YouTube: www.devhackmod.com
"Ye cannae change the laws of physics, captain" - Scotty
 

Offline dadler

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 842
  • Country: us
Re: The Airing
« Reply #27 on: June 25, 2015, 01:03:47 PM »
Not far off:
 

Online edy

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1451
  • Country: ca
    • DevHackMod Channel
Re: The Airing
« Reply #28 on: June 26, 2015, 03:45:44 AM »
dadler.... That video was hilarious! Thanks for sharing!  :-DD

The Airing also has something called FLEXIBLE FUNDING which I mentioned a couple posts ago. That should be a huge warning.  :palm:

Look at this article titled "Why ‘Flexible Funding’ Campaigns on IndieGoGo are Dangerous":

http://timidmonster.com/why-flexible-funding-campaigns-on-indiegogo-are-dangerous/

Obviously nobody seems to have caught that or knows enough to read between the lines. We already have an engineering issue, a flexible funding red-flag issue, a project creator with previously failed start-up lawsuit and dubious business practice (Encite LLC). How much more does it take for people to get the message?

... Oh that's right, they AREN'T getting the message because they never bothered to scrutinize it at all or look around the web for other opinions. They just threw money at it with blind hope... Sad especially when people suffering with this medical condition are grasping for any hope of an alternative. Seeing by some of the IndieGoGo comments, some backers are having a hard time getting refunds as well. Not sure how that works... I thought it was automatic.


These guys are doing so well sucking up people's money, that they are running out of ideas on Perks! This survey was put up by Airing in the last few days to ask for suggestions on additional perks:

https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/MDYZ2QL

Unbelievable!  :palm:
« Last Edit: June 26, 2015, 03:54:42 AM by edy »
YouTube: www.devhackmod.com
"Ye cannae change the laws of physics, captain" - Scotty
 

Online edy

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1451
  • Country: ca
    • DevHackMod Channel
Re: The Airing
« Reply #29 on: June 29, 2015, 10:26:44 PM »
Quick update....

They are at $707,427 USD which is 7x their goal, in 14 days. They have 17 days to go. Will they reach 1 million?

People are asking for stretch goals. Also I noticed someone commenting about a refund and then the comment disappeared. Not sure if the backer erased it after they were refunded or if Airing can take it down themselves. Still watching this campaign in awe.... Can't wait to see what happens.
YouTube: www.devhackmod.com
"Ye cannae change the laws of physics, captain" - Scotty
 

Online edy

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1451
  • Country: ca
    • DevHackMod Channel
Re: The Airing
« Reply #30 on: July 03, 2015, 04:41:02 AM »
Another quick update:  They are at $726,782 USD with 2 weeks to go. Vastly exceeding their $100,000 flexible funding goal. People still don't get it, although a few more comments have come in finally asking the same questions we did here in our thread long ago.

I just realized that the PERKS are actually vouchers for when Airings become available. They do not promise anyone an Airing directly. Does that mean, they can technically claim they delivered to their backers (and meet IndieGogo guidelines) as long as they send them a piece of paper (voucher)? And not the actual product? Hmmm.... :palm:
« Last Edit: July 03, 2015, 04:43:18 AM by edy »
YouTube: www.devhackmod.com
"Ye cannae change the laws of physics, captain" - Scotty
 

Online edy

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1451
  • Country: ca
    • DevHackMod Channel
Re: The Airing
« Reply #31 on: July 06, 2015, 05:18:37 AM »
Not content with having scammed now over $760,000 from backers and 760% of their funding goal, Airing has announced a new contest to help backers scam their friends as well:

Quote
Win A Year's Supply Of Airings!

Starting today and ending on July 7, 2015 at midnight EST, anyone who has contributed to the Airing campaign can win free Airing devices by sharing the Airing campaign with friends. The more your friends contribute to the campaign, the more Airing devices you can win. Maybe even a year's supply.

Prizes:

Raise $500 from your friends and you get 10 free Airing devices.

Raise $750 from your friends and you get 20 free Airing devices.

Raise $1,000 from your friends and you get 30 free Airing devices.

Raise $1,250 from your friends and you get 40 free Airing devices.

Grand prize: raise the most money during the contest period (now through July 7, 2015 at midnight EST) and win a full year's supply, or 365 Airing devices! To win this grand prize, the winner must not only raise the most money, but raise a minimum of $3,000.

10 days left on this campaign. No blog rebuttals or anything close to what is seen against Holus (which is actually a real product) yet Airing has no major skeptic and IndieGogo likely ignoring all abuse/scam reports. Will be following this one for 2 years...
« Last Edit: July 06, 2015, 05:22:39 AM by edy »
YouTube: www.devhackmod.com
"Ye cannae change the laws of physics, captain" - Scotty
 

Offline Nerull

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 460
Re: The Airing
« Reply #32 on: July 06, 2015, 07:39:05 AM »
I wonder... the principle of the CPAP machine is to increase the pressure in the respiratory system by presenting that increased pressure to the nose and mouth. But as us electrical engineers know, all voltages (and pressures*) are relative, so you could expose the entire rest of the body to a negative pressure to achieve the same result. Of course, this would be even more uncomfortable and cumbersome than a traditional CPAP machine - a negative pressure spacesuit with a cutout around the face. But, would the legs and arms need the negative pressure? The crown of the head? The torso? Pure speculation on my part, but is it possible to expose just the neck area to a negative pressure to achieve the same result? Would this be significantly less irritating than a mask? Heck, people voluntarily use neck pillows.

Has this been considered?


* OK, there is such a thing as absolute pressure, but it's irrelevant here.

You mean like these?

 

Offline rs20

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1950
  • Country: au
Re: The Airing
« Reply #33 on: July 06, 2015, 08:46:03 AM »
You mean like these?



Absolutely, except less ruggedly constructed and only applying the negative pressure to whichever area of the skin is relevant. Again, it might perhaps be as simple as a neck pillow outfitted with suction of some sort. Feasibility depends entirely on where this collapsing airway is, and how/where that collapsing pressure is being coupled in through the skin.
 

Online edy

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1451
  • Country: ca
    • DevHackMod Channel
Re: The Airing
« Reply #34 on: July 06, 2015, 02:59:28 PM »
Thanks to some "anonymous" backer by the name of Billie Joe Bob, this comment has appeared a couple hours ago on the Airing campaign (although I doubt it will make much difference, it is something):

Quote
Billie JoeBob
2 hours ago
My opinions: Tiny fans probably can’t generate the necessary pressure, and if they could, tiny batteries could not provide the necessary current for one night. Conventional CPAP masks do not use prongs that fit inside nostrils — they might be painful and might not hold much pressure. CPAP manufacturers constantly improve their devices, and probably would have already invented this sort of thing, if feasible. Beware — there is no prototype. I donated $5 so I could make a public comment.

And just when you thought the media was done with it, here is a CBS local TV news story from a few days ago:

http://boston.cbslocal.com/2015/07/02/burlington-company-hopes-airing-device-will-revolutionize-sleep-apnea-treatment/
« Last Edit: July 06, 2015, 03:04:00 PM by edy »
YouTube: www.devhackmod.com
"Ye cannae change the laws of physics, captain" - Scotty
 

Online Richard Crowley

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3454
  • Country: us
  • KE7GKP
Re: The Airing
« Reply #35 on: July 06, 2015, 03:36:30 PM »
And just when you thought the media was done with it, here is a CBS local TV news story from a few days ago...

Must have been a slow news day and their press release was on top of the pile at the moment.
Even national and international news operations lack reporters or editors with ANY scientific or technical knowledge.
 

Offline rs20

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1950
  • Country: au
Re: The Airing
« Reply #36 on: July 06, 2015, 04:22:40 PM »
To be clear, I do think this is a scam, but I'm struggling to convincingly technically debunk it (or at least, debunk it as comprehensively as Solar Roadways).

CPAP pressure = 10mm H2O = 13.5 millibar 10cm H2O = 9.8 millibar
Resting breathing rate = 7.5 L per minute
Sleep time = 8 hours
Energy density of an Li-ion battery = Up to 620 W·h/L

a*b*c/d = 2.17 1.58 cubic centimeter battery to power the device for a night.

Now, reasons why this estimate will be conservative: inefficiency in motors, friction, inefficiency of pump mechanism, etc. Can we put hard numbers of any of these factors? I can't off the top of my head, I don't know HVAC.  Reasons why the estimate might be liberal could be if they manage to achieve energy regeneration on exhalation, which seems extremely ambitions but not impossible.
« Last Edit: July 12, 2015, 10:23:38 AM by rs20 »
 

Offline fcb

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1199
  • Country: gb
Re: The Airing
« Reply #37 on: July 06, 2015, 07:03:06 PM »
My dad used a CPAP for a number of years, and I tried it on once or twice - the amount of pressure it generated was surprising.  It was also fantastically awkward to wear.

So whilst I think there is merit in carrying out research into the micro CPAP concept, there is NO WAY the unit they have shown is going to work, and they must know that.

Now if they have managed to make something more comfortable than a standard CPAP mask & hose - but are struggling with the battery, why not just use a cable (or wireless power...)?
 

Online edy

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1451
  • Country: ca
    • DevHackMod Channel
Re: The Airing
« Reply #38 on: July 06, 2015, 08:59:53 PM »
The entire campaign is emphasizing that people are buying the devices, when really the emphasis is that you are donating to research on building and testing micro-blower technology which doesn't exist at all.

Even if there has been a breakthrough in micro-blowers, surely the creator Stephen Marsh (who already has an interesting history, see earlier posts in this thread) could have made even the most crude prototype.

The best micro-blowers today are fan or piezo based and do create pressures but move a tiny volume of air. This Airing campaign is a huge money sinkhole for Marsh to either do nothing and run with the money, or spend it over the next few years (with a nice salary of course) on a "moonshot" project whose real risk of producing nothing is very conveniently being buried by the campaign and all who report it. Backers all seem to think the device exists or is close to existing and is proven and that in 2 years they will be getting a voucher in the mail to pick up their free Airings.

Now as a purely passive device like Breathe-right strip, the Airing could probably hold your nose open. But my concern is that it is being sold as a CPAP replacement and has taken advantage of a desperate population looking to grasp on to anything, by a guy who has a shoddy business history which has amounted to a previous bankruptcy with nothing to show for it.

Any HVAC thermodynamics engineer should be able to calculate the energy required to sustain thus kind of pressure with volumes of air worth breathing for 8 hours. We have 2 years... I will read up on my old books and try to post something here, as a personal challenge and to learn something.

I hope this is real, my dad and my son both had experience with CPAP, I may be next. We both had the clunky big machines. But Airing sounds too good to be true, it probably is
« Last Edit: July 06, 2015, 09:04:21 PM by edy »
YouTube: www.devhackmod.com
"Ye cannae change the laws of physics, captain" - Scotty
 

Offline mikerj

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1360
  • Country: gb
Re: The Airing
« Reply #39 on: July 06, 2015, 09:59:58 PM »
To be clear, I do think this is a scam, but I'm struggling to convincingly technically debunk it (or at least, debunk it as comprehensively as Solar Roadways).

Ignoring the (lack of) availability of fans that can produce the pressure and airflow requirements in a suitable form factor and the power source for these fans, one absolutely fundamental issue is that there is nothing to stop all the air coming straight out of the wearers mouth rather than into their lungs.
 

Offline fcb

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1199
  • Country: gb
Re: The Airing
« Reply #40 on: July 07, 2015, 12:32:32 AM »
Mikerj - yes, I was wondering that - but I don't know enough about CPAP theory to know if that is a problem, and assumed that if that is a flaw it is so blindingly obvious that it would have zero'ed the development before it began.
 

Online Richard Crowley

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3454
  • Country: us
  • KE7GKP
Re: The Airing
« Reply #41 on: July 07, 2015, 02:07:15 AM »
NONE of the crucial technology this gadget depends on is viable.  This cannot be anything but a complete scam.   :palm:
 

Online edy

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1451
  • Country: ca
    • DevHackMod Channel
Re: The Airing
« Reply #42 on: July 07, 2015, 08:25:21 AM »

This is the reason it is pointless to argue with backers:

Quote
Pete Williams
17 hours ago
Thanks for your “opinions” Billie JoeBob. Now take your fake name and $5 and go back to working for whatever giant CPAP company you work for. We don’t need industry moles trying kill off this great invention that will hopefully rescue us from those brutal masks and tubes you’ve got us tied to. I’m sure you would love to do to Airing what Big Auto did to the electric car, but there are clearly thousands of us willing to bet a few bucks on something better.





Thanks to some "anonymous" backer by the name of Billie Joe Bob, this comment has appeared a couple hours ago on the Airing campaign (although I doubt it will make much difference, it is something):

Quote
Billie JoeBob
2 hours ago
My opinions: Tiny fans probably can’t generate the necessary pressure, and if they could, tiny batteries could not provide the necessary current for one night. Conventional CPAP masks do not use prongs that fit inside nostrils — they might be painful and might not hold much pressure. CPAP manufacturers constantly improve their devices, and probably would have already invented this sort of thing, if feasible. Beware — there is no prototype. I donated $5 so I could make a public comment.

And just when you thought the media was done with it, here is a CBS local TV news story from a few days ago:

http://boston.cbslocal.com/2015/07/02/burlington-company-hopes-airing-device-will-revolutionize-sleep-apnea-treatment/
YouTube: www.devhackmod.com
"Ye cannae change the laws of physics, captain" - Scotty
 

Online hamster_nz

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1271
  • Country: nz
Re: The Airing
« Reply #43 on: July 07, 2015, 02:45:14 PM »
To be clear, I do think this is a scam, but I'm struggling to convincingly technically debunk it (or at least, debunk it as comprehensively as Solar Roadways).

CPAP pressure = 10mm H2O = 13.5 millibar
Resting breathing rate = 7.5 L per minute
Sleep time = 8 hours
Energy density of an Li-ion battery = Up to 620 W·h/L

a*b*c/d = 2.17 cubic centimeter battery to power the device for a night.

Now, reasons why this estimate will be conservative: inefficiency in motors, friction, inefficiency of pump mechanism, etc. Can we put hard numbers of any of these factors? I can't off the top of my head, I don't know HVAC.  Reasons why the estimate might be liberal could be if they manage to achieve energy regeneration on exhalation, which seems extremely ambitions but not impossible.

I can't believe that calculation is correct. As a battery can be 620 Watt hours per litres, that is  0.62 Whrs per cubic centimetres, so a 2.17 cm^3 battery can supply around 1.35 Watt hours, and that has to last for the entire night - so the most the blowers could use is around 150mW.

That is only enough to run a small 35mm / 600mW fan that is on my desk for 2 hours.... and that fan only has enough pressure to just lift 10 post-it notes, Even if their fan is 100% efficient it must be feeble.

I know a bit about CPAP, as I put my son on it for a couple of years when he was younger...
just as interesting is the problem of humidification - it would be truly unpleasant to have dry air forced up your nose all night.
 

Offline rs20

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1950
  • Country: au
Re: The Airing
« Reply #44 on: July 07, 2015, 06:17:02 PM »
I can't believe that calculation is correct. As a battery can be 620 Watt hours per litres, that is  0.62 Whrs per cubic centimetres, so a 2.17 cm^3 battery can supply around 1.35 Watt hours, and that has to last for the entire night - so the most the blowers could use is around 150mW.

That is only enough to run a small 35mm / 600mW fan that is on my desk for 2 hours.... and that fan only has enough pressure to just lift 10 post-it notes, Even if their fan is 100% efficient it must be feeble.

I know a bit about CPAP, as I put my son on it for a couple of years when he was younger...
just as interesting is the problem of humidification - it would be truly unpleasant to have dry air forced up your nose all night.

7.5 litres per minute * 13.5 millibar = 0.16875 watts delivered pneumatic power.

As I called out in my original post, my calculation assumes 100% efficient fans/pumps and motors; the fan on your desk may be only 1% efficient (in terms of pressure drop sustained * flow rate) given that it's just wafting around this ethereal stuff we call air, and because the air can just flow back between the blades, preventing the fan from ever developing much pressure. Thing is, e.g., vane pumps might be more efficient because the air can't just leak back between the blades; which is why I'm basically asking for hard numbers of the inefficiencies of various fan/pump technologies. Obviously miniaturizing a fan probably makes it even less efficient, which is why this project is so very dubious, but I still think if we're so sure it's bogus, we should be able to back that up with hard numbers? (Even though the 2cc battery pretty much blows it out of the water by itself).
 

Online edy

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1451
  • Country: ca
    • DevHackMod Channel
Re: The Airing
« Reply #45 on: July 07, 2015, 10:11:21 PM »
Just imagine a balloon and you have an air pump at the entrance of the balloon. Now you are trying to inflate the balloon so that the internal pressure of the balloon is 6-20mm Aq higher than the surrounding air. That could be determined either by the balloon stretching a bit in size, or you can put a weight on the balloon (assume the balloon is not stretchy) and just trying to inflate it so it overcomes the mass sitting on it and forms an inflated shape.

Let us assume an air-tight seal of the blower and mouth of the balloon. The leakages that would cause issues would be back flow through the blower itself. Remember we are just trying to overcome tissue at the back of the nasal passages and throat... so the main function and most demanding part of the cycle is just that portion which is needed to build a pressure in a closed nasopharynx and pressurize it, until the tissue flap opens and the pressure essentially drops again as air leaks back out the back of the throat.

The Airing needs to stay plugged in to the nose at the highest pressure, so can those ribbed rubbery things hold on to the inside of your nostril? Also how much work is required to inflate the nasopharynx (assuming closed mouth) to the point where it can overcome the tissue flap? The volume of nasopharynx is what we need to work with, not the entire lung. There also has to be enough air volume passable through the device since if it is your only pathway for air, you will suffocate if there is insufficient volume flow through its fans. Finally, what happens when the mouth opens? What effect does that have even on regular CPAP?

I think we can calculate work needed to move that volume of air (regardless of pressure) since that is a critical parameter. Then the actual pressure the blower can produce when it is obstructed is going to be based on the design of the blower construction, how "leaky" it is when faced with a blockage.... we will then have to show it can sustain 6-20mm Aq. But the first part is simply moving a volume of air assuming 100% perfect mechanical driving force to sustain breathing.

It is a bit more complicated even...

The volume that can pass through the Airing can be a combination of that pumped by the blowers and also any one-way release valves available. When you inhale air, you will expect a certain amount of air flow to go in. But if the blowers can't accommodate that, you would at least have a one-way valve letting you suck air in through the Airing and bypass the microblower. So together with the one-way air inlet and microblower, there should be enough openings to allow that rush of air in. The problem is when you breathe out you also need to accommodate for air escaping, especially if you are not going to be opening your mouth. That becomes an issue with a one-way valve designed to only allow air in.

If you have it designed for air going out, then you will have an issue getting air in through the microblower only, unless it can deliver the volume rate needed. Either way, for your microblower to be more efficient and develop a better pressure it will need to have tighter fit/valve design to make sure all the work of the motor is pushing against the pressure. Otherwise if you are just whiffing air around it will just leak out through openings around the blower and not overcome the pressure in the nasopharynx.

The reason CPAP as it now exists works and is unfortunately very clumsy to use, is because it does drive air in at a certain volume unimpeded by any valves or other obstructions. It overcomes the pressure of tissue at the back of the throat when you inhale air, due to shear brute force of air volume. There is leakage everywhere but that also allows for exhaled air to also exit along the same path without any need for valves. The pressure of you breathing out can easily overcome the CPAP blowing air into you... so it is not a problem. Remember, all you need is enough pressure in the nasopharynx to blow it open and lift that loose tissue long enough to let a gulp of air in.... And the continuous blowing of air keeps that flap open for a good amount of time.  It does no good to blow open the obstruction for a millisecond, then lose all the pressure you've built up in the nasopharynx and then have the tissue flap close up again. You will not have delivered enough of a gulp of air in that time. You need continuous sustained pressure for a certain length of time.

Now you could improve existing CPAP by having it monitor breathing and lung movement and actually have it cycle puffs of air blowing sinusoidally so it would "power assist" your breathing. It would have to monitor your breathing rate and automatically try to synchronize with it. Then provide sustained air pressure in waves and by monitoring the pressures and time, can estimate the volume delivered.

I still think Airing has no way to possibly function as it's intended goal, but then again, we have yet to be informed as to all the proprietary details behind the scenes. Maybe there is something but they are hiding it, for sure, because from everything I've seen it is vaporware.
« Last Edit: July 08, 2015, 05:32:02 AM by edy »
YouTube: www.devhackmod.com
"Ye cannae change the laws of physics, captain" - Scotty
 

Online edy

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1451
  • Country: ca
    • DevHackMod Channel
Re: The Airing
« Reply #46 on: July 11, 2015, 01:49:37 AM »
Once again, the media doesn't surprise me.... From a couple days ago Dailymail UK:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-3151419/Could-nose-ring-help-beat-snoring-Matchbox-sized-device-pumps-air-nose-continuously-night.html


And I quote the article, which seems to state this as "fact" even though nothing has actually been developed yet and is all speculative:

Quote
The new device, called Airing, consists of a 2 in-long, chunky plastic nose ring that weighs less than an ounce. It has two protruding buds, made from a soft, pliable, silicon rubber material, which fit into the nostrils.

The buds contain hundreds of mini pumps, which take air from the atmosphere and deliver it into the nostrils under a slight pressure, which keeps the airways open.

It's powered by inbuilt batteries, which provide sufficient energy for the device to work for eight hours. Made from recyclable, cheap materials, it is designed for single use and costs around £2 (there are multiple sizes in order to accommodate different nostril shapes).

Research suggests that the device can produce the same air pressure as traditional CPAP machines.

Hello Dailymail? Where did it say anywhere on that KickStarter page that the device has had *any* research? The whole point of the KS campaign is to fund the research!
YouTube: www.devhackmod.com
"Ye cannae change the laws of physics, captain" - Scotty
 

Offline ElectroIrradiator

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 615
  • Country: dk
  • More analog than digital.
Re: The Airing
« Reply #47 on: July 11, 2015, 02:50:46 AM »
Didn't read the whole thread with a magnifying glass, but it seems some of the energy estimates mentioned are more than an order of magnitude off.

Standard CPAP mask machines start at 40 mm H2O, 4 cm, and go up to 25 cm, 250mm, at the normal limit. A pressure difference of 10 mm H2O, 1 cm, will do nothing.

Many CPAP users have sleep apnea problems due to being seriously obese, and they do need that much static pressure to open their airways.

Increase your energy estimates by a factor of 25, please.
 

Online edy

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1451
  • Country: ca
    • DevHackMod Channel
Re: The Airing
« Reply #48 on: July 11, 2015, 03:57:54 AM »
Didn't read the whole thread with a magnifying glass, but it seems some of the energy estimates mentioned are more than an order of magnitude off.

Standard CPAP mask machines start at 40 mm H2O, 4 cm, and go up to 25 cm, 250mm, at the normal limit. A pressure difference of 10 mm H2O, 1 cm, will do nothing.

Many CPAP users have sleep apnea problems due to being seriously obese, and they do need that much static pressure to open their airways.

Increase your energy estimates by a factor of 25, please.

Good observation. I think we've mixed up "mm" and "cm" a few times along the way. But it is "cm" of water, at least 10x factor difference from any previous calculation that may have assumed "mm". And if the equations had any squares involved it would be 100x off.
YouTube: www.devhackmod.com
"Ye cannae change the laws of physics, captain" - Scotty
 

Offline ElectroIrradiator

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 615
  • Country: dk
  • More analog than digital.
Re: The Airing
« Reply #49 on: July 11, 2015, 04:28:08 AM »
Good observation. I think we've mixed up "mm" and "cm" a few times along the way. But it is "cm" of water, at least 10x factor difference from any previous calculation that may have assumed "mm". And if the equations had any squares involved it would be 100x off.

The factor of 25 I mentioned is due to a linear scaling of the power needed when going from 10 to 250 mm H2O. If the Airing widget is intended to be a complete replacement for the majority of existing CPAP machines, then it needs to be able to do at least 25 cm H2O. Even 10 cm (100 mm) will not do for a lot of users.

It seems the simplified inhale/exhale functionality they describe won't work either. The CPAP widget needs to maintain the rated CPAP pressure during exhalation as well, which is a lot more complicated than just maintaining it during inhalation. You need to be able to exhale out through it while it simultaneously keeps a steady and elevated airway pressure.
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf