Hi group,
I think this is the most interesting picture on the kickstarter campaign:
And it is what you don't see that is interesting. I don't see a structure that is capable of support the mechanical stress of reasonable vacuum. I also don't see a vacuum pump.
Latent heat of vaporization of water = 2256 kJ/kg.
900W for 15 minutes = 15 x 60 x 900 = 810 kJ
Even at 100% efficiency enough energy to vaporize 0.36 kg of water.
Regards,
Jay_Diddy_B
And it is what you don't see that is interesting. I don't see a structure that is capable of support the mechanical stress of reasonable vacuum. I also don't see a vacuum pump.
Right. There are no vacuum hose as well. Also I wonder - how do they manage to seal 6% vacuum between rotating drum and stationery translucent door?
[edit] Minute later possible solution came: whole enclosure except water tank could be under vacuum.
Hi group,
I think this is the most interesting picture on the kickstarter campaign:
How they thought they could display that teardown picture and not have people see there is no vacuum system is beyond me
I will check when we next do the laundry, but we don't have a drier other than fresh wind.
And I did. Well, tell a lie, I didn't but my missus did
| item | 1200 Spin | dry | % water |
| cotton thingy | 357g | 219g | 39 |
| cotton t-shirt | 270g | 190g | 30 |
| George knickers | 33g | 22g | 33 |
| M&S knickers | 37g | 25g | 32 |
So 30-40% seems to be the actualite.
| item | 1200 Spin | dry | % water |
| cotton thingy | 357g | 219g | 39 |
| cotton t-shirt | 270g | 190g | 30 |
| George knickers | 33g | 22g | 33 |
| M&S knickers | 37g | 25g | 32 |
So 30-40% seems to be the actualite.
It is for for nearly empty (total dry < 0.5Kg) washing machine, right? When machine is loaded up-to nominal capacity, there will be more remaining moisture, I bet up-to 50% as manufacturers say.
No, there was more but I'd asked for the comparison of a cotton t-shirt and she came up with that list.
Edit: your post prompted me to go and check what they actually claim, and they say this:
The clothes after spin dried normally contain 10%-30% of water. While in our demo the clothes were wrung dried by hand so it had more moisture (40%).
The water content here is the weight of water divided by the weight of the wet clothes. According to CFR, RMC (remaining moisture content) is the weight of water divided by the weight of dry clothes. In this case, the RMC of the item in the test is 66.6%.
Hi group,
I think this is the most interesting picture on the kickstarter campaign:
How they thought they could display that teardown picture and not have people see there is no vacuum system is beyond me
An interesting thought experiment:
A cheap way to create a vacuum in a chamber is to inject steam to displace the air and then condense the steam. Not that this is a viable method for the job of drying clothes. First there has to be valve to let the air out; that isn’t too hard to accomplish. The big problem is that the steam has to be cooled in order to make it condense. Where could they put this heat energy? Well, the clothes could be heated to make them dry faster, so heat the clothes with steam.
From a marketing standpoint this looks like a winner plus a claim of (elusive) “energy savings” by using the steam to do two things.
But wait, what about the steam condensing and adding water to the clothes that are supposed to be drying? The marketing wank answer is that they are under a vacuum and heated so drying so much more efficient. (Cue Dave’s fail button sound here, WA, Wa,wa) The Morus marketing people obviously don’t understand equilibrium, such a concept doesn’t seem like it has enough profit margin. So there is equilibrium of steam that was injected to make a vacuum and water vapor evaporating from the clothes; there doesn’t seem to be any energy savings with this model.
Then there is the bonus feature of a tray that collects all of the condensed water. There seems to zero heat pump components in the picture and Peltier junctions are anything but efficient against the heat of vaporization for water which needs to be removed from the vapor to condense it into water.
So they show water boiling at 102 F (39 C) in the image. That means pressure is being dropped from 1,000 hPa to 78hPa or so. Is this doable with a cheap vacuum pump?
Maybe that is why they went with the small chamber, easier to pull a vacuum.
Would be nice to see improved tech in this area, some people refuse to hang their clothes and dryers use quite a bit of power ($1-3 per load!).
The water has a lower boiling point at low pressure. Morus Zero uses a compact high-performance vacuum pump to allow water to boil at lower to 100 °F. The water in the boiling state has a very high evaporation rate, and Morus Zero uses this principle to accelerate the drying speed.
https://www.omnicalculator.com/chemistry/Boliling-point
Most people know, that water boils at lower temperature at lower pressure.
Most people dont know, how this really works, and what is the temperature and what pressure.
This. We learn as kids that tea made at the top of Everest is really weak, and we've seen the videos of stuff boiling off at low temperatures. It's pretty much like proving we went to the moon when world+dog could see the flag waving - on an airless world - in the original video.
But them's the breaks. Debunking isn't about reeling off numbers and having your audience fall asleep (or watch more conspiracy channels). You need to be more convincing than what you're debunking, and it's that a bit too difficult then you should stick with your day job. A bad debunking video is counterproductive and merely proves whatever is being debunked is actually real.
Registered just to correct the record: It has nothing to do with boiling point. Water freezes at 273.15K but supercooled water exists, just because a material crosses the boiling/freezing point doesn't mean it necessarily will freeze/boil
The energy it takes to go from a liquid to a gas (in macroscopic terms) is the latent heat of evaporation. In microscopic terms it is the energy required to break the hydrogen bond, which TF demonstrated with computer simulation in his video and as someone who also work in the same field - the theory is sound
and as someone who also work in the same field - the theory is sound
I think "Whooosh" is an appropriate response here, particularly considering the extracts you quoted!
No-one here doubts the theory or the numbers. The point was that it doesn't matter how sound or unflawed it is - present it poorly and you've done nearly as much damage as saying "Yep, that's a pukka kickstarter."
a percentage of dry weight.
OK. I guess that makes sense - it's not so circular
Just to let you know guys that google started showing ads for this scam.
Thunderf00t actually got one!
Figured what I really hate about thunderf00t's videos - the chopping to multiple clips (I bet he doesn't bother with copyright) so at any one point you don't know if you're watching him, the product, some unrelated 'statement' thing, stuff just for the crack or what. And just as you almost figure it out it changes again.
Does he suffer ADHD on fast play or something?
the chopping to multiple clips (I bet he doesn't bother with copyright)
Interestingly enough he does bother with copyright and the understanding of fair use.
Fair use allows him to use the product videos. The other stuff is more like using someones photo to illustrate something - he is making money from their work. Fair use might allow him to use short clips, but on a moral level he is essentially filling up his 28 minutes with other people's work because he doesn't have enough material. No doubt why the same 2-second clips come around and around and around...
Fair use might allow him to use short clips, but on a moral level he is essentially filling up his 28 minutes with other people's work because he doesn't have enough material.
Moral and legal are two different things. That said, I do not think that his use of, say, a few seconds worth of film clip is immoral. You may as well argue that using memes based on movies to make a humorous point is immoral. Either way, it was clearly demonstrated that the Morus delivered is not the Morus promised and that the whole thing was bollocks.
15 minute drying time....
* Tested with 1 polyester t-shirt
it was clearly demonstrated that the Morus delivered..
I wanted to see what he actually got, but after a minute or so of his editing skillz realised I couldn't give a toss any more.
I was hoping to get an cheap vacuum chamber.
The UV-sterilization would make it simple to degas & harden glue / epoxy / resin
Sadly it's the usual over promise, under deliver scam