Sing Core, Sing Square Log Homes
P.O. Box 1691, McCleary, WA 98557 (360) 495-3577
Here is where we will be posting all of the comments and critiques of the protective breathing apparatus. If you would like to add anything, please contact us at email@example.com!
‘I think that we could simplify your design a little, to get the same “wash effect.”I am looking at rebreather designs, which use a sponge, brass wool, or similarly porous material that holds the liquids, and allows the air to pass through with lot’s of wetted surface area. Another variation are swamp coolers. This would eliminate the need for a rotating brush.A small pump to keep the surface wetted would be the only power draw.Here is a link to the concept:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k0hhBLLHs9o this concept could be scaled down to your filtration tube. Similar concept with a rebreather. The breathing air passes through a unit with a chemical solution in a porous material to keep it wetted and increase surface area:
Either way, a small fan to make up for the flow restriction, like that on a PAPR, would make breathing effortless.
I fully realize that valuable new ideas in the past have always been met with skeptics, and I don’t want to be dismissive when I may well be wrong. But I have to say, I think you face a real uphill battle here for several reasons.
I did a little research on your competition, I see that 3M make a product, the Versaflo TR-300, and I used that as a basis of comparison and education. One key fact is that this 3M device delivers 185 liters of air per minute. You mentioned that you would sterilize air by mixing it with soap or alcohol. Right off, we can eliminate the alcohol idea, evaporated alcohol vapor (that can’t be separated out) would not be tolerated at levels able to kill virus, I believe. Even with soap, I worry about vapors from evaporation or incomplete separation in a centrifuge separator, being inhaled. Even if substantially less than 185 liters would be adequate, say 90 (?), aerosolizing enough of a soap like product for this volume, mixing with air for an adequate amount of time, and then completely separating out this product at such high flow rates just doesn’t sound workable.
I like the UV light idea better, I found a UV-C sterilizing bulb that consumes only 6 Watts of power that perhaps could sterilize air flowing at such a high rate (???). It only costs $3.01, so that’s affordable. If you go this way, I don’t see that you could treat exhaust air with the same bulb, mixing intake and outflow takes much higher flow rates needed to dilute expired CO2 and allow enough O2.
I think with the trillions being spent on vaccination, you will find this a tough sell, even if you manage to overcome the many practical issues that will come up with adequate sterilization and affordable production. Plus, people don’t want to wear a mask, let alone a hood, so that is a real issue.
I think your best chance of success would be to come up with a more affordable alternative that could be used in ER’s and stockpiled for future pandemics, but funding sounds like a challenge.
Sorry I’m not more excited, but that’s what I think at this point.
I see you already started your fund raising process.
To bring it to the commercialized Stage you might have to go through lots of haird
It is not easy to bring a concept to make it commercialized especially this type of extreme sensitive worldwide pandemic situation.
I hope your prototype model can be done soon, Selecting the final materials to be used are very important,
You should not mention in the Go fund me about the plastic Hood used costs only five cents each, you should just say “little cost” because you’re not certain what will be the final material Yet.? it has to be safe and pass many tests because there’s a lot of liability issues you have to consider,
I will think of more to share-
Anyway wish your success!
‘I have the same idea as your friend Vincent. Think the easiest would be modifying an existing PAPR system. Something like this: https://www.grainger.com/product/SENTINEL-XL-PAPR-System-6NTV4, but add your own disinfectant system. For mass acceptance, the whole thing need to be of lighter duty. If mass production of this is possible for $1000, US government can provide everyone with one for 400 Billion dollars, which is less than amount spent fighting this now. However, with the political climate, I just don’t see majority of people would wear this even if received for free from government. I still think a wet system would be too difficult to easily make into personal device.
For the “marketing release” you would need to add some pictures or drawings in order for people to better visualize this. I think another way to do this, instead of having personal protection system, is to modify existing HVAC system for all the indoor facilities, such as restaurants, mall, theaters, etc. If the virus can be effectively eliminated in the HVAC system, it would make indoor activities much safer and I think would help greatly in reduce the amount of transmission.’