cost-effective

能不能降低安全空气的价格而不牺牲效果?

我开始做DIY空气净化器之后,很快就有人冒出来模仿我的DIY。我不介意,因为我把制作说明发布到网上,所以谁都可以做,并不是一定要用我的。不过,我看到两家价格比我便宜,还说我太贵了!

作为一个书呆子,我第一反应是要研究。所以我订了他们的货,发现他们用的风扇更小,而用的HEPA捕捉颗粒效果特别低。HEPA一般能捕捉99%的0.3微米及以上的颗粒;我发现这个更便宜的HEPA捕捉了85.8%(测试)。

有没有办法让HEPA再便宜?

不过,如果能有同样效果但更便宜的HEPA就更好了。所以我开始测试宽度稍微小一点的HEPA。为什么呢?因为HEPA能便宜6%,但是宽度还足够盖上风扇的出风口。

测试

作为一个书呆子,我还是想先去测试,以确认效果没有降低。所以我用DIY 1.0 + 29mm HEPA做了10次过夜房间测试,然后跟我之前发布30mm HEPA的测试比较了

测试是在北京的15㎡卧室里做的。空气测试仪是一台Dylos DC1700,能测到0.5微米颗粒(手提空气测试仪跟大使馆官方测试仪相比,准不准?)。

e

为了算效果,我算了起床之前最后4个小时的颗粒污染浓度,然后跟没开净化器的时候比较。同时我记录了外面的PM 2.5数据。以下是其中一天测试:

q

结果

10次测试,DIY 1.0 + 29mm HEPA平均减少了86%的0.5微米颗粒和91%的2.5微米颗粒。

w

这个测试结果是说明29mm的HEPA效果跟30mm HEPA没有区别。所以我把HEPA的价格降低6%,从80元到75元。书呆子这回高兴了!

HEPA价格对比

从性价比看,淘宝上Blue Air HEPA要359元,IQ Air要2,150元(还有长期使用成本对比)。

r

书呆子注释:实验重做

做实验的时候,科学家注重replication(重做)。如果一个现象是真的,应该能在不同的实验当中重做而得到类似的结果。虽然做这次测试的时候,重做不是主要的目标,这系列的测试是我测试DIY 1.0的第三个系列的测试 (包括早期测试200天长期寿命测试)。再加上美国医生Dr. Saint Cyr的测试,被重做的次数已经足够。

公开数据

跟之前一样,为了其他学霸同胞们,我发在下面布了原始数据和测试方法细节。

原始数据

1

2

3

4

 

户外PM 2.5的波动

我觉得这种几个小时的测试比常见的20分钟测试(比如CADR测试)更好,因为这是我们用空气净化器的更常见的方式。不过,八个小时测试的短处是,做测试的时候,外面的PM 2.5有可能会上升或者下降。如果外面PM 2.5下降,会夸大净化器的效果。如果外面PM 2.5上升,会低估净化器的效果。

如果算10次测试的平均值,这些波动应该会互相取消,但是还是值得分析数据,确定外面PM 2.5的波动没有影响结果。这10次测试当中,两天(9/25和11/10)的PM 2.5数据有比较大的波动。我去掉这两天的数据之后,平均消除的颗粒数据基本没变:84%的0.5微米颗粒和91%的2.5微米颗粒。

测试中户外PM 2.5

也值得看看测试的那10天,外面PM 2.5是不是跟北京平常PM 2.5水平一样。这10次测试的时候,外面PM 2.5平均值是116微克。这个比北京近5年的平均PM 2.5高差不多20微克(以我分析的美国大使馆PM 2.5数据为准)。所以这些测试能够代表北京常见的PM 2.5水平或者甚至更高的水平。

5

1-29-1024x768

Finally! Directly comparable tests: DIY versus Blue Air

对不起,此内容只适用于美式英文。 For the sake of viewer convenience, the content is shown below in the alternative language. You may click the link to switch the active language.

I’ve wanted to know for a long time whether the DIY filter is as effective as the Ferrari filters. In an earlier post, I compared my data to the tests of Dr. Saint Cyr (whose excellent posts inspired me to look into filters in the first place). But I noted that the comparisons were far from perfect because:

  1. The rooms were different.
  2. The Cyr post did not specify how long the tests were (and that can make a big difference if you’re looking at times under an hour–see this time comparison).
  3. The Cyr post did not describe the particle counter or particle size.

But now I finally have directly comparable data! That’s because two kind souls donated a Blue Air 203/270E (3,600 RMB) and a Philips AC4072 (3, 000 RMB). That means I could finally test the DIY against expensive brands in the same room, for the same amount of time, with the same particle counter.

To do that, Anna ran 11 overnight tests with the Blue Air and 9 tests with the Philips. As always, I calculated effectiveness as percent reduction in particulates from the room air. Anna tested the air before she turned on the air filter, and then set the particle counter to take hourly measurements of the air in her 15 m2 room. Anna used the highest setting on each filter. (As always, I’m putting the original data and more details about the methods for fellow nerds at the end of this post.)

And (drumroll!) here are the results:

1

The Cannon removed as much particulate as the expensive machines. Not bad for 450 RMB!

Yet all four filters were making the room air significantly cleaner. For particles 2.5 microns and above, all four removed over 90%. For particles 0.5 microns and bigger, all four removed over 80%. I’m not the first person to say: All you need to significantly reduce the particulate pollution in your home is a simple HEPA filter.

Based on the data, here’s how much you’re paying for each percentage reduction in 0.5 micron particles:

2

(And that’s not counting the cost of the exorbitantly priced replacement filters.)

Recently, a Chinese news article claimed air filter companies are making “falsely inflated profits.” That fits with this data showing that the cannon removes more particulates than the Blue Air, yet costs 1/10th per percentage of 0.5 micron reduction. Similarly, the original DIY removes 4% less 2.5 micron particulate and 6% less 0.5 micron particulate than the Blue Air on average, yet the Blue Air costs more than 16 times as much.

Conclusion: You can remove particulate pollution from the air in your home and pay far less than a Blue Air or Philips.

Now, as I’ve said before, particulates are not everything. There are also gases like radon and carbon monoxide (although I’m less concerned about those). People who suspect that their homes may have harmful gases (particularly people whose homes are being remodeled) can get home tests done for gases from Pure Living China. It’s not cheap, but I’d consider it if I had a baby at home.

As always, I’m posting the original data and detailed methods for fellow nerds.

(更多…)