The Dyson Air Multiplier, a bladeless fan, operates by drawing air through a base unit and expelling it through a circular opening, creating a smoother airflow without traditional blades. This design claims to increase airflow pressure by 15 times, delivering 118 gallons of air per minute. Despite its innovative appearance, critics argue that the fan's performance may not justify its $300-$330 price tag, suggesting that traditional fans are more efficient and cost-effective. The discussion highlights the marketing implications of the "bladeless" label, questioning the validity of such claims in the context of engineering principles.
PREREQUISITESEngineers, product designers, marketing professionals, and consumers interested in innovative home appliances and their underlying technologies.
sanman said:x-posted from Mechanical Engineering forum:
That makes me wonder - could similar principles be used to come up with a bladeless wind turbine? Some environmentalists are concerned that wind turbine blades could pose a hazard to birds. I'm wondering if Dyson's approach couldn't be used to rectify that?
Also, many residential areas might have zoning laws against things like wind turbines, but if they could be made bladeless then perhaps they might be exempted from such restrictions.
So rather than being an "air multiplier", I suppose it would be an "air concentrator".
Is such a concept possible? If so, would such a device prove to have comparable efficiency to standard wind turbines?
No.The fundamental flaw in every wind turbine is that none of them actually speed up the air...
50%*3=150% efficient? No.The current systems extract less than 50% of the wind’s energy and are only working about a third of the time!
According to Dragonfly, the nature of the new turbine’s inner wing design increases the air speed to create more power – up to three times the average of a standard wind generator.
Uh, diffusers diffuse. They decrease air velocity, they don't increase it! By definition!The chambers act as defusers so by the time the air reaches the third chamber, the smallest, the air inside is moving as fast as the air outside.
No, that's not what the SR-71 inlet cone was for. The SR-71 inlet cone basically just ensured that the cone shaped shock wave generated by the tip of the cone hit the inside of the inlet. The shock wave gets tighter as the plane accelerates, so the cone moves out.The nacelle of the Dragonfly was inspired by the technology of the SR 71 Blackbird, with a unique nose cone capable of expanding over 600% in size, increasing or decreasing the air speed and flow passing through the unit.
Solidworks is a software company, not an engineering company. They don't do the analysis for you!According to Dragonfly Industries, two computer dynamic fluid (CDF) tests on the design were completed by an independent software company, SolidWorks, and the results are promising for moving forward with prototypes.
Uh - above it said that a typical turbine is 50% efficient and that this generated 3x more power...and proves that more than 59% of the wind’s power can be harvested with the right design.
russ_watters said:No. Uh, diffusers diffuse. They decrease air velocity, they don't increase it! By definition!
No, that's not what the SR-71 inlet cone was for. The SR-71 inlet cone basically just ensured that the cone shaped shock wave generated by the tip of the cone hit the inside of the inlet. The shock wave gets tighter as the plane accelerates, so the cone moves out.
Solidworks is a software company, not an engineering company. They don't do the analysis for you!
mgb_phys said:The fan is in the base - it pushes air through the circumference of the ring where it comes out along the axis through tiny holes.
The idea is a smoother airflow and no whirling blades - so quieter and safer