h a l f b a k e r yWhy did I think of that?
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
There are plenty of designs for breathing apparatus - for toxic
atmospheres, dust, etc.
The same is true of filter masks.
Filter masks have a limited life and often don't stop odours.
Breathing
apparatus usually requires a supply of compressed air.
For domestic and light industrial use,
BorgCo now offer the vacuum
mask.
It consists of a lightweight full-face mask, a long length of conjoined
lightweight tubing, and a connector/valve assembly. Additional
lengths of twin pipe can be easilly plugged in.
To use, attach the pipe labelled OUT to the inlet of a domestic
vacuum
cleaner.
Turn on the cleaner and don the mask.
The cleaner sucks a continuous supply of air through the inlet pipe,
past the wearer's face, and back through the return pipe, where it is
discharged through the cleaner to atmosphere.
A leak valve at the suction end of the outlet pipe bleeds in air to
ensure that the mask is only just below atmospheric pressure,
enough
to draw a sufficient amount of air through the inlet tube, but not
enough to suck the user's lungs out through their nose.
[link]
|
| |
Close to the connection to the vacuum cleaner, but not actually right
next to it. |
|
| |
Whilst I can see how this would prevent noxious items from entering the lungs, I can also see it preventing oxygen from doing so as well. |
|
| |
Admittedly the link between oxygen inhalation and cancer is irrefutable, but... |
|
| |
I think [8th] failed to fully specify the layout of the
inlet pipe. I assume that inlet pipe goes outside
the room to some location where there is fresh air
available. So basically, the vacuum is sucking fresh
air past the user's face. There isn't much restriction
in the tube, so the pressure isn't much lower in the
mask. |
|
| |
What you've done is invented a supplied air
respirator, except replaced the purpose-built motor
with a household vacuum. These are WKTE for
painters, sand-blasters, and BSL4 workers. If you
want something for dirty domestic jobs that filters
smells try a military gas mask. They're surprisingly
cheap on eBay. |
|
| |
Right, so... instead one hose and couple flapper valves, two hoses and a vacuum cleaner. |
|
| |
//to suck the user's lungs out through their nose. ?// |
|
| |
Your right to avoid that. Could bring the product liability police. |
|
| |
Since you already have a vacuum at the job site, why not use it. |
|
| |
Use concentric hoses so that there appears to be only
one. |
|
| |
I can't help but imagine the cheapo version from some
enterprising nation, where to reduce material cost, the
inlet pipe is replaced by an opening on the side of the
mask, completely negating the whole thing....but hey,
it looks good. |
|
| |
Yes, what [scad_mientist] said. |
|
| |
// replaced the purpose-built motor with a
household vacuum // |
|
| |
Durrr, yes ? Purpose-built air handler ==
expensive, whereas most homes have a
vacuum cleaner. |
|
| |
Filter masks have a limited effective life.
Conventional supplied air respirators are
expensive.
This product is "cheap and cheerful", low
purchase cost and low cost of ownership. We
estimate that the basic model (without the
anti-lungs-being- sucked-through-the-nose
valve) would retail at about USD$30. |
|
| |
I could use this title to invent a new kind of face lift! |
|
| |