Electrolux Olympia One 1401-B Airflow Losses

[wyaple]

The first two measurements were easy to get, the last one (CFM at the nozzle) required me to build an airflow box. I think this pic should easily illustrate where and by how much CFM is lost in this machine. I think this is excellent performance from a 36 year old cleaner, admittedly with a new vinyl hose.

From the base of the machine to the hose (stretched out straight), there is a loss of 104-95 = 9 CFM. From the hose to the nozzle, there is a loss of 95-75 = 20 CFM. The CFM lost through the wands and power nozzle is just over twice as much as the hose.

Total airflow losses from the canister base to the power nozzle (held at a 45 degree angle to the floor) is 104-75 = 29 CFM or about 28% of the original airflow. Of course as the bag fills, the airflow will drop in addition to more losses depending on how the hose is coiled.

Last note: even though the rug plate opening is small (about 21 square inches), the CFM density is well above average, about 3.6 CFM/Sq. In. If you ever wondered if this old beast was capable of deep cleaning, I would argue it definitely was even with soft, long brush roll bristles.

Bill

 

[human]

Just an unscientific guess but I'm thinking your losses are occurring at the joints where machine and hose, hose and wand, wand halves, and wand and nozzle come together. They aren't perfectly airtight and except for the hose, have some 36 years of wear. Also, the hose appears to be an aftermarket unit (I can see a power switch on the handle, which the OEM hoses never had) so the connectors may not be as tight as the original. But hey, it's still a great machine. I love my 1205's, my Super J and my Diamond Jubilee.

 

[suckolux]

I think???? some of that drop off is not due to all leakage, but the friction of the distance and turns?? Guessing, but I think a good one.

 

[real1shep]

You'd need a 'control' to know what these numbers really mean. 'Control' being the factory numbers when the machine and accessories were new. In this example, the Oly 1 should have the Super J motor if original. How do we even know the motor is peaking like an original? I agree on turns and friction loss for lengths. You'd even have slightly different CFM's from a six ft hose versus a seven ft hose, all things being equal.


 


That first turn is about a 45 degree angle...not as restrictive as a 90 degree angle, but it's significant. And I like the comment about how well the aftermarket hose fits into the canister versus the original. These are great vacuums, but without the original factory numbers, we have no idea how these test numbers reflect what the vacs & accessories were capable of originally.


 


Kevin

 

[ronni]

Impressive testing and photo, Bill. Even if we don't know how it compares to its brand-new condition its current performance is effective.

Aerus/Electrolux cleaners often get a bad rap for not being dirt diggers. Your tests indicate that a more scientific look is in order.

I will say that the cleanliness of motor fans affects airflow--even the slightest amount of dust on the blades can make a negative impact. The deterioration of the hose inlet seal would also be an age factor affecting airflow.

What kind of filter bag is in the cleaner--paper or synthetic? I would take for granted that it is new.

 

[wyaple]

Thanks for the replies and interest guys!

Sometimes, I think that measurements mean very little here. (ha!)

Conditions of the test performed:
-Brand new, unused Perfect "C" HEPA bag (as stated in the picture).
-Dedicated 122 Volt, 20 Amp circuit used
-Machine itself fully serviced, commutator polished, fully seated new motor brushes, all seals like new.
-All original motor and power nozzle, obviously replaced aftermarket hose.

As far as total machine performance goes, Electrolux rates this bad boy at 9.7 Amps total current usage with the power nozzle. My current tests show 8.2 Amps with the hose and 10 Amps with the power nozzle in operation on medium pile carpet.

I personally would be about 99% sure that 104 CFM at the base with a clean HEPA bag would be maxed out. The paper bags test slightly worse and lose airflow very quickly as they fill up. Without any bag, I did get a reading of 113 CFM at the canister base, which I believe easily holds its own against most modern vacs, with the exception of a Kirby of course.

If you want to see the BIG table of nozzle airflow results, check out the link below.

I will be posting airflow loss pics just like this one for all my machines over time (like 1 every day or so). Next on my list is a mint condition Dyson DC14 Animal.

Bill



http://www.vacuumland.org/cgi-bin/TD/TD-VIEWTHREAD.cgi?33262_10

 

[ronni]

Well, duh, about the HEPA bag annotation in your photo--sorry 'bout that!

I've observed that there isn't a lot of interest in data overall on this site--whether test results, years, models, et cetera. That said, there are those like me who appreciate it, so please continue.

 

[compactc9guy]

Electrolux AP 200

I have tp say that my Electrolux AP 200 , whit a vinyl hose performs quite well i do know , that the air flow could be improve whit the hepa bags .I use 4 ply paper bags but whit the vinyl hose air flow and suction is quite strong .But on the other hand my Compact Electra C9 whit vinyl hose and new electrostatic bag and new cloth bag and new motor filter .now that bad boy sucks the floor nozzle to the ground and keeps on going .

 

[real1shep]

Measurements are....

great! Not condemning you for your efforts and do continue. I was merely saying that without the factory numbers, we have no 'standard'. But...we can compare whatever we have to your results....which to me is more than worthwhile.


 


Kevin

 

[real1shep]

<a name="start_33360.363917"></a>Aerus/Electrolux cleaners often get a bad rap for not being dirt diggers. Your tests indicate that a more scientific look is in order.


 


Not to people in the carpet business. I've been told by a number of carpet layers that they can always tell when they pull up an old carpet if the homeowner has been using an Electrolux or not. Electrolux always less dirt when they pull out the old carpets. Those were volunteered statements, so I'm not slamming Kirby, Hoover or Royal et al.


 


Kevin

 

[wyaple]

Kevin,

Love to hear your kind of stories! When I set off to measure all this stuff from various vacs, I collected the CFM from them and stared at the results for a while. Then I created a measurement of CFM density in the power nozzle and WHAM! It hit me that some machines may not have gargantuan total airflow at the PN, but the CFM density may hold the key as to why some lower airflow machines can still clean very well.

Loosely speaking, if a PN has a CFM density of 2.5 CFM/SqIn or above, it should have very good pickup. Vacs with a PN density of 3.5 CFM/SqIn should clean insanely well. Machines that test out around 1.5 CFM/SqIn clean poorly as you have to keep going over the same spot over and over again.

AND, you *hint* that you may have some test data? If so, please post it somewhere or email it to me (I had one poster do that a few months ago).

At the time of this posting I also have posted airflow losses for a Dyson DC14 and a Rainbow D4C SE PE in the contemporary forum. Y'all have to check those out and tell me what you think.

Bill

 

[human]

When I was in high school, I used to think the Electrolux 1205 we had was a seriously wimpy machine. You practically had to feed debris into it by hand. What I came to understand long after the fact was that it had a seriously leaky hose. I rescued it from my parents' attic last summer with the idea of keeping it as a parts donor for my other 1205, but now that I've cleaned it up (and out) and fitted it with a good vinyl hose and a power nozzle, which it didn't have before, it performs better than ever, or at least better than it has since Dad nabbed it from a neighbor's trash some 35 years ago. I've tested it side by side with my other 1205 and my Super J using the same hose and power nozzle and it stands up well against both of them. While they're certainly no slouch in the performance department, none of my Luxes can quite match my three G-series Kirbys for for all-out brute power. Nonetheless, I still tend to prefer the the metal Lux canisters for their versatility and relative ease of use. They're just such elegant machines, both in design and operation.

 

[real1shep]

I have a......

love/hate affair with the 1205. The one I sent back to my son in Brooklyn was my DD. In the postcard pull test against my restored G, it would always lose. In inches of water it was 5 inches less than the G. I never could get that motor to peak out at what I thought it should. I have another 1205 to restore.


 


I think these old vacs have personalities. My restored G is a case in point. My mother-in-law gave us her old G that her husband had gone through when we were first married. I don't know what he did other than brushes, but that motor has a higher output than any other G motor I have. So much so that when I found a nice clean G, I transplanted that motor into it. They always had Electrolux and a close association to the salesman....maybe it was a replacement motor at some point. Or maybe it just has good voodoo. 


 


I think of the 12 or so Diamond J's I've restored for people only a couple of them were identical in inches of water. My DD now is a Diamond J and it pulls 80 inches right out of the box it came in. I'll get around to restoring it someday.


 


I guess my favorite vac in the G, but I don't use it much anymore. It's just such a classic, beautiful vac of an era long gone. But the wheels are flimsy and have always been a problem fo that machine. Turquoise replacement wheels for that machine are like trying to find dinosaur eggs. 


 


The Electrolux floor brush I use on my hard floors tends to trap the dog hair against the bristles, rather than suck them in. I can flip over the head and do it that way, but the brush bristles sweep the floor better. The Constellation head even though flimsy, does a much better job on the floor, although you have to figure out your passes with that motor bottom exhaust blowing the dirt everywhere.  A member here says he gets 80 inches from his Constellation. Respectfully, I'd like to see that in person or a pic with a gauge on it. Mine was like new and it pulled 60"....went through the motor and it still pulled 60". My other Connie pulls about 50 inches, but suspect a tough life.....no hurry to go through that motor.


 


The folks that claim they get at least 80" out of every motor they touch, must have better magic fingers than I do. I'm pretty good with small electric motors, but I'm lucky to get 80".


 


Kevin.

 

[real1shep]

I have a......

love/hate affair with the 1205. The one I sent back to my son in Brooklyn was my DD. In the postcard pull test against my restored G, it would always lose. In inches of water it was 5 inches less than the G. I never could get that motor to peak out at what I thought it should. I have another 1205 to restore.


 


I think these old vacs have personalities. My restored G is a case in point. My mother-in-law gave us her old G that her husband had gone through when we were first married. I don't know what he did other than brushes, but that motor has a higher output than any other G motor I have. So much so that when I found a nice clean G, I transplanted that motor into it. They always had Electrolux and a close association to the salesman....maybe it was a replacement motor at some point. Or maybe it just has good voodoo. 


 


I think of the 12 or so Diamond J's I've restored for people only a couple of them were identical in inches of water. My DD now is a Diamond J and it pulls 80 inches right out of the box it came in. I'll get around to restoring it someday.


 


I guess my favorite vac is the G, but I don't use it much anymore. It's just such a classic, beautiful vac of an era long gone. But the wheels are flimsy and have always been a problem for that machine. Turquoise replacement wheels for that machine are like trying to find dinosaur eggs. 


 


The Electrolux floor brush I use on my hard floors tends to trap the dog hair against the bristles, rather than suck them in. I can flip over the head and do it that way, but the brush bristles sweep the floor better. The Constellation head even though flimsy, does a much better job on the floor, although you have to figure out your passes with that motor's bottom exhaust blowing the dirt everywhere.  A member here says he gets 80 inches from his Constellations. Respectfully, I'd like to see that in person or a pic with a gauge on it. Mine was like new and it pulled 60"....went through the motor and it still pulled 60". My other Connie pulls about 50 inches, but suspect a tough life.....no hurry to go through that motor.


 


The folks that claim they get at least 80" out of every motor they touch, must have better magic fingers than I do. I'm pretty good with small electric motors, but I'm lucky to get 80".


 


Kevin.

 

[real1shep]

Bill......

your calculations on CFM density are fascinating to me. Can you share with us how you do that on a PN??


 


Kevin

 

[wyaple]

Kevin,

To obtain PN CFM density, simply take the PN CFM and divide by the nozzle opening area. For example, the above machine has an opening of 21 square inches and an airflow reading of 75 CFM. Take 75 CFM / 21 sq in = 3.57 CFM/Sq In. This density is well above average and somewhat proves that this 36 year old beast can deep clean.

As far as water lift goes, my Lux will do 78" from the base and 74" from the hose end with no bag installed.

Bill

 

[real1shep]

Well.....

then, I'm doing really well to get 80" from a Diamond J with a HEPA bag/clean. Like I said, that doesn't happen often as most wind up in the 70's....which I think is still good. I've had a couple of stubborn Diamond J's that I couldn't get over 65".  I have a Super J that was pulling around 60" when I got it and so I ordered a nice re-wound armature. The armature cost more than the whole vacuum and accessories! Anyway, that motor is waiting to be restored.


 


Thank you so much for that info! So for the Electrolux vacuum, I measure the actual opening of the bottom plate and convert to sq/in? But how did you build your "box" to make your PN CFM measurements?  Sorry to be so nosy, but I'm fascinated by all this!


 


Kevin

 

[wyaple]

Kevin,

Here's the link to the BIG table of air flow box results. That should answer some of your questions. And thanks for taking an interest in my tests. I've posted quite a few of them here over the years.

Bill

http://www.vacuumland.org/cgi-bin/TD/TD-VIEWTHREAD.cgi?33262_10

 

[ronni]

@ Real1shep

"My mother-in-law gave us her old G that her husband had gone through when we were first married. I don't know what he did other than brushes, but that motor has a higher output than any other G motor I have."

What color is the Model G that your mother-in-law gave you and your wife? Electrolux changed the Model G color from aquamarine green to tan in 1966 to indicate that the motor had been tweaked to give it higher rpms (the armature was wound with more copper and more commutator segments). A quick way to tell the difference (if a motor had been swapped out at some point) is that the aquas' motors had black brush holders, and the tans' motors had burgundy ones. Another reason for the color change was likely to differentiate the more durable plastic used in the brown-colored wheels than the teal ones. It's definitely more common to see broken teal wheels than brown ones.


"The Electrolux floor brush I use on my hard floors tends to trap the dog hair against the bristles, rather than suck them in ... "

Aerus (and perhaps aftermarket companies) makes brush strips with cut-outs that minimize the collection of contaminants at the edge of the bristles. Consider swapping out your standard ones for those (the brush plate needs to be removed first, then the metal grips are bent back with a flat screwdriver or knife to remove the brush strips).