More airflow tests.

VacuumLand – Vintage & Modern Vacuum Enthusiasts

Help Support VacuumLand:

blackheart

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 6, 2011
Messages
1,882
Location
North Dakota
I think it'd be better for me to stick to a single thread rather than making a new one for each machine. I feel like i've been spamming the forum lately.

So fresh off the box we have a Shark UV795 31 Powered Rotator lift away. In the 2nd picture we can see that when placed on the box it has nearly 1/3 of it's original waterlift. Machines lose a lot of power at the nozzle.

blackheart-2017082918200100125_1.jpg

blackheart-2017082918200100125_2.jpg
 
Almost 59 CFM, That's Towards The Top

Of the heap for a bagless machine. So you also were able to get suction measurements at the power nozzle, eh? Very cool! I'll have to build another air box that can do more than just measure airflow.

Bill
 
Where to buy?

I would like to do these airflow tests, but where do I buy the tools for it?
The Kirby airflow meter for instance (I do not mind having to buy it from the US)?

I had this idea 6 month ago and I bought an anemometer (I think that is the name) but it was to weak and just shattered when coming close to the wand. Long time ago I read a post on this site with some guy that had built a carbon box for these type of measures (I was so inspired and impressed)and I tried and failed myself. Please, some hints. I will not use it in any videos, but may post it here if I just get the hang of it.
 
My motto:

There is no shame in fame. Please Bill post the video.
Instead of having me (or readers of this post) search.

Where to buy the Kirby meter is still a puzzle. A link would be great.
 
Miele S7 Freshair

Another surprise i thought it would have had more flow, but it has a very large amount of twists and turns in it's airpath. The reason i took readings on both smooth and low pile is due to the suction motor automatically turning itself down when the brushroll is active listening to the sound of the unit and messing with the speed control i've found that it's carpet speed is about low pile max. I also think it's kinda funny that the motor was running at 1165 watts, so the motor should be the same as the canisters? 1200w vortex and yet the airpath of the machines majorly effects the flow.

blackheart-2017083019024807643_1.jpg
 
Another Airflow Shocker...

I'm stunned that such an expensive machine still has no better nozzle airflow than a typical bag-less cheapie. I love the look and features of the S7, but your tests reveal that Miele has produced an expensive package that's nothing more than a look and features.

Devin,

I have one request. Do you remember when you gave me some Miele C3 Baird meter readings a while back? Is it possible to get the nozzle airflow tests on that C3? I would like to see how close my predictions were.

Bill
 
Miele C3

It's possible yes, I was going to wait until i finally got my C3 brilliant but that's months away yet. When people look at Miele i often tell them right off the bat that the canisters are more powerful than the uprights. I mean I like my Fresh air it's a very nice vacuum, the bare floor pick up is fantastic, the carpet cleaning hasn't dissapointed me either, But i have a feeling that the brilliant will outdo the S7.
 
If you ever get the chance

Here's what I would like to see:


If you could do a test with a turbo nozzle.  It would be interesting, as we know the turbo robs the airflow.  I would like to see just how much, I'm betting it is pretty significant.


 
 
Sebo Felix

This was interesting it's essentially as powerful as my D4. When measuring the D4 i did not have a fully clean bag nor was the wand leaned back into a cleaning position. So the CFM at the nozzle is probably even closer than my results show. Out of curiosity i also took waterlift readings.

blackheart-2017083119134106762_1.jpg
 
Simplicity S40p

Ah the synergy i've been saying for some time now that i believe this is the best cleaning vacuum. I was honestly expecting over 100 nozzle cfm but eh. As a bonus i included a picture of the bag i took out of the machine. I live in a 1 bedroom apt with a cat not a whole lot of space to clean and it hasn't been used too much so i was shocked to see the amount of dirt in it. there was a lot of denser dirt caught in the clumps low in the bag. I'm really beginning to wonder what's up with the nozzle testing It should not have more flow at the hose then at the base especially with the wide airpath.

blackheart-2017083119252206830_1.jpg

blackheart-2017083119252206830_2.jpg

blackheart-2017083119252206830_3.jpg
 
Hmm

The synergy will be re-done i think i may have been holding the vane wrong. It significantly effects your numbers if you hold the wrong side of it to the airflow. I found some old numbers from when the dirty bag was still installed (the same one seen above) and i was getting 86.83 and 99.15 at the nozzle with 1 and 2 motors. Something really seemed off when i was getting more flow from the hose that makes no sense. Disregard the post above and we'll see what tommorow brings.
 
Good videos, but what I was meaning about testing airflow with turbo heads was to use your air flow box and compare the losses when a turbo is attached. Much like when you begin measuring at the machine body, then hose end, etc. Instead of power nozzle measurements, do measurements using a turbo cat or Miele turbo floor nozzle. Hopefully this would show how much power is robbed pulling these attachments.
 
Thanks Bill!

Thanks Bill!
Much appreciated. I will be watching this weekend.

Blackheart (proof of me having a U1 are in the pics or in the pudding :-)):
I noticed the same for my Miele U1. It struggled to pick up some long rice left in one mess vacuuming I did (after using a vacuum starting with an O ending with a k). I thought I would bring out "The Beast" to finish what the previous vacuum did not. To my surprise it did not help. What the U1 did, however, was bringing up a lot of rice to the surface of the high pile but it could not bring it to the bag. I used my Sebo Felix in the end which did the job.

Very interesting thread this is, I have to say. I know that this is more or less a site for US people, but I cannot comment on American vacuums as there are not many in Europe (where I live).[this post was last edited: 9/1/2017-13:53]

drsnuggle-2017090113033400530_1.jpg

drsnuggle-2017090113033400530_2.jpg
 
.

Harley, I can perform that test when i test the C3 cat and dog, I have access to a C2 with a turbine. I have owned a wessel werk turbing I think it was a Tk284 and wessel werk sent me a few gates "the opening into the turbine" they come in 3 different sizes Miele's turbine seems to use the largest opening so i'd except their turbine tool won't lose as much as most will. We may also have a turbocat lying around....

Jakob. I like the Miele uprights but I know there's better I'd certainly take them over the majority of other items on the market. They are a good machine. (Good machine to me means i'd be comfortable owning it as a sole vacuum or supplemented with something if it lacks tools.) But their canisters are superior to their uprights. I'm curious I see you have the electronic control does it too automatically step down when the brushroll is in use?
 
LFM and CFM don't correlate unless you are measuring LFM for a given size.
LFM is speed given over time while CFM in a volume over given time but I'm sure you now that :) I would like to know more about how you came up with this conversion factor. Also extremely important here is the aK number or "free space" air has to flow at the entrance of the power head.

PS I have yet to find a vacuum with as much suck power as my shop vac with a hepa and drywall dust bags.
 
In truth

The process was developed by Bill, Wyaple on here. I have no idea how he came up with the conversion. I just go with it. I wanted to see what sort of numbers my machines were pulling and the baird meter isn't exactly an effective tool for comparison since it's on a scale of 10 it leaves you thinking there's a dramatic difference between the numbers. I just learned about his process and started to do it myself with a few differences. It's been an interesting process for me some of my machines do better than i expect but most of them actually do worse than i had hoped.

and for those paying attention to the thread I'll have 4 more machines done, hopefully tonight the measurements have been taken, now it's just a matter of conversion, and photo editing.
 
MIele turbine

I didn't bother taking the full tests as i was more focused on the turbine aspect for Harley besides both Mieles have the 1200 watt vortex

blackheart-2017090217070702513_1.jpg
 
Miele C3 cat and dog.

Despite having the same motor the hose losses and wand losses are quite different i'd assume it's due to the wiring in the hose and the electric channel which consumes wand space.

blackheart-2017090217084504190_1.jpg
 
Thanks for the Miele Turbo vs. Powered head comparisons. I have a C3 Alize suction only, for which I added a turbo head months back. On some of my medium dense pile Persian rugs the turbo is tough to push, but I guess I could open the vent to reduce suction yet keep the beater bar up to speed... but I intuit that may degrade performance further relative to deep cleaning.

With the above said, I just dropped a bit over $500 today to get a powered cord/wand/head combo (SES236) so I will now have a fairly complete powered and unpowered Miele system. Based on your comparison above and comments about the wired tubing/hose constricting air flow will I be feeling positive with the results of my pricey addition? I'm thinking your turbo head comparison testing may not be completely accurate in reality because when bristles are restricted by the carpet, flow my be further restricted as the turbine creates more resistance but should not have the same result with a powered head. Could this be a correct assumption?
 
Your assumption

Should be correct. As the brush is put to carpet it will slow the turbine which should impede it's airflow further. So really the figure is more like a max flow figure, in use it'll be less. Though i cannot tell you how much. An electric tool is going to give you better agitation and despite overall losing more through the electric hose and wand you still do have more airflow at the base. Though distributed over a larger opening.
 
GM8901 Conversion Factor

This is how you convert feet per minute into CFM when using this anemometer.

Diameter of GM8901 Anemometer Detector = 2.1875 inches
Radius = 1.09375 inches = .0911458 feet
Detector Area = 3.1415926 x .0911458 x .0911458 = 0.0260990 (rounded)

Sooooo, if the vacuum generates 5000 ft./min that would be:
5000 x .026099 = 130.5 CFM

Hope this helps,

Bill
 
Miele C3 Cat & Dog

Devin,

When you first gave me the measurements of the C3, you had measured 101 CFM at the end of the hose and 95 CFM at the end of the extended wand (just before going into the power nozzle). Do you have any idea as to why your newer measurements are so much lower? The end of wand readings are off by 14 CFM, which is huge. And a drop from 79" to 18" of water lift at the PN probably means there's a major leak somewhere.

Bill

Initial Measurements:
Hose: 101 CFM
Wand: 95 CFM

Second Measurements:
Hose: 95 CFM
Wand: 81 CFM
 
Back
Top