Air Knight REME
Does anyone know how well the unit does at removing dust from a home. Thanks in advance for the info.
It doesn't. When you see techno-babble like "friendly oxidizers", run away.
-If you won't turn it on then nothing else matters.
The Air Knight does not remove particulate, however it does charge the particles in the air allowing them to cluster and stick together. This enhances the performance of your filtration system allowing it to have better performance since it will be working with larger particulate.
Having a great filtration system combined with AirKnight REME is the ultimate team for the best particulate removal.
I can understand your skeptism, but I would encourage you to try yourself and read the independent testing before you discredit the technology. Oxidation is basic science...but that part of air knight does relate to its ability to help in filtration capabilities.
Hope you get a chance to try it out and enjoy the benefits!
OK, so we are supposed to believe that the Air Knight (installed on the supply side) is going to charge particles in a house, make them stick together and be easier to pick up by the air filter when they go back to the air filter in the return. Sorry, I would have to see data in an actual house setting showing me this was possible. I have a hard time understanding the physics of this approach given the volume of air in a house, the dynamics of particle movement and the relatively short run times of most HVAC systems.
Oxidation is basic science. It is also bad science when it comes to indoor air quality. I have reviewed all of the "studies" that I can find on this device and none show the benefits stated in the literature for actual indoor environments. Why would someone "just try" an ozone producing device and waste their money?
If you go to the website the testing data is there and it also states the independent test labs name and credentials.
Needle point ionization does make particulate stick together. Air Knight and other companies use this process to enhance capture rate. it is also used in other manufacturers air cleaners.
Also the ozone output on the air knight is .002 ppm (documented on calibrated metering device). There are plenty of oxidation devices that produce ozone. That is the reason i would "just try one" as there is nothing harmful (like ozone) being produced from the Air Knight. It has created a much better indoor air quality in my home personally. So with the documented data and performance and the personal evidence I have experienced...those would be the reasons I would encourage someone to "just try" the PHI technology in their own home and then make a decision if it fits into their business model.
Sounds like you have read a lot, but not tried a lot and have lumped all technolgy into one category. I would look for the differences. The simplest one is the transmission rate of the UV output on the bulb. That alone will tell you if it has Ozone output.
The "testing data" on the website is from laboratory tests done in chambers the size of a microwave oven. You could achieve the same results by turning on the microwave. They do not apply to indoor environments any more than my "microwave" example would apply. To state that they "destroy" things like MRSA and H1N1 is dangerous and deceptive.
Needle point ionization does work, but what you are doing with the Air Knight is not needle point ionization. Needle point ionization charges the particles in the return air just before the filter. It does not work on the supply side.
To state that the Air Knight has an ozone output of .002 ppm (2 ppb) is not correct. It may only add .002 ppm of ozone to a space - if the space is large enough - perhaps the size of Cowboys Stadium. The OUTPUT of the device is far higher. It is probably 10 to 30 times higher.
I have done a lot of experiments with ozone producing air cleaning devices and reactions with terpenes that create huge quantities of ultrafine particles. This article will give you the basic science involved. http://www.texairfilters.com/article...ngintheair.htm
I did one of the same experiments using a PHI device and a terpene (Pine Sol). The result was that within a very short period of time there were more than 9,999,999 particles of .3 microns and above per cubic foot in the room. To put this in perspective the worst outdoor particle count I have ever recorded was about 6,500,000 on a very polluted day in an urban environment.
Indoor air chemistry is not as predictable as the Air Knight people would make it seem. There are just as many bad things that can be created as good.
Picture of the experiment with PHI and terpene - particle count
That is not a REME, that has no ionization
Originally Posted by breathe easy
Tech Bulletin Ozone fact fiction 0911.pdf
Breathe Easy- The original question from Belmont was- "Does anyone know how well the unit does at removing dust from a home. Thanks in advance for the info."
Based on your 673 posts you express a lot of personal opinions on here.
Both the REME and the Guardian Air use the same photohydroionization (PHI) technology. Do you really think the outcome would be different? The small reduction in particles from ionization is totally overwhelmed by the massive amount of ultrafine particles created by the chemical reaction of the ozone and the terpene.
Thank you for noticing that I have 673 posts on this site (now 674). I seem to get rather energized when I see people claiming they have products that will do wonders to improve indoor air quality. Unfortunately, indoor air is invisible and the average consumer or HVAC contractor for that matter does not have the information to assess the claims being made. This means that many of these incorrect claims go unchallenged. I like to challenge them and this is a good forum to do so.
As to the claim that you make that these are "opinions," I disagree. For the most part they are facts supported by scientific data.
For example, you stated that the REME device had an output of only .002 ppm of ozone. I said that it had a minimum of 10 to 20 times that amount. Then you produced a RGF document that showed that it indeed had an output in a duct with moving air 3' from the source of .02 ppm. In other words, my statement was a fact.
I have the original test reports from Kansas State on the tests done with various contaminants. The tests were done in a small chamber - not in an indoor environment. That is a fact.
The particle counts created when a PHI device is exposed to a terpene are facts. In this case a picture is worth a thousand words.
On the other hand I do have an opinion on these products. My opinion is that they are overhyped, ineffective and not worth the money anybody pays for them.
AftMktGuy, we've been through this dozens of times with other people and this one or similar technologies and sorry, but you didn't bring anything useful or scientific to the discussion. Oxidation can be extremely dangerous -- ever heard of oxidative stress, a major component of aging and causes of cancer? Fires are also an oxidative process! Like all the others before you, you made gratuitous, unsupported statements that not only betray your ignorance but put people at risk.
If you want TO reduce dust and particulates the Global Plasma Solutions GPS 2400 Needle Point Bi-polar ionizer is a much better option to the Reme. I have one in my house and my filter gets unusual balls of dust clustered up on it. Also there is no Ozone odor with it and the REME make an enormous undesirable odor which I think is because of it's 6,500 SF rating. That's a product for a 15 ton system not a home. See www.GPSHVAC.com try it and you will thank me I promise. Oh yes I almost forgot there are no replacement parts necessary and it cost less then the REME. REME Is old technology next to this.