Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 45

Thread: Casino

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Thibodaux, LA
    Posts
    1,170
    Post Likes

    Casino

    We are in the middle of installing the HVAC system on a Casino truck stop.

    In the casino the mechanical engineer is calling for those t-bar mounted smoke eaters (basically EACs in the ceiling) that need maintenance every 3 months at least.

    I know Sanuvox makes a product designed for the buiding.

    Anybody else have success with anything else. I am looking for something with low maintenance maybe like twice a year or even annual maintenance.
    "Football Season again finally"

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    997
    Post Likes
    Every three months is about the norm! you could look for a smoke eater that is HEPA filtered.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    7,400
    Post Likes
    look for a company called bioclamictic they offer some different products for that type of application.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Thibodaux, LA
    Posts
    1,170
    Post Likes
    Thread Starter
    Quote Originally Posted by drk View Post
    Every three months is about the norm! you could look for a smoke eater that is HEPA filtered.
    We could duct them in and maybe put media filters if the ESP would allow.

    Swaping media filters every three months would be great!
    "Football Season again finally"

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Lubbock Texas
    Posts
    778
    Post Likes
    bluetooth go over to The Finish Line Off Track Betting off of Veterans and Edenborn Ave in Metairie. Look at what was done there.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    46
    Post Likes
    Late in the game here, but if you want to get rid of visible smoke AND odors, none of the suggestions so far will do it.

    Impingement (HEPAs, ionization, BioClimatic, etc.) works fine on particulate matter but odors are gases and VOCs. Dust filters are worthless on gases.

    At the scale of a truck stop slot parlor (presumably 2,000 sq ft or thereabouts), the optimum solution is a self-contained media air cleaner which contains both true HEPA particulate filtration AND a sorbent module containing activated carbon for odors.

    In my experience, Honeywell has by far the best line. If you're in the Western US, here's the distributor:
    Last edited by Senior Tech; 05-13-2008 at 07:28 AM. Reason: Grammatical error

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Beautiful British Columbia
    Posts
    1,242
    Post Likes
    None of the above will help, cigarette smoke and the carcinogins contained in them can not be removed by these methods. They may mask the smell but will never remove the threat.
    GO GREEN HEAT

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    46
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by DocHVAC View Post
    None of the above will help, cigarette smoke and the carcinogins contained in them can not be removed by these methods. They may mask the smell but will never remove the threat.
    "None of the above will help"????

    Wow! Major new discovery! Care to share the methodology you used to analyze the "above" and determine they don't do anything? And where your degree in science comes from?

    While we're at it, could you explain the difference between "cigarette smoke and the carcinogens contained in them"? (sic)

    Name a few of the carcinogens in ETS? Tell us the concentration levels they're at in a space ventilated to 30 cfm/occupant?

    How many of the same carcinogens would be present in the same space even if people weren't smoking, and at what levels?

    No, of course not. You not only can't answer any of the above, you're too ignorant to even know where to look.

    I can't tell whether you're a tobacco crusader in drag as an HVAC guy or just another in an infinite supply of dumbasses in this business, but in any case you couldn't be more wrong (Genesis and I disagree about a lot of things, but real photocatalytic oxidation works great.)

    Here's a thought for you, "Doc": "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt."

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Here and there
    Posts
    4,812
    Post Likes
    Have used Sanuvox with great success. Biowall's and split lamp combos in bars and rental halls
    i belong to peta ... people eating tasty animals. all my opinions are just mine.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Beautiful British Columbia
    Posts
    1,242
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by IndoorAirGuy View Post
    "None of the above will help"????

    Wow! Major new discovery! Care to share the methodology you used to analyze the "above" and determine they don't do anything? And where your degree in science comes from?

    While we're at it, could you explain the difference between "cigarette smoke and the carcinogens contained in them"? (sic)

    Name a few of the carcinogens in ETS? Tell us the concentration levels they're at in a space ventilated to 30 cfm/occupant?

    How many of the same carcinogens would be present in the same space even if people weren't smoking, and at what levels?

    No, of course not. You not only can't answer any of the above, you're too ignorant to even know where to look.

    I can't tell whether you're a tobacco crusader in drag as an HVAC guy or just another in an infinite supply of dumbasses in this business, but in any case you couldn't be more wrong (Genesis and I disagree about a lot of things, but real photocatalytic oxidation works great.)

    Here's a thought for you, "Doc": "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt."
    Talk about a know it all, if you have some kind of degree it would be in stupitidy. It has been proven over and over there are no mechanical ways to get rid of all the toxins in cigarette smoke, and I'm no crusader because I smoke. I'm just an HVAC guy that noes the truth and does not try to pull the wool over peoples eyes. See the designation under my name I am a professional not a newbe on here.
    GO GREEN HEAT

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    11,808
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by IndoorAirGuy View Post
    "None of the above will help"????

    Wow! Major new discovery! Care to share the methodology you used to analyze the "above" and determine they don't do anything? And where your degree in science comes from?

    While we're at it, could you explain the difference between "cigarette smoke and the carcinogens contained in them"? (sic)

    Name a few of the carcinogens in ETS? Tell us the concentration levels they're at in a space ventilated to 30 cfm/occupant?

    How many of the same carcinogens would be present in the same space even if people weren't smoking, and at what levels?

    No, of course not. You not only can't answer any of the above, you're too ignorant to even know where to look.

    I can't tell whether you're a tobacco crusader in drag as an HVAC guy or just another in an infinite supply of dumbasses in this business, but in any case you couldn't be more wrong (Genesis and I disagree about a lot of things, but real photocatalytic oxidation works great.)

    Here's a thought for you, "Doc": "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt."
    you're an a$$hole

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    6,958
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by IndoorAirGuy View Post
    "None of the above will help"????

    Wow! Major new discovery! Care to share the methodology you used to analyze the "above" and determine they don't do anything? And where your degree in science comes from?

    While we're at it, could you explain the difference between "cigarette smoke and the carcinogens contained in them"? (sic)

    Name a few of the carcinogens in ETS? Tell us the concentration levels they're at in a space ventilated to 30 cfm/occupant?

    How many of the same carcinogens would be present in the same space even if people weren't smoking, and at what levels?

    No, of course not. You not only can't answer any of the above, you're too ignorant to even know where to look.

    I can't tell whether you're a tobacco crusader in drag as an HVAC guy or just another in an infinite supply of dumbasses in this business, but in any case you couldn't be more wrong (Genesis and I disagree about a lot of things, but real photocatalytic oxidation works great.)

    Here's a thought for you, "Doc": "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt."
    I'm ignorant too...ignorant enough to hit the ban button if you insist on berating well respected members of this site. In fact, given the fact you didn't think about your post prior to posting it...take a few days, cool off, apologize to those you have berated and perhaps you'll be welcomed back.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    46
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by Senior Tech View Post
    I'm ignorant too...ignorant enough to hit the ban button if you insist on berating well respected members of this site. In fact, given the fact you didn't think about your post prior to posting it...take a few days, cool off, apologize to those you have berated and perhaps you'll be welcomed back.

    Obviously I didn't choose between diplomacy and IAQ. In the context of indelicate choice of words in my initial response, you're right, I was wrong to berate the initial poster instead of focusing exclusively on taking exception to his sweeping commentary on remediating tobacco smoke.

    On the other hand, as someone who's extremely high-integrity, who has done more research (northward of 70,000 pages) and published peer-reviewed science on the matter, who knows more about remediating tobacco smoke in indoor environments than anyone who's ever lived and has spent a significant chunk of his life solving those problems in commercial environments, I resent the hell out of being called a fraud ("nothing works," ergo, I'm scamming my customers and fooling them and their customers by the millions) by someone who clearly hasn't invested the most infinitesmal fraction of the time I have in studying or fixing this problem.

    Admittedly, I have about a decade-plus chip on my shoulder toward MEs and MCs whose messes I've made a rather lucrative business out of cleaning up.

    In retrofits for new customers, I'm always the fixer of last resort, after the design ME and build MC and several other MEs and MCs have spent tens of thousands to millions of dollars of the owner's money on additional unsuccessful experiments after the original design/build flops.

    This is because they haven't got a clue how to fix the problem -- if they did, my company wouldn't even exist -- and would rather the owner keep taking it in the shorts for millions of dollars a year in opportunity cost from alienated customers and pissed-off employees than admit they haven't got a clue.

    Under the "better mousetrap, etc." theory, I was initially under the impression that the ME/MC community would welcome a solution with open arms. Unfortunately, their inability to admit there's anything they don't know has produced exactly the opposite reaction and, despite my increasingly high-profile and extensive track record of success, every new customer brings yet another ME and/or MC expert with attitude whose poop I'm there to shovel because they don't know how.

    So if I overreacted, it's not because I'm mean or anti-social, it's because I'm frustrated and tired of getting attacked and accused of being a fraud by people whose lack of knowledge is the source of 95% of my income.

    (Also, I suck at apologies, but I do try!)

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    533
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by Carnak View Post
    you're an a$$hole
    and arrogant too it seems

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    46
    Post Likes
    Hmmm...let me see if I understand the drill here. As a "newbie" I'm verboten from confronting a non-newbie; whereas the non-newbies are free to blast away, call me a$$hole, arrogant, ignorant, etc. sans any restriction whatsoever.

    That about cover it?

    Once ya'll are over the ad hominem attacks and argumentum ad personam, care to address even ONE of the questions I asked in the initial post? Didn't think so.

    Soooo...please pay attention.

    1) Cigarette "smoke" -- aka the haze or gray cloud that's visible in smoking spaces -- is particulate matter, clouds of billions and billions of tiny dust particles in the 0.01 to 0.5 micron size range.

    2) Tobacco odors are GASES. The carcinogenic volatile organic compounds contained in environmental tobacco smoke are also in gas form.

    3) When it comes to visible smoke, dilution IS the solution to pollution, although strategically speaking it's the equivalent of going after a gnat with a sledgehammer. Plenty of effective ways to skin the visible smoke "cat" without selling the owner 2X as much HVAC as he needs or screwing with the critical path by putting waste receptacles (aka supply ductwork) under the floor.

    4) When it comes to gases, dilution doesn't work, sorbent media (carbon) only solves part of the problem, with huge replenishment expense and disposal issues, and conventional impingement filters (boosted by ionization or not) are even more worthless because gas molecules are 1/100th to 1/10,000th the size of dust particles, and act/react differently in closed atmospheres.

    5) I've sampled for TOTAL VOC (TVOC) content in more than 100 commercial smoking environments. The highest TVOC I've ever sampled in a place ventilated to 30 cfm/occupant or better is 150 parts per million. If the ventilation capability of the existing HVAC is less than 30 cfm/occupant, I explain they need to upgrade their HVAC before I can do anything for them.

    6) There are hundreds of chemicals in ETS. There are hundreds of chemicals in the air in ANY commercial environment, particularly where large numbers of people gather, whether there's smoking or not. Some of the same chemicals that are in ETS are also generated or present from other sources, and so would be present in the atmosphere in Ma and Pa Kettle's Casino even if smoking wasn't allowed.

    7) If the TOTAL VOC content is an adequately ventilated casino is 150 parts per million, anyone care to guess the concentration levels of any one of the hundreds of constituent chemicals, VOCs and gases that are present? Let me tell you, the amount is so small, it's not only exponentially below any of the government exposure limits, it's below any field sensor's ability to even DETECT. If you want to know how much of any specific substance is present, you have to take some of the atmosphere into a negative pressure bottle and send it to a lab that's equipped with the gas sensor equivalent of the electron microscope, the mass spectroscope.

    8) The issue isn't about health because the exposure levels are so small IN ADEQUATELY VENTILATED SPACES. The issue is occupant comfort. The human nose is a much more sensitive instrument than any field instrument in use. The substances that our memory tells us smell like tobacco burning create olfactory impressions in the PPB to parts per TRILLION range.

    9) Adequately sized, introduced properly and monitored closely and carefully, ozone is highly effective both because the concentrations of the offensive VOCs are so low, and because the VOCs that most readily produce olfactory recognition tend to be those of simplest structure and lightest atomic weight, which are more readily and swiftly oxidized than more complex molecules.

    I'm not going to argue with ya'll over the "O" word here because I've tracked the many other strings on the topic and realized how pointless and futile it would be (i.e., "casting pearls before swine," "none so blind as those who will not see," etc.).

    However, I'm encouraged that at least ONE HVAC guy is willing to admit he hasn't got a clue how to solve the problem:

    "Talk about a know it all, if you have some kind of degree it would be in stupitidy. It has been proven over and over there are no mechanical ways to get rid of all the toxins in cigarette smoke, and I'm no crusader because I smoke. I'm just an HVAC guy that noes the truth and does not try to pull the wool over peoples eyes. See the designation under my name I am a professional not a newbe on here."

    By the way, because YOU don't know how to solve it, doesn't mean NOBODY KNOWS how to solve it. Do you understand the difference?

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    11,808
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by IndoorAirGuy View Post
    Obviously I didn't choose between diplomacy and IAQ. In the context of indelicate choice of words in my initial response, you're right, I was wrong to berate the initial poster instead of focusing exclusively on taking exception to his sweeping commentary on remediating tobacco smoke.

    On the other hand, as someone who's extremely high-integrity, who has done more research (northward of 70,000 pages) and published peer-reviewed science on the matter, who knows more about remediating tobacco smoke in indoor environments than anyone who's ever lived and has spent a significant chunk of his life solving those problems in commercial environments, I resent the hell out of being called a fraud ("nothing works," ergo, I'm scamming my customers and fooling them and their customers by the millions) by someone who clearly hasn't invested the most infinitesmal fraction of the time I have in studying or fixing this problem.

    Admittedly, I have about a decade-plus chip on my shoulder toward MEs and MCs whose messes I've made a rather lucrative business out of cleaning up.

    In retrofits for new customers, I'm always the fixer of last resort, after the design ME and build MC and several other MEs and MCs have spent tens of thousands to millions of dollars of the owner's money on additional unsuccessful experiments after the original design/build flops.

    This is because they haven't got a clue how to fix the problem -- if they did, my company wouldn't even exist -- and would rather the owner keep taking it in the shorts for millions of dollars a year in opportunity cost from alienated customers and pissed-off employees than admit they haven't got a clue.

    Under the "better mousetrap, etc." theory, I was initially under the impression that the ME/MC community would welcome a solution with open arms. Unfortunately, their inability to admit there's anything they don't know has produced exactly the opposite reaction and, despite my increasingly high-profile and extensive track record of success, every new customer brings yet another ME and/or MC expert with attitude whose poop I'm there to shovel because they don't know how.

    So if I overreacted, it's not because I'm mean or anti-social, it's because I'm frustrated and tired of getting attacked and accused of being a fraud by people whose lack of knowledge is the source of 95% of my income.

    (Also, I suck at apologies, but I do try!)

    You want to start with a clean slate, try this

    "Dear DocHVAC, please forgive me for being such an a$$hole. I am sorry"

    Don't spew paragraphs about how smart you figure you are and think it is an apology.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    6,958
    Post Likes
    I don't know all the fancy words so let me put this in plain and simple form...

    Do you know the difference between arrogance and confidence?

    Arrogance is when your right and no matter what the other guy says you refuse to listen. The benefit to this is you don't have to wait for others to give you kudos for your accomplishments...because you've already tooted your own horn...loudly. Don't mistake arrogance for credibility, it sure won't get you any around these parts.

    Confidence is when you know it yet your willing to participate in open discussion, and actually entertain the idea that it's possible for you to learn, even from those new to the field or less educated than yourself.
    Those who display confidence and determination go places around here...and shame on me...I've been in the business many years and just the other day a newbee taught me a few tricks about my combustion analyzer....of course I beat him down afterwards

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Ocean Pines, MD
    Posts
    7,110
    Post Likes
    [I've been in the business many years and just the other day a newbee taught me a few tricks about my combustion analyzer....of course I beat him down afterwards [/QUOTE]\

    Wouldn't that fall under the pride heading?


    Confidence, when I know I'm right and you just haven't realized it yet.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Beautiful British Columbia
    Posts
    1,242
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by IndoorAirGuy View Post
    Obviously I didn't choose between diplomacy and IAQ. In the context of indelicate choice of words in my initial response, you're right, I was wrong to berate the initial poster instead of focusing exclusively on taking exception to his sweeping commentary on remediating tobacco smoke.

    On the other hand, as someone who's extremely high-integrity, who has done more research (northward of 70,000 pages) and published peer-reviewed science on the matter, who knows more about remediating tobacco smoke in indoor environments than anyone who's ever lived and has spent a significant chunk of his life solving those problems in commercial environments, I resent the hell out of being called a fraud ("nothing works," ergo, I'm scamming my customers and fooling them and their customers by the millions) by someone who clearly hasn't invested the most infinitesmal fraction of the time I have in studying or fixing this problem.

    Admittedly, I have about a decade-plus chip on my shoulder toward MEs and MCs whose messes I've made a rather lucrative business out of cleaning up.

    In retrofits for new customers, I'm always the fixer of last resort, after the design ME and build MC and several other MEs and MCs have spent tens of thousands to millions of dollars of the owner's money on additional unsuccessful experiments after the original design/build flops.

    This is because they haven't got a clue how to fix the problem -- if they did, my company wouldn't even exist -- and would rather the owner keep taking it in the shorts for millions of dollars a year in opportunity cost from alienated customers and pissed-off employees than admit they haven't got a clue.

    Under the "better mousetrap, etc." theory, I was initially under the impression that the ME/MC community would welcome a solution with open arms. Unfortunately, their inability to admit there's anything they don't know has produced exactly the opposite reaction and, despite my increasingly high-profile and extensive track record of success, every new customer brings yet another ME and/or MC expert with attitude whose poop I'm there to shovel because they don't know how.

    So if I overreacted, it's not because I'm mean or anti-social, it's because I'm frustrated and tired of getting attacked and accused of being a fraud by people whose lack of knowledge is the source of 95% of my income.

    (Also, I suck at apologies, but I do try!)
    I'm so glad you can solve all these problems and make a smoke infested casino so healthy your my heroe.
    GO GREEN HEAT

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    710
    Post Likes
    IndoorAirGuy
    I have hesitated to get involved in this discussion because I don't have a lot of time to be involved in a long drawn out dialogue which will accopmplish little, if anything. You will vehemently declare that your methods of using ozone to reduce cigarette smoke (meaning both particles and gasses) work and I will remain unconvinced and skeptical.

    A very surprising part of the discussion to me is that you claim to be an expert on indoor air quality and you are a supporter of cigarette smoking indoors. You may be the first individual I have known of that has this unique perspective. Maybe this is because we come at the issue of IAQ from totally different perspectives. You look at it from the perspective of your customers in the gaming industry. I look at it from the perspective of those with respiratory illnesses.

    The statement of docHVAC really was not directed at you. It was a very brief summary of the position of most professionals involved in IAQ, respiratory illnesses and cancer care. It is no different than the following from the National Cancer Institute: http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/f...et/tobacco/ets

    Contrary to what you have stated the human sense of smell is not a very good way to determine the safety of any given substance. For example, carbon monoxide and natural gas are odorless - yet toxic. Consequently even if your applications reduce or even eliminate the odor that does not mean they are safe. In fact you may be creating other byproducts such as formaldehyde, ketones, acids, other aldehydes, ultrafine particles, etc. without eliminating such problem chemicals as nicotine, cotinine and solanesol.

    Elsewhere you have stated that there is no good science available showing the problems of ozone in indoor air. In fact, there are many studies that have shown that ozone reacts with various VOC's to produce unintended and detrimental byproducts. For example, a leading figure in the area of indoor air chemistry is Dr. Charles Weschler of Rutgers. You might read this article to have some idea of the issues involved: www.ehponline.org/members/2006/9256/9256.html
    There are plenty of references in the footnotes if you want additional information.

    Your statement that you are keeping ozone below 50 ppb provides little comfort for me. First, the 50ppb standard of the FDA for medical devices has never been tested to be "safe." I don't believe that it is safe for those with respiratory diseases such as COPD, asthma, and emphysema. In fact, Dr. Richard Corsi in his comments to the CPSC on ozone limits feels that the level should be no more than 5ppb.

    Secondly, the ozone levels you are measuring are dependent on the reactions that are taking place in indoor air. The ozone you are creating is being consumed by the reactions with the VOC's. Again, you do not know the outcome of those reactions. You assume the resulting compounds are safe. I believe they are not. (and please do not give me the carbon dioxide and water response. There are intermediaries that are created besides these substances that are stable and long lasting.)

    For you the worst part about your position of using ozone in indoor air is that the tide is definitely flowing against you at this point. No matter how strident you are in your defense of your methods, the array of opponents you are facing is large and growing including the EPA, the California Air Resources Board, most indoor air scientists and engineers and public opinion.
    Last edited by breathe easy; 05-19-2008 at 05:30 PM. Reason: Spelling

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •