4 ms·

> Traditional ventilators, by contrast, can cost more than $20,000 Traditional ventilators (ventilator) are very different from bag valve masks, resuscitators

> Traditional ventilators, by contrast, can cost more than $20,000 Traditional ventilators (ventilator) are very different from bag valve masks, resuscitators, PAP and CPAP, BiPAP machines. This Nvidia design is not alternative to that $20,000 hospital ventilator. It's emergency-response ventilator alternative these other cheap designs you can already order from Amazon. You can't keep people long time in this kind of device without serious risk of damage to the lungs.

baybal2 6y ago
Very few countries managed to produce emergency ventilators from scratch. Out of hundreds of ambu bag squeezer designs, find at least one that reached the assembly line. Not a lot. Only 4 countries on record now managed to start mass production of designed from scratch emergency ventilators. Expanding existing capacity would've been an incomparably better option.
- Nokinside 6y ago
  One German manufacturer recently explained how their company has already outsourced almost all parts and manufacturing phases that can be easily scaled. The company does design, final assembly testing, calibration and quality control. I suspect that the internally used testing and manufacturing equipment and protocols are the hardest thing to scale.
  - baybal2 6y ago
    No, from my experience in OEM manufacturing since 2007 I can say it isn't.
- dejv 6y ago
  Check out Corovent, its somehow open source (they have to hide their exact BOM for now, because of companies buying full stock of those parts). It is build by university team that actually design ventilators for 25 years and is certified to be used in case when there are no proper ventilators available. They are currently using industrial version of medical parts (due to limited availability of those parts) but full certification is in pipeline. They are just starting mass production now.
adrianmonk 6y ago
The article did specifically say it is more advanced than a bag ("provides better care than “bag squeezer” emergency ventilators because it precisely regulates flow, pressure, and volume"). And it linked to the paper (http://op-vent.stanford.edu/docs/need.html http://op-vent.stanford.edu/docs/need.html) with more specifics. The "Prototype Specifications" section of the paper might be a good starting point for information about its capabilities. Are your criticisms based on an understanding of how this specific device actually works? Sorry to be blunt, but by suggesting it is comparable to a bag valve mask, it sounds like you did not learn a lot about the device before making up your mind about it.
- Nokinside 6y ago
  >Sorry to be blunt, but by suggesting it is comparable to a bag valve mask, it sounds like you did not learn a lot about the device before making up your mind about it. Noting wrong with being blunt. But please, be blunt only after you read whole sentences and trying to decipher the meaning. I listed several different classes of devices of varying complexity that are not equal to those $20,000 ventilators used in ICU. I have experience in design of electronics that becomes part of ventilators and other medical equipment. GE healthcare and other firms. >Are your criticisms based on an understanding of how this specific device actually works? Yes. The system in question is very low-end emergency-response ventilator (explained in documentation). It's simplified design from those you see used in emergency response and patient transport. The operating mode seems to be basic pressure-controlled ventilation PCV.It can also measure tidal and minute volumes. ICU ventilator is device is very different from everything else. It's connected to the patients trachea. You must sedate patients because it's super uncomfortable to use. Patients are put into those ventilators when they are really sick. Removing carbon dioxide is an issue. Long term use can damage lungs so the system monitors large number of variables and it has multiple operating modes.
  - adrianmonk 6y ago
    OK, I see a little better where you're coming from now. Knowing that you have some expertise in this area puts your first comment in a different light. For what it's worth, I did read your comment carefully. The reason I took exception (and reacted strongly, I fully admit) is that since the article addressed the bag thing, that makes it a red herring, so I would have expected you to filter it out of your list. Maybe that's overly rigid or overly literal of me, but that is why I reacted how I did. This device definitely intends to be less than a full-featured ventilator. On the Pneumatics page (http://op-vent.stanford.edu/docs/pneumatics.html http://op-vent.stanford.edu/docs/pneumatics.html) it explains their goal is to produce kind of a stripped down "simple ventilator with the features needed to treat COVID-19". So they believe it can be useful even though they know it lacks features. Whether they're right is certainly up for debate. They mention several optional features, which is interesting because maybe it means they're just trying to be flexible or maybe it means they don't really know what is the minimum necessary to have a net benefit (save more people than you kill) if we run out of full-featured ventilators.

baybal2 6y ago

Very few countries managed to produce emergency ventilators from scratch. Out of hundreds of ambu bag squeezer designs, find at least one that reached the assembly line. Not a lot. Only 4 countries on record now managed to start mass production of designed from scratch emergency ventilators. Expanding existing capacity would've been an incomparably better option.

Nokinside 6y ago
One German manufacturer recently explained how their company has already outsourced almost all parts and manufacturing phases that can be easily scaled. The company does design, final assembly testing, calibration and quality control. I suspect that the internally used testing and manufacturing equipment and protocols are the hardest thing to scale.
- baybal2 6y ago
  No, from my experience in OEM manufacturing since 2007 I can say it isn't.
dejv 6y ago
Check out Corovent, its somehow open source (they have to hide their exact BOM for now, because of companies buying full stock of those parts). It is build by university team that actually design ventilators for 25 years and is certified to be used in case when there are no proper ventilators available. They are currently using industrial version of medical parts (due to limited availability of those parts) but full certification is in pipeline. They are just starting mass production now.

adrianmonk 6y ago

The article did specifically say it is more advanced than a bag ("provides better care than “bag squeezer” emergency ventilators because it precisely regulates flow, pressure, and volume"). And it linked to the paper (http://op-vent.stanford.edu/docs/need.html http://op-vent.stanford.edu/docs/need.html) with more specifics. The "Prototype Specifications" section of the paper might be a good starting point for information about its capabilities. Are your criticisms based on an understanding of how this specific device actually works? Sorry to be blunt, but by suggesting it is comparable to a bag valve mask, it sounds like you did not learn a lot about the device before making up your mind about it.

Nokinside 6y ago
>Sorry to be blunt, but by suggesting it is comparable to a bag valve mask, it sounds like you did not learn a lot about the device before making up your mind about it. Noting wrong with being blunt. But please, be blunt only after you read whole sentences and trying to decipher the meaning. I listed several different classes of devices of varying complexity that are not equal to those $20,000 ventilators used in ICU. I have experience in design of electronics that becomes part of ventilators and other medical equipment. GE healthcare and other firms. >Are your criticisms based on an understanding of how this specific device actually works? Yes. The system in question is very low-end emergency-response ventilator (explained in documentation). It's simplified design from those you see used in emergency response and patient transport. The operating mode seems to be basic pressure-controlled ventilation PCV.It can also measure tidal and minute volumes. ICU ventilator is device is very different from everything else. It's connected to the patients trachea. You must sedate patients because it's super uncomfortable to use. Patients are put into those ventilators when they are really sick. Removing carbon dioxide is an issue. Long term use can damage lungs so the system monitors large number of variables and it has multiple operating modes.
- adrianmonk 6y ago
  OK, I see a little better where you're coming from now. Knowing that you have some expertise in this area puts your first comment in a different light. For what it's worth, I did read your comment carefully. The reason I took exception (and reacted strongly, I fully admit) is that since the article addressed the bag thing, that makes it a red herring, so I would have expected you to filter it out of your list. Maybe that's overly rigid or overly literal of me, but that is why I reacted how I did. This device definitely intends to be less than a full-featured ventilator. On the Pneumatics page (http://op-vent.stanford.edu/docs/pneumatics.html http://op-vent.stanford.edu/docs/pneumatics.html) it explains their goal is to produce kind of a stripped down "simple ventilator with the features needed to treat COVID-19". So they believe it can be useful even though they know it lacks features. Whether they're right is certainly up for debate. They mention several optional features, which is interesting because maybe it means they're just trying to be flexible or maybe it means they don't really know what is the minimum necessary to have a net benefit (save more people than you kill) if we run out of full-featured ventilators.