3 ms·

Here is their patent submission: https://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PG01&p=1&u=/netahtml/PTO/srchnum.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=%2

Here is their patent submission: https://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PG01&p=1&u=/netahtml/PTO/srchnum.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=%2220210055010%22.PGNR.&OS=DN/20210055010&RS=DN/20210055010 https://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2... Not sure which desiccant they're using. They have several papers on their site, e.g. https://www.pnnl.gov/publications/graphene-oxide-membranes-high-permeability-and-selectivity-dehumidification-air https://www.pnnl.gov/publications/graphene-oxide-membranes-h...

DannyBee 4y ago
Yeah, this reads like a standard dessicant dryer applied to HVAC. I can believe that it costs less to run the dessicant dryer and then cool the air than a standard AC. This is often very true in compressed air, because you are trying to compress air, and if your air is saturated with water, you are producing a much smaller volume of compressed air vs using dry incoming air. Water is relatively incompressible, so it's actually somewhat remarkable how true this is (IE what volume of air you get out of 80% humidity intake air vs 30% humidity intake air) The main issue they are likely (IMHO) to hit is contamination. Compressed air is filtered before being dessicant dried to avoid getting oil/dust/etc on the dessicant, because it will reduce efficiency and destroy adsorption capability over time. Compared to compressed air, residential HVAC systems are not that well filtered (commercial can be). There are lots of people using nothing or random low-MERV fiberglass filters. That will destroy dessicant capability very quickly. So i have to imagine they are starting commercial first.
- jonnycomputer 4y ago
  Yeah, this is pretty far out of my expertise (so appreciate your commentary). Your point about contamination might explain their market choice (which others have questioned in these threads).
- CorrectHorseBat 4y ago
  >(IE what volume of air you get out of 80% humidity intake air vs 30% humidity intake air) A quick Google gives me that both are in the order of ~10 g/kg (or g/m3 at standard pressure), so I'd say both will be about the same? What am I missing?
  - DannyBee 4y ago
    You are not accounting for incoming temperature, heat of compression, pressure, etc https://www.air-compressor-guide.com/articles/water-in-compressed-air-calculations https://www.air-compressor-guide.com/articles/water-in-compr... has a reasonable view. The short version essentially amounts to you will end up with a lot of water to deal with.
    - CorrectHorseBat 4y ago
      Sure it's annoying to deal with, but that article seems to confirm what I said? Compared to the volume of air it's nothing.

DannyBee 4y ago

Yeah, this reads like a standard dessicant dryer applied to HVAC. I can believe that it costs less to run the dessicant dryer and then cool the air than a standard AC. This is often very true in compressed air, because you are trying to compress air, and if your air is saturated with water, you are producing a much smaller volume of compressed air vs using dry incoming air. Water is relatively incompressible, so it's actually somewhat remarkable how true this is (IE what volume of air you get out of 80% humidity intake air vs 30% humidity intake air) The main issue they are likely (IMHO) to hit is contamination. Compressed air is filtered before being dessicant dried to avoid getting oil/dust/etc on the dessicant, because it will reduce efficiency and destroy adsorption capability over time. Compared to compressed air, residential HVAC systems are not that well filtered (commercial can be). There are lots of people using nothing or random low-MERV fiberglass filters. That will destroy dessicant capability very quickly. So i have to imagine they are starting commercial first.

jonnycomputer 4y ago
Yeah, this is pretty far out of my expertise (so appreciate your commentary). Your point about contamination might explain their market choice (which others have questioned in these threads).
CorrectHorseBat 4y ago
>(IE what volume of air you get out of 80% humidity intake air vs 30% humidity intake air) A quick Google gives me that both are in the order of ~10 g/kg (or g/m3 at standard pressure), so I'd say both will be about the same? What am I missing?
- DannyBee 4y ago
  You are not accounting for incoming temperature, heat of compression, pressure, etc https://www.air-compressor-guide.com/articles/water-in-compressed-air-calculations https://www.air-compressor-guide.com/articles/water-in-compr... has a reasonable view. The short version essentially amounts to you will end up with a lot of water to deal with.
  - CorrectHorseBat 4y ago
    Sure it's annoying to deal with, but that article seems to confirm what I said? Compared to the volume of air it's nothing.