Hi everyone!
I have seen an air purifier advertising itself as providing “laminar flow” to provide a pocket of safe air for the user
Is this legit? (has anyone tested it apart from the maker?) Also how does this compare to other small personal air purifiers (like the smartair qt3) which promise to provide a bubble of clean air for the user. Are they using the same tech?
Hi Harry,
This is a very interesting question and not one I have much experience with. However, I’ve done a bit of research, and as far as I can tell, there isn’t much testing of this purifier currently out there. This video, https://twitter.com/Engineer_Wong/status/1765284609632420291, is from the company’s founder, but I assume you might have already seen it since you mentioned the maker testing it. While he’s obviously interested in showing the product in the best possible light, it looks to perform well, at least at close range.
From what I’ve heard, this device likely performs better than devices such as Airinum’s Hale and those smaller cylindrical portable air purifiers. However, I know the QT3 is currently considered the best in the category so it would be great to know which one performs better. I will see if I can get some more information and get back to you!
Awesome, thank you! Would be great to know if this technology is worth investing in as it could provide important protection for people who need to unmask for things like dental appointments.
This video might interest you:
https://twitter.com/Engineer_Wong/status/1780555078417748191
Thanks Ethan - this looks like a really cool and useful technology.
Apologies for reviving this thread. However, I think you might be interested in this @HarryLeWhippet as I’ve finally had the chance to test the QT3!
I know this is an old post but I wanted to make sure if someone else is interested in the AirFanta 4 Lite they know how it stacks up among other purifier options. I recently came across this Twitter post from someone who tested the Smart Air Qt3, 4Lite, and their own creation. The 4Lite is much better than the QT3 but this person’s design beats the 4Lite. Only issue is to create the better device you need access to a 3D printer since the inventor no longer sells his pre-made device.
Qt3 is on the left, Edderic Ugaddan’s device is in the middle, and the 4Lite is on the end
Thanks for sharing this, it’s a great visualisation of the airflow and the whole Twitter (X) thread you shared is very informative.
From the image it’s clear that the 4 Lite pushes a lot more air than the QT3. However, I’m not very surprised as this is what I had heard from a few sources. Edderic’s device looks to push vastly more air than even the 4 Lite. However, it also looks quite a lot larger, so I’m not sure if it’s a direct comparison to the 4 Lite and QT3. Definitely a good device to know about, though!
I think it could be perfect as a desk-based device in settings like office buildings…
