Dyson’s reputation as a maker of household air purifiers gives the company solid ground to build on; it’s just making the tech wearable. The company claims that the Zone’s two-stage, sealed filtration system can remove 99 percent of ultrafine particles and “city fumes.” Dyson’s engineering lead Vicky Gibson-Robinson told Engadget that the Zone uses an electrostatic filter to capture particulates as small as 0.1 microns. That, paired with an activated carbon filter that she claims can absorb fumes and gasses such as nitrogen dioxide (the main pollutant emitted by cars, trucks, and buses), is the bread and butter of the filter. Keep in mind, though, that the Zone will require electrostatic filter replacements, anywhere from every six to 12 months depending on the dirtiness of the city you are based in. The carbon filter, on the other hand, Dyson engineers said will not need to be replaced as often and should only be swapped out when “it starts smelling.”

The Zone has three air flow rates based on your level of activity: rest (level one), light (level two), and moderate (level three). Gibson-Robinson says the best way to get the most out of the Zone is by setting it to auto mode to preserve battery life (a big point of contention which we will get to later). “If you put it in auto mode, it will just ramp up and ramp down as it needs to,” she said, meaning the Zone is smart enough to know when to increase the filtration rate depending on the wearer’s movement and breathing rate. The more you strain and move, the more inhaling and exhaling, and the more filtration is needed.

Gibson-Robinson says that all the claims made about the Dyson Zone, such as its ability to remove fine particles like PM2.5 that can enter your respiratory tract, were made via testing each part of the filtration system individually. Meaning, the electrostatic filter, the activated carbon filter, and the impeller fan were tested alone. Gibson-Robinson claims that since we were not planning to disassemble the device during our tests, we might find that the Zone’s ability to filter pollutants would be even greater than claimed.

Engadget picked three locations to test how well the Zone performed, including a clean lab as a control, and a subway station in New York City, followed by a busy intersection. We reached out to experts at NYU’s Grossman School of Medicine who work in partnership with the University’s Langone’s Center for the Investigation of Environmental Hazards to help us test the Dyson Zone’s filtration system.

“The subway is a good substitute for a worst-case scenario,” said Terry Gordon, NYU Professor at the Grossman School of Medicine, who helped Engadget run these tests. Gordon, who has researched the underground transit systems and its health effects on commuters, says that in a scenario where an air quality emergency is not taking place, the air quality inside a subway station is comparable. Meaning, how well the Zone does in the subway station would be a good indicator of how well it would perform during another acute air pollution crisis.

Once we agreed on a mission, our aim was simple: test how well the Zone removed pollutants from the air surrounding a wearer’s breathing zone, no pun intended. We primarily used two lab-grade devices: a portable particulate monitor and a particulate counter. The portable particulate monitor gave us real-time measurements of PM10 and PM2.5 particulates in the air, which are the two main types of pollutants scientists care about and differentiate based on size. Meanwhile, a particulate counter is used to measure the concentration of pollutants left in the air. In an ideal world, we would have liked to test the Zone’s ability to filter out volatile organic compounds (VOCs), or toxic chemicals that come from home products and natural sources like benzene, formaldehyde or acetone, but these compounds were not easily detectable in the city streets or on the subway by our handheld VOC detector. This made sense since the subway tract is mostly run on electricity, not coal or gas.

For each test, we collected data while the Dyson Zone’s visor blew air in my face, instead of a dummy head. We did it this way for two reasons. For one, the lab-grade dummy head was not always detected by the Zone, so the filter would not run properly. Also, this allowed me to include real-world user experience in our assessment.

So first, in the NYU lab, while the visor blew fresh air into my face, Gordon’s Ph.D. students David Luglio and Antonio Saporito held clear tubes connected to both the portable particulate monitor and the particulate counter in the path of the airflow. This happened in the small cramped space between the plastic visor and my lips. By doing this, we were able to gauge how the numbers recorded on the devices changed when the filter was turned on and off. Because it was a clean lab, the air quality was already pretty good. When we turned on the filter to rate three, the volume of PMs measured by the monitor dropped to zero. No surprise there.

We applied the same method on the 14th Street-1st Avenue subway platform in Manhattan’s Lower East Side, which is often flooded with college students taking the L train into Brooklyn. Using the particulate monitor and the particulate counter, we recounted how the filter did before and after being turned on. The results clearly demonstrated the Zone’s effectiveness. The ambient particle monitor went from giving a reading of 200 micrograms of particle matter per cubic meter of air before it dropped close to 50. This meant the air quality went from dangerous to normal with the Zone running a level three.

Meanwhile, the particle counter went from measuring 20,000 particulates per cubic centimeter to under 1,000 at the level three. So instead of all those fine particles going up into my respiratory tract, they were wafted away through the filtration system.

NYU doctoral student David Luglio, whose thesis work has primarily focused on the health effects of long-term exposure to subway air quality in large metropolitan areas in cities like New York and D.C., was shocked by how well the Zone filtered the subway air. “Air quality in the subways in general, wildfire or not, is probably one of the worst environments to be in in New York City because concentrations are typically at least 100 micrograms per cubic meter, and outside on a typical day it is only 10 or less.”

In our final test, we used the same method on the busy street corner right across from the subway station. Again, the Zone did its thing. Readings from the two live monitors spiked and dropped again-proving that the Zone actually worked.

“It’s Dyson and Dyson knows particles and filtrations, that’s what they’re famous for,” Gordon said. The Dyson Zone proved it can remove ambient particles from the surrounding air, he continued. Those particles “are the main contributor to the adverse health effects of air pollution-more so than ozone, NO2, SO2,” and ultimately wearing a device like the Zone will protect your lungs and your heart from the adverse health effects of long-term air pollution.

This is all great in theory. However, there almost always has to be a catch with experimental devices that explore new categories like the Zone does: the battery life. Unfortunately, while testing, the Zone would only last about an hour and a half. We had to keep a charger handy in case it decided to shut off. This, coupled with the fact that we weren’t even using the audio feature while testing, told me that the device is still a long way from being practical for everyday use. Dyson is fully aware of this issue. “Although the audio system and the airflow system are two separate systems, they’re sharing the battery,” Gibson-Robinson said.

You only have to look at what Dyson has done with the vacuum cleaners, Gibson-Robinson explained. To draw a comparison, Gibson-Robinson brought up her first handheld vacuum. “[It] had a runtime of something like nine minutes, 15 minutes, something like that and now my newest one, which I got the other week, actually blew my mind. It’s like 60 minutes of runtime,” she continued.

It took the company a decade to make that leap. While Dyson’s capacity to boost battery life in its handheld vacuums could be a good indicator that there are loads of gains to be made for the Zone, it’s nearly impossible to justify the $949 asking price. That, coupled with the fact that the climate crisis is worsening day by day, some consumers (myself included) might not be willing to wait for Dyson.

Still, Gibson-Robinson says the compromise on battery life “felt adequate” in order to offer a device that could double as a headphone and a filter. “We’ve obviously had to balance between because the batteries are housed in that headband… and we’ve had to balance comfort and weight with battery life and performance,” she said. But ultimately, “It’s engineered and designed to be worn primarily as a pair of headphones and then secondary, which pains me to say because I did all the filtration stuff, the secondary function is that it’s a purifier,” she added.

Besides the disappointing battery life, I wasn’t a fan of the plastic visor itself. Although Dyson claims it’s super durable (Gibson-Robinson even dropped the visor from a balcony once out of curiosity), the detachable plastic felt like an awkward appendage at times. You can pull the visor down to sit below your chin while you’re wearing the headphones if you don’t want to run the filter all the time. You can also flick it back up and have your face covered in a second if you are ready to turn on the filtration mode. But something about it hanging beneath my chin when the filter was off felt kind of gross after a while.

If you’re a germaphobe like me, there’s plenty of reason to worry about something being so close to your face all the time. For one, it bumps into your face when you put it on in a rush and do not adjust it properly. It also comes off pretty easily, making it easy to drop on, say, a gross subway station floor. On the plus side, although the material feels cheap and flimsy, it’s at least easy to clean since it’s removable and wipeable.

Still, there’s a heaviness to the device overall. I don’t feel like I can just brandish the headphones around my neck, especially with the visor up. Not only is it uncomfortable after a few hours of wear, but it’s sure to attract attention, which isn’t ideal when I just want to feel invisible on my commute home.

If I were really concerned with my respiratory health and wanted to limit my daily exposure to pollutants, I would choose something more practical and affordable. Is it nice to know the Zone does in fact work? Sure, but why would I drop $949 on this when I already have a pair of good noise-canceling headphones, and cheaper filtration alternatives exist. Besides the standard K-95 mask, a chemical respirator with filters used in construction and for painting, there are portable HEPA filters you can buy off of Amazon for under $50 bucks. They run for about 200 to 500 hours and have a filtration efficiency of 99.7%. It basically provides what the Zone offers in its level one filtration mode, but at a fraction of the cost and without any of the battery limitations.

This article contains affiliate links; if you click such a link and make a purchase, we may earn a commission.

The post We put the Dyson Zone’s air filters to the test. Here’s what we found. appeared first on Best News.

This impressive weight and size reduction is largely thanks to some re-engineered heating elements, which allowed the team to replace the old design’s large head with just a bend at the end of the shaft — like a lower case “r,” hence the name. (Remember the HTC RE camera?) Miniaturized heating grills consisting of 99.9% copper microfins are lined up along the pipe’s curve, to ensure the high-pressure airflow is heated evenly with high precision (via intelligent heat control) to achieve better hair shine. The elements are also laid out in a way that avoids hot spots being generated, which may otherwise cause heat damage on your hair.

The buttons for three precise airflow settings and four heat modes (including constant cold shot) are just a thumb-click away. The air inlet at the bottom of the handle now comes with a longer-lasting depth-loaded filter, which captures air pollutants typically present in hair salons.

In addition to Dyson’s improved Hyperdymium motor in the handle, the Supersonic r is also equipped with an RFID sensor to recognize its magnetic accessories — diffuser, flyaway attachment, wide tooth comb, pro concentrator and a new powerful air attachment. This feature allows the hair dryer to automatically adjust the motor and heater accordingly, in order to deliver optimal airflow and temperature to suit the purpose. On example is that the diffuser is set to low flow and low temperature, which reduces frizz and enhance curls. Each attachment can also save your customized settings for future use.

Dyson’s Supersonic r is asking for $570, but it’s currently aimed at professionals, meaning us mere mortals will have to figure out other ways to get hold of one. If you happen to be a US-based hairstylist with a valid cosmetology license, feel free to join the waitlist, and your salon can pick up a Supersonic r as soon as April.

This article contains affiliate links; if you click such a link and make a purchase, we may earn a commission.

The post Dyson's new lightweight 'Supersonic r' hairdryer looks a lot like a periscope appeared first on Best News.

While we haven’t had the chance to test the 360 Vis Nav yet, we were able to get more details from Dyson about how the new robot vacuum works. A few things stand out as departures from traditional robot vacuums, the first being the 360-degree vision system that uses a camera on the top-center of the robot to map out your home as it cleans. Home mapping isn’t new in this space, but Dyson claims that the images captured by this vision system will help the machine better understand the layout of your home, including where obstacles like furniture live, make note of corners and edges and help it recognize where it’s cleaned and where it still needs to go to finish a job. The camera is surrounded by eight LEDs that balance exposure and better help the robovac navigate in low-light situations as well.

Second, whereas most robot vacuums use small sweepers to collect dust bunnies hiding in room corners and along furniture edges, Dyson’s machine has a side-edge actuator that opens automatically when cleaning spaces like these. It then uses suction to collect debris, which Dyson claims provides an even more thorough cleanup. I’m eager to see how this works in practice because cleaning the corners of rooms is one of the hardest things for a robot vacuum to do right, even for those that have the advantage of a D-shaped design like the 360 Vis Nav.

Finally, Dyson’s robot vacuum uses a Piezo sensor similar to those found in the company’s stick vacs to detect dirt and, subsequently, help the machine do a couple of things: kick up its suction power to the max 65 air watts when necessary, and create a heatmap in the My Dyson app of the dirtiest parts of your home. This sounds like a more useful application for a piezo sensor than that of Dyson’s cordless vacuums; I found in my testing that seeing how many dirt particles you’re sucking up with a manual vacuum might be fun to watch change on a digital display as you clean, but it’s not very actionable once you’re done vacuuming. But in this application, particularly with the heatmap, that information can show you areas of your home you may want to clean more often and you can program the 360 Vis Nav to only clean those spots from within the app.

The Dyson 360 Vis Nav has a similar design to some of the higher-end robot vacuums on the market right now, with two squared-off edges that help it get into room corners more easily. Under the hood, it has a Hyperdymium motor and a removable filter, plus a triple-action brush bar that spans the entire width of the machine, something you don’t often see in competing robot vacuums. Naturally, the cleaning surfaces borrow a lot from those on the company’s stick vacs: there are carbon fiber bristles and stiff nylon bristles for deep-cleaning carpets and a “fluffy” softer nylon surface that’s better on hard floors. The whole machine is HEPA-compliant, which means air that’s been sucked up cannot escape through other parts of the machine, making it better at trapping microscopic particles like allergens and dust mites.

Dyson may have waited a bit to enter the US robot vacuum market, but it appears it wanted to find the right ways of integrating technology from its cordless vacuums into this space before doing so. On paper, that technology could set the 360 Vis Nav apart from other robot vacuums when it comes to raw suction power. When we’re able to get testing time with the device, I’ll be interested to try out its four cleaning modes (Auto, Boost, Quick and Quiet), see if the advertised 65-minute runtime (in Auto Mode) actually holds up and judge how robust and easy to use the My Dyson app is.

But what already sets the 360 Vis Nav apart from the competition is its sky-high, $1,199 price tag. That’s a price we’ve only seen on robot vacuums that come with self-emptying bases, and the 360 Vis Nav doesn’t have one of those (its dock only recharges). But this won’t be a surprise if you’re familiar with other Dyson products, which are often priced at a premium.

Dyson 360 Vis Nav

$1,199 at Dyson

The post Dyson enters the US robot vacuum market with the 360 Vis Nav appeared first on Best News.