Kirby Vacuum Dirt Meter Pad Myths

This video debunks a silly myth suggesting the use of Kirby dirt meter pads prevents accurate performance measurements (except when fully clogged of course!). This absurd myth is peddled by rabid Kirby zealots who scrape the barrel to find any reason to rubbish clear, objective data that reveals their favourite machines to be, well…poor.
Links:
1. Why vacuum cleaners always leave something behind - • Why Vacuum Cleaners Al...
2. Demonstration that vacuum cleaners always leave something behind - • Vacuum Cleaners Always...
3. Why measuring airflow using boxes is misleading - • Vacuum Cleaner Airflow...
4. How Kirby 'testers' mislead you - • How Rugs Are Used to M...
5. Kirby performance testing on non-porous carpet - • Dyson V10 Vs Kirby: Ho...
6. Kirby performance testing on porous carpet - • Dyson V10 (not V11) Vs...

[@VacuumFacts]

Already there are propaganda videos desperately attempting to refute the basic high-school-level science shown here that exposes the weaknesses of poor machines out there. Look out for dodgy propaganda sources that pack in three dirt meter pads instead of 1, artificially blocking the dirt meter and reducing the Kirby's already paltry suction, and making its performance even worse. That's also stupid because it implies they think Kirby should be making their pads three times thicker, and that these people don't seem to understand how these pads work. They're supposd to be porous to allow air through with minimum resistance, but also net particles. Even if you used 1 pad like any sensible person would and as I myself used, using only sand, as is often seen, is absurd and unrepresentative of natural household dust. Nothing in these propaganda videos actually directly explains any of the empirical observations and measurements made under the honest conditions I tested-they evade that responsibility because you can't argue against facts. Look out for the deceivers who peddle nonsense and don't like when these facts expose the weaknesses of inferior products and design. It's a tribalistic reaction.

[@frankkersky5510]

Using ohms law, a formula for direct current electricity, as a parallel for fluid dynamics is barbaric at best.

[@VacuumFacts]

Thanks for explaining why in detail and backing it up with independently verifiable objective evidence specifically in the context of the situation you're complaining about. And then there's everything else in the video ignored...

[@frankkersky5510]

@@VacuumFacts As a humble hill billy I decline the invitation for a rebuttal as I have no intention on presenting a thesis on such trivial matters. *inserts tumbleweeds* 😘

[@VacuumFacts]

Oh the irony. Have to wonder why you bothered to even comment in the first place then. Just look like an idiot troll now. Goodbye then.

[@2711marcus]

I agree with what you're saying but if the airflow is so much higher to begin with, the question is how much does the resistance drop the airflow? It could be that it still has more airflow at the cleaner head

[@VacuumFacts]

ha Agreeing with what I'm saying is actually the same as directly disagreeing with all those who've been hostile on my video comments that you're chummy with. Contemplate that for a second! Quite profound; I guess facts, intelligence, and being amenable to common sense always wins. The answer to your question is in the video: Not noticeably because the data in the plots shows quite clearly there are no symptoms of loss from sources other than carpet. Fitted carpet on a solid floor (with porous or non-porous backing) is always the dominant controlling factor, and by such a huge magnitude that it utterly dwarfs any other source (except heavily dust-loaded bags), which can thus be neglected. You would not get those curves if the dirt meter using my particular dust type (or any other factor like the brush roll choice etc.) was a significant source of the total loss. It's not just airflow alone that matters either; it's how it's utilised to achieve cleaning performance that is important-something else I've mentioned several times to deaf ears. I tried to explain all this back at the time I released the original data in comments, but some just weren't having it. So it was new video time.

[@2711marcus]

@@VacuumFacts I'm friendly with anyone who's friendly with me 👍

[@VacuumFacts]

@@2711marcus Anyway, another myth debunked. Rabid vacuum enthusiasts: 100% incorrect still.

[@2711marcus]

@@VacuumFacts Johnny you need to let this go now, it's just a vacuum cleaner, there's more important things going on in the world.

[@VacuumFacts]

@@2711marcus heh the irony xD love it

[@MikeDurham-kw9wr]

So why does a Kirby leave the wood floor under my carpet clean, while everything else leaves a ton of dust under the carpet?

[@VacuumFacts]

It's not possible to know without any meaningful information and data. However, all possibilities are covered in several of my videos under the kirby kzbin.info/aero/PLBxUOcW7kaEs7xuTK2A-pncwupMjXuRbb and educational playlists kzbin.info/aero/PLBxUOcW7kaEvk3bygbiP56Fw3UtLog_p_

[@nathanschiel4244]

I know for a fact that when the dirt meter is on and the zip brush is on the zip brush, it only runs half the speed

[@VacuumFacts]

I've seen no evidence to support this claim. Some sources on YT use multiple pads at the same time (e.g. kzbin.info/www/bejne/fqC9o59vaLmLmJofeature=shared&t=470 ), which obviously provides greater air resistance and is deeply misleading and unrepresentative. This would also imply Kirby are stupid for inventing this method of testing that isn't representative.

[@deniscookingadventures8296]

But the best vacuum is the vacuum that gets used… so if the enthusiastic peeps use it everyday…

[@VacuumFacts]

That's not how objectivity works :)

[@jocodashcam295]

I'd like to get with you and develop a more accurate air flow testing method that's repeatable. As a mechanical engineer who designs industrial systems including fans, compressors, and pumps, it always bothers me how the Kirby fans love to state air flow, but they only test airflow at a single point; that is open head unrestricted air flow. What I'd like to see is a curve produced just like you'd buy any fan, compressor or pump. When you buy one of those pieces of equipment, you buy them based on the pressure (head) vs flow. In the case of a vacuum cleaner, it would be vacuum/lift vs flow. you NEVER buy a fan or pump based on run-out (unloaded), since that's not the operating condition. In doing so would give you flow at the operating point. I've see the Kirby fans say, "130 cfm air flow", but then see it only has 25 inches W.C. of lift. That results in a super flat curve with not much slope to it. What that means is small changes in suction restriction results in wild swings in airflow. We system engineers specifically avoid selecting equipment with low slope curves, as it makes the system difficult to control and guarantee performance. Case in point, a Kirby has 130 cfm at the head unloaded, but that number falls to 70 with a hose attached. Just the restriction of an open hose almost cut the cfm in half. That puts the Dyson with greater airflow at the hose than the Kirby. Dysons have a lower open unrestricted airflow, but they are able to generate about 110 inches W.C. of suction. That results in a nice, steep usable curve where changes in flow restriction do not result in drastic changes in flow. At only about 10 inches W.C. of suction the Dyson curve intersects the Kirby curve and anything above about 10 inches W.C., the Dyson has more airflow. I'd like to do 2 tests: 1) Make a test box with an air valve so we could test at varying amounts of restriction to generate an suction lift vs flow curve. We test open flow, then start closing the valve down incrementally to gather data all the way up to completely shut off (no air flow). With this data, you can overlay the curves of different machines to see where suction and flow intersect to tell the tale of performance. 2) Drill and tap a test port in the cleaner head to measure suction while in use. We could easily 3D print a test tube with port to install between the head and wand, but the Kirby aluminum head would need drilled and tapped. With suction pressure only, you can determine airflow from the previous test above. Do hard floors, low pile carpet, medium pile carpet, and shag. Measure the suction pressure in the head for actual airflow during use. Again, compare that to one another for performance. It will really tell the tale of performance of airflow in actual use, where the Kirby's airflow drops like a stone with increased suction pressure.

[@VacuumFacts]

The only test that's important is the one already done by international comparative industry test standards: measure cleaning performance (i.e. the end result, rather than peripherial metrics like airflow, which aren't relevant in themselves). Anyone measuring airflow, especially without resistive load, and then trying to conclude something about cleaning performance is sufficiently ignorant of basic physics, let alone a complex fibre network like a carpet, and shouldn't be listened to. Airflow is a motor metric and doesn't directly bear on cleaning performance. I can't achieve the rigor of the industry test standards in a mere home and on an individual's budget, but I nevertheless do comparative quantitative testing to a 'standard' that avoids all the flaws and problems of amateur testing littering YT. The data is reproducible and validated by showing exactly the trends and relationships you'd expect in the detail.

[@jocodashcam295]

@@VacuumFacts industry standard tests do not produce a performance curve. Plus, industry standard tests change based on feedback. Someone needs to be the leader here. A curve is much more useful than meaningless open flow numbers.

[@doct0rnic]

This is actually the reverse of what I thought, I came here thinking the dirt meter improved performance than the normal bag being that its used to doop people in thinking their house is dirty.

[@VacuumFacts]

It is used to dupe people into thinking their house is dirty but not for the reason many seem not to understand. It doesn't affect performance; it simply plays on ignorance of elementary statistics and that carpets are like first-order rate systems (removal of dirt is statistical and gradual with each pass; more is removed initially when there is more to be removed; less so later). They prey on the scientific ignorance of the general public that have been failed by poor leadership and the corresondingly weak education system they've been subjected to and the victim of, coming out of it without simple knowledge. Keep them smart enough to pull the levers but dumb enough not to ask questions. It's how the rich stay rich...at the expense of the typical person that doesn't notice.

[@nathanschiel4244]

You didn't test the kirby bag against the dirt meter

[@VacuumFacts]

The video clearly evidences that the bag and dirt meter are indistinguishable relative to the flow reduction provided by the carpet. I suggest you watch the video. There is no other physical means to explain the observed data trends.

[@Boodieman72]

I have a Kirby, bought it used because no sane person would buy a new one. I also have the Dyson V10. The only time the Kirby gets use is if there is a spill of something and the Dyson's filter is drying out after being rinsed.

[@VacuumFacts]

I can help with that Kirby curse; get a cool fan (not a hot one) and blow dry the filter. Dries in no time before you even need to get the Kirby out.

[@Boodieman72]

@@VacuumFacts Not really an issue as I have used the Kirby twice since getting the V10. Regardless of cleaning performance, pushing a Kirby around, even one with tech-drive, is a miserable experience.

[@VacuumFacts]

@@Boodieman72 I know, right. I was shot down by the rabid vacuum enthusiasts for saying as much (stating an observable fact) in my review kzbin.info/www/bejne/rpC1o6xpqpZ-mdU I guess the truth hurts.

[@Boodieman72]

@@VacuumFacts The rabid people might not have used anything better.

[@VacuumFacts]

@@Boodieman72 While there's probably truth to that, their behaviour is tribal; they don't WANT to use anything else. Because !

[@VacMaster1991]

Great factual video as always👍, my grandparents sent me a 1980s kirby. It stinks to all mighty and is in pretty poor shape. Sad in a closet filled with stinky dog dirt for 20+ years🤢🤮, it needs about $300 of repairs, which I'm unwilling to 💵 in 🗑 for it.

[@VacuumFacts]

:/ according to my hate mail, 'only Dysons stink'. Had to make that new video to replace the old two kzbin.info/www/bejne/nqTPZad5lrFpnZo I'm sure people unclog their toilets with theirs because mine's never stank.

[@VacMaster1991]

@@VacuumFacts , I accidentally vacuumed up wet carpet powder in to it. I vacuumed out the powder, and wiped it out. didn't stink anymore.

[@VacMaster1991]

@@a111z , the active air clean filter is not hepa, its carbon. It captures 99% of 5 micron particles. The dyson cordless uses a hepa filter which captures 99.99% of 0.3 micron particles.

[@VacMaster1991]

@@a111z , absolutely not true. Miele bags are not hepa, doesn't say on the box. Look here at 2:30 kzbin.info/www/bejne/Y2amc5iDerWHg5o

[@VacMaster1991]

@@a111z , Yes but for how expensive Miele machines are they need washable heap filters, included in all models. My $600 U1 came with a cheap felt filter. Not impressive. Plus there cleaning performance is pretty mediocre for there price. Vacuum wars only got an 87% on his U1 while he got 100% on a Dyson cordless. That shows how much of a rip off Miele's are.

[@nathanschiel4244]

All you mid level vacuum sales people are the same. Spray wd40 in an old kirby bearing when one comes in your shop, then sell the customer a sebo or something when they come back in 6 months

[@VacuumFacts]

Not sure who that's directed to, but if you're suggesting I'm a 'Kirby vacuum sales person' then you might want to go do a little fact check.