Scientists Invent Ultrasonic Dryer That Uses Sound To Dry Your Clothes (yahoo.com) 441
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Yahoo: Scientists at Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee have developed a dryer that could make doing laundry much quicker. Called the ultrasonic dryer, it's expected to be up to five times more energy efficient than most conventional dryers and able dry a large load of clothes in about half the time. Instead of using heat the way most dryers do, the ultrasonic dryer relies on high-frequency vibrations. Devices called green transducers convert electricity into vibrations, shaking the water from clothes. The scientists say that this method will allow a medium load of laundry to dry in 20 minutes, which is significantly less time than the average 50 minutes it takes in many heat-based machines. The drying technology also leaves less lint behind than normal dryers do, since the majority of lint is created when the hot air stream blows tiny fibers off of clothing. Drying clothes without heat also reduces the chance that their colors will fade. While the ultrasonic dryer has been in development for the past couple of years, the U.S. Department of Energy explains in a published video that it has recently been "developed into a full-scale press dryer and clothes dryer drum -- setting the stage for it to one day go to market through partners like General Electric Appliances."
Fido (Score:5, Funny)
Depending on the frequency, this should drive your family dog totally insane.
Re:Fido (Score:5, Funny)
Insane, but very,very dry.
Re:Fido (Score:5, Funny)
As long as it reduces the dog drying time. 20 minutes in the dryer leaves him disoriented and almost always up to no good...pissing on the floor, eating shoes, etc.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Damn. This thread was doing fine until you brought up 3D printers.
Anyone else want to contribute? Arduino, drones, anything?
Re: (Score:2)
Where are the APPS guy or APK when you actually need them?
American problem is American (Score:4, Insightful)
I don't get this. I actually just put a load in the washer, and in three hours it'll be done (says the thing). Then I'll hang it all out to dry.
Now I understand that stateside having clothes hang outside is a sure sign of poverty. While I'm certainly not rich, there is no such stigma here. And anyway, clothing hangs pretty well on an indoors rack too. It just takes a night or so, which is fine by me. I even turn down the spin cycle speed to go easy on the clothes, something dryers very much don't do.
So while this ultranoisy thing is probably wonderful progress and everything, I don't really understand the problem in the first place. Maybe I'm just not first world enough.
Re: (Score:3)
First problem: 3 hours??? Just for the wash? My "Speed Queen" old-fashioned top-load washes the clothes in around 30-40 minutes if I put it on the longest cycle. If you live somewhere that water needs to be conserved, then I guess I can understand... but holy crap that is a long time.
Second problem: hanging laundry. It takes a lot of space and you need a relatively low-humidity place to do the drying where people aren't going to steal your stuff. In fair weather, outside is an option if you don't live in an
Re:American problem is American (Score:5, Informative)
That explains a lot why the average power consumption in the US is 11MWh compared to a meager 4-6MWh in the EU. The longer washing cycles use much less energy.
Why would you care about how long it would take? You don't have to watch it to completion!
Re: (Score:3)
Why would you care about how long it would take? You don't have to watch it to completion!.
You may not realize this but your clothes probably have an odor from sitting in the washing machine.
Re: (Score:2)
If they don't realize the odor, it's not strong enough to worry about.
Re:American problem is American (Score:4, Funny)
If they don't realize the odor, it's not strong enough to worry about.
When it comes to tech nerds, that's almost always entirely untrue.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
We're talking about leaving clothes in the washer, not people.
Re: (Score:2)
Why would you care about how long it would take? You don't have to watch it to completion!
Single city dweller, eh? Or does your spouse take care of the laundry and kids?
Re: (Score:2)
Why would you care about how long it would take? You don't have to watch it to completion!
Because I need to do more than one load. If you want to do a load of laundry every day, it wouldn't matter, but my family always does a few loads in a row once a week.
Re: (Score:2)
Washing machines that run shorter cycles and don't spin as fast and driers that run a gas heater don't use very much electricity - probably less electricity than European models. My top loader uses a lot more water, though.
What does use a lot of electricity is air conditioning. My house has two central air units, and while we don't use it much in favor of ceiling fans, we are not typical and the US has more severe weather than most of western Europe.
Re: (Score:2)
It's getting harder and harder to find the real* top loaders. I had to pay a premium and modify the water level on mine. In my experience, the low-water front loading washers take too long and do not handle muddy kid soil loads very well. They also require more maintenance and less reliable and more complicated/expensive to repair.
* They still sell top-loaders, but they are really just front loaders turned 90 degrees. They still use a tiny bit of water and take ages to run a cycle. Even my old-fashioned top
Re: (Score:2)
They don't suck at all things. For some things, front loaders suck. As I said, try mud - the only thing that works is massive quantities of water, otherwise everything just turns orange. If you actually read the manuals for the front loader you can disable a lot of the water saving features and get a decent wash, but most people hit the "go" button. And it still takes twice as long or more. I understand that it's supposed to be "gentler" on clothes. While I don't understand this, I'll accept it as fact, but
Re: (Score:3)
I think our front-loaders are substantially different from yours. They only caught on here because the EPA enacted very aggressive water usage limits. A $250 front-loader is unheard of. Even most top loaders are really the same machine just turned on it's side. My top-loader is from a company that skirts the rules by shipping a 30-year-old design (of very high quality, meant for laundromats), but sets the factory water level to the EPA maximum. If you don't adjust the water level up, it can hardly even be c
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not talking about grass stains and a little bit of dirt - I'm talking red clay mud from playing near the creek and whatnot. I don't know what brand you have, but if you are telling the truth I'd like to know the make and model as I need a new upstairs washer and would like to go stacked if I can find a front loader that doesn't suck. I presume you need to put it into some "extra water" mode or something? 45 minutes to rinse out mud in a front-loader sounds too good to be true.
Re: (Score:2)
Good explanation why this is: https://w [quora.com]
Re: (Score:2)
1. Yes, three hours. Put laundry on, go do other things. Come back later and its done.
2. Most folk in the US have significantly more space than in the UK, yet in the UK it's still common to hang clothes to dry. Apartment blocks typically have shared space for drying clothes. A rotating clothesline takes very little space.
3. The UK frequently has
Re:American problem is American (Score:5, Informative)
Then I'll hang it all out to dry.
Now I understand that stateside having clothes hang outside is a sure sign of poverty. While I'm certainly not rich, there is no such stigma here.
In the county where I am in the US there are by-laws that prohibit hanging washing outside*, and from what I understand this is not uncommon.
In addition there are by-laws that prohibit using furniture and items that were intended for inside use, from being used outside your house. I assume this was to stop people putting old couches on their front porch. But a few years ago a local was prosecuted for using an old bath tub as a planter in their backyard. The kicker was that you couldn't see the bath tub from the street.
Home of the free. Yeah, right.
* And at this time of the year you wouldn't want to hang your clothe outside. There is so much pollen flying around that your clothes would be unrecognizable.
Re: (Score:3)
Is this a county law or a covenant of your homeowners association? I'd be very surprised to hear that an entire country has banned outdoor clothes-drying. I know there are states that have outlawed restrictions against outdoor drying.
I'm keen to know which government body would do such a stupid thing.
Re: (Score:2)
Then I'll hang it all out to dry.
Now I understand that stateside having clothes hang outside is a sure sign of poverty. While I'm certainly not rich, there is no such stigma here.
In the county where I am in the US there are by-laws that prohibit hanging washing outside*, and from what I understand this is not uncommon.
In addition there are by-laws that prohibit using furniture and items that were intended for inside use, from being used outside your house. I assume this was to stop people putting old couches on their front porch. But a few years ago a local was prosecuted for using an old bath tub as a planter in their backyard. The kicker was that you couldn't see the bath tub from the street.
Home of the free. Yeah, right.
* And at this time of the year you wouldn't want to hang your clothe outside. There is so much pollen flying around that your clothes would be unrecognizable.
That sounds like an awful restriction! May I ask in which state you live?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Also, doesn't sunlight, water and oxygen have some sort of chemical reaction that acts as a sort of bleach to disinfect and make clothes brighter? I know my mom used to hang the bedsheets and pillowcases outside in the summer and they always were soft and smelled nice.
Re:American problem is American (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:American problem is American (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:American problem is American (Score:4, Informative)
Europeans manage to dry their clothes just fine with all the conditions you've listed.
So how exactly do they manage to dry clothes when 1) it's raining outside, and rains every day in fact (as in the Pacific Northwest), 2) it's snowing outside, or 3) it's below freezing outside (which is common in the winter in many parts of the US), or 4) it's 100% humidity outside (which is normal in the southeast US during the summer)?
Re:American problem is American (Score:5, Informative)
As for interior, my current apartment doesn't have room for me to put a drying rack anywhere that I won't trip over it.
There are valid reasons for someone to own a drier and not hang their clothing outside.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Many people have neither an outside, nor an inside suitably large enough for hanging a rack with cloths. Hell many don't even have space for a separate drier and buy the all in one units.
Re: (Score:2)
Long ago, I didn't have a dryer. I had clotheslines outside and in the basement. It took a long time to dry in the basement because of the humidity, and sometimes the clothes smelled. It took even longer to dry outside because when I hung them out, it would rain! If it didn't the clothes would smell from the bird droppings!
Needless to say, I much prefer the dryer.
Re:American problem is American (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:American problem is American (Score:4, Insightful)
Hanging outdoors is second best, but results in crinkled clothes which need ironing (eliminating a good chunk of the energy savings of not using a dryer since you dry everything at once, but iron one at a time). If you've got a family of 4, it takes a lot of space. That forces you to wash/dry in multiple small loads instead of a few big ones, which wastes more energy and requires more labor. And of course weather and particulate matter (pollen, smog) can dirty your "clean" clothes before you've even worn them.
Hanging indoors is worst. All the problems of hanging outdoors, but less space so more loads, more crinkling since you typically don't use clothespins to stretch the clothes out, longer drying time, and picks up household odors. It also increases the humidity of the air indoors, which cools the air so increases your heating bill in the Winter. In Summer, if you're in a low-humidity environment (desert) this cooling can be helpful; but in high-humidity climates it just increases your air conditioning bill because humid air feels hotter (sweating is less effective) forcing you to run the air conditioner more.
But overall, I'd say the biggest factor is reduction of labor. Instead of taking 15-30 minutes clipping everything to the line or rack, you just shove all the clothes into the dryer in 1 minute, turn it on, and go do something else. (Unloading time is about the same for both since you have to fold the clothes.)
Re:American problem is American (Score:5, Funny)
Spoken like a true American.
Re:American problem is American (Score:4, Interesting)
Why shouldn't a washer take 3 hours, if it uses less electricity and less water to do so? I'd rather have my washer take more time and cost less. It's got a timer anyways, so those 3 hours can be whenever I want, including right before I wake up, or right before I arrive home from work.
Unless you're doing more than 7 loads a week, the amount of time the washer takes doesn't really matter. Take out the previous day's load, load up the next day's load, set the timer, and you're done for the day.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
in 3 hours I can run the whole household's laundry through and have it put away.
Assuming it takes 30 minutes per load right now, it would only take 18 hours to run it on a slow washer.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, why aren't you working from 6AM to midnight on the laundry!
Re: (Score:2)
perhaps you should grasp the concept that a washer should not take three fucking hours to do its job.
Tell me about it. Stop fast cycling your cloths. It should take at least 4+ hours if it's soaking correctly
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think it has anything to do with poverty. I live in a middle class neighborhood and people do hang their laundry out to dry and nobody thinks less of them for it. That sounds like some sort of external bias you have going on there.
Its called projection.
br. They talk a good game, while revealing what they are really like inside.
Back in the 1970's (when dinosaurs ruled)... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Cool (Score:4, Funny)
Cool... cause it's not hot... Yes, I know. I can't resist, no matter how terrible the joke.
Re: (Score:2)
There you have it.. A REALLY dry joke....
Sounds like .. (Score:2)
... my clothes are going to be dry any minute now.
Why the ignorance? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
It was stated it consumes less energy, does not produce unnecessary heat.. I get you are fine with your current machine, but why shouldn't we improve what we have?
We should look to improve on what we have.
The problem is often how we go about introducing it. This will likely be a considerable disruptive move within the industry that has made traditional heat-based machines for decades now. A monopoly driven into the industry secured by patents may not prove to be a benefit for all those employed in the industry. For consumers, neither will a $5000 price tag.
Re: (Score:2)
Good grief, listen to yourself. How can a $5000 product be a "disruptive force" competing with products costing $200 and doing the same thing?
Re: (Score:2)
Really? Have you looked at Slashdot reader comments lately about things like CPUs, GPUs, RAM, drives, etc?
Clothes line in the sun (Score:3)
even more efficient. OK: it doesn't work all year round where I live, so in cool months I hang my clothes on a drying rack in a spare room.
Re: (Score:2)
Haier owns GE (Score:2)
Haier is a Chinese company that bought GE Appliances last year, they still have plants in the U.S. There might be some American appliance makers left, but they all have foreign manufacturing facilities.
The good and the opulent (Score:3)
This will cut down on house fires, which is certainly good.
It's also progress towards something I've wanted for decades: An automatic closet. When I get undressed I want to just toss my clothes at the closet and have it launder, dry, and fold or hang them as appropriate, hopefully doing it quietly enough to not bother my sleep.
I actually don't mind the cleaning and drying part - just a robot to put them away would be awesome.
The fate of the fibers (Score:5, Interesting)
So I wash my clothes, then run ultrasonics against/thru them to dry them. And I do this every week (or whatever).
What is the affect on the structural integrity of the fabric? Wouldn't prolonged exposure to intense vibration cause some fibers to break and knits to stretch? Would the ends of fibers tend to fray more quickly?
I don't think I'll be the first on my block to buy one.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly. I'd like to see how they work after 5 years before I commit. I don't like what my current electric heat drier does to my clothes, so I'm very interested in an alternative, but not if it is worse (obviously).
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I was wondering about that too but the more I think about:
1) on "ordinary fabrics" heat + tumble dry is not exactly gentle. Certainly the heat causes expansion and contraction, which probably puts much more stress on cotton and natural fibers than vibration would.
2) heat on synthetics often results in fatal failure modes! I have lots of outdoor/backcountry stuff that is entirely synthetic and I have ruined that stuff by failing to set the thing to "noheat"
I don't know that this ultra sonic stuff might not
Re: (Score:3)
Mostly the ultrasound causes nodes of pressure and vacuum to form in the air; the vacuum reduces the boiling point of water in the fabric and boil off the water, which is then vented outside. Ultrasonic cleaners work by causing steam filled cavitions pockets in the working fluid, they literally steam clean things at room temperature.
Re:The fate of the fibers (Score:5, Interesting)
Alternate technology, available today (Score:5, Informative)
In the meantime one could consider a heat-pump clothes dryer [google.com]. Rather than using electricity or natural gas to heat indoor air, pass it over the clothes, then dump it to the outside in a once-through cycle, a heat-pump dryer uses (as you can guess) a heat pump. The hot side of the heat pump creates warm air that passes over the clothes gathering moisture. The cold side condenses the moisture back out, before passing this de-humidifed air back to the hot side.
Advantages:
Yes, they are more expensive. That is to be expected, considering how dirt-simple the mechanisms of a traditional dryer are. However, depending on your local electricity rates and how much laundry you do, the breakeven should be well within the lifetime of the appliance. Maybe that's not enough to junk a perfectly good existing dryer, but should definitely be considered when purchasing a replacement.
Re: (Score:2)
My gas dryer uses less than half the electricity of your electric dryer you know..
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah and my fusion powered dryer uses exactly zero electricity.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Uses 1/2 the electricity of an ordinary dryer. It has no vent to the outdoors, so the whole home envelope can be that much tighter. (It does have a water drain for the condensate.). The mechanism relies on warm, de-humidified air, rather than heavily heated air, so it is more gentle on clothes. They've been available as consumer products for a number of years now - it's not brand new technology
I have a 2 in 1 washer and condensing dryer. Saves a lot of space, and it is handy to just throw a load in and have it wash and dry without having to change machines. Obviously not good if you do a high volume of laundry or if you are concerned about speed - the condensing dryer is quite a bit slower than a regular dryer, whereas the one in the article seems much faster. Apparently these are quite popular in Europe, not so much in North America (I could only find four models when I was looking to buy).
Re: (Score:3)
Oh, Jane? (Score:2)
Could less lint = fewer house fires? (Score:2)
Lint build-up in dryer vents is a common source of home fires, so maybe a dryer that creates less lint would reduce the chance of a fire, and in turn public safety? Of course dryer vent/lint fires typically occur because homeowners are negligent in cleaning vents out, BUT if this could remove or reduce long-term dryer vent cleaning effort/cost that would be another benefit. I'm just speculating, of course...
Re: (Score:2)
oops, I missed an important word "...reduce the chance of fire, and in turn IMPROVE public safety..."
how noisy is this? (Score:2)
I once had the misfortune of having to work in a room that contained several large ultrasonic cleaners. Even with their covers closed, the noise drove me crazy in short order.
Such a dryer would need a lot of soundproofing.
what a fraud (Score:2)
They ran some small-scale experiments with flat fabric samples on a huge transducer, then they stuck some transducers into a drum and imply that somehow they can make it scale. If this ever works (and that's doubtful), it will take tens of millions of dollars to develop. What a waste of $880000 of public funding.
You want energy efficient drying? That's really simple: hang your clothes up on a line. If you need it faster, wear synthetics.
Anyone thought of health tests? (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
To boldly clean how no one has cleaned before (Score:3)
Re:Don't buy this (Score:5, Funny)
I wonder how my lungs are doing now that I've worn hang-dried clothes with all those evil fibers for decades...
Re:Don't buy this (Score:5, Insightful)
here are no tangible benefits to using a crazy ultrasound dryer.
"up to five times more energy efficient than most conventional dryers"
It's the second sentence in the summary for god's sake. You didn't even have to click the link or read the article to get to it.
Re: (Score:2)
Why on earth would you think that if it halves the time for a load that takes 50 minutes, it wouldn't also shorten the drying time for quicker drying fabrics? I don't think there's anything magic about the 50 minute time suggested, it's just a typical length of time for a dryer to run.
As for using
Re: Don't buy this (Score:3)
Presumably it means it can dry five times the laundry use the same amount of energy.
Re: (Score:3)
But why would you want thermal energy specifically? We're looking for "drying energy". Sometimes, waiting for water to fall out of a shirt and the rest of the moist to evaporate while at room temperature works.
We could also throw our clothes in a large electric pizza oven at around 300C (I know, this is not a good enough oven for making "real" pizza). I'm sure the pizza oven is better at trapping heat in. But hope your clothes are rugged enough.
Re: (Score:2)
AC science in all its glory! This is why we can only have nice things when China starts manufacturing them and selling them to us.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Don't buy this (Score:4, Interesting)
It is definitely and objectively better to blow the loose fibers out of the clothes with a traditional dryer and dispose of them
How many of those fibers were already loose, compared to the ones that get broken off by all the friction in the dryer ?
Re:Don't buy this (Score:4, Insightful)
This is very much like the asbestos hysteria. OMG my child is at a school which has an asbestos wall, they'll all die in 40 years!!!!! No. The fibres are inside a sealed bonded sheet. Don't disturb it, don't attempt to remove it, keep it well maintained (reads: painted) and you'll be fine.
Re: (Score:2)
It is definitely and objectively better to blow the loose fibers out of the clothes with a traditional dryer and dispose of them.
How many of those fibers are broken off by a traditional dryer in the first place? Seems like previously loose fibers would have come off in the washer, as evidenced by the lint trap located on the drain line. The video in TFA shows this technology using a traditional horizontal drum configuration, apparently with air blowing through and including a lint trap, which should alleviate your concerns. If anything you should be supporting this because of the shorter drying time and lower temperatures, which w
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
people claiming it flakes off non-stick cookware and causes a whole litany of health problems
Well...it does flake off of non-stick cookware. Eating it is relatively harmless, though.
It also vaporizes under high cooking heat - and that is at least known to kill birds. It's only a literal canary in the proverbial coal mine, but it's a hint that it may not be good for people either.
Re:Don't buy this (Score:4, Interesting)
So instead 'green pans' and 'copper pans' are all the rage.
To be fair, those green pans where they use a ceramic lining instead of Teflon are actually really amazing. They are wayyyy harder to scratch and just as non-stick. I will never buy a teflon pan again, and I'm not someone who cares at all about the whole fear-mongering.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The only point I'd disagree with is that Donnie would sign in with his own name. He's proud of his level of stupidity.
Re: (Score:2)
Front loader? I thought those all had problems? Mold, seal issues, I don't know what else.
Re: (Score:3)
If you've been wearing the same crusty underwear for a week, you aren't a regular consumer.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe the green author has some kind green of brain tumour green and doesn't green know about it.
Re: (Score:2)
Somebody need to gather up all these marketing morons and hang them from the nearest tree
As long as they use a natural fiber rope, I'm fine with that. Nylon is bad for the environment.
Re: (Score:2)
In my area, the AC is more about removing the humidity than cooling the air temperature, but what ever floats your boat..