etan@tellab1.UUCP (Nate Stelton) (12/19/84)
This is a compilation of responses to my moist air inquiry.
I don't remember the exact wording, but the questions that were posted on the
net were "What is the difference in performance between a vaporizer and a room
humidifier?" "Which would be more appropriate for the bedroom at night?"
Here is an accumulation of the net.consumers postings (I hope I didn't forget
any):
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Path: tellab1!ihnp4!mhuxj!aluxe!david1
From: david1@aluxe.UUCP (nelson)
Subject: re:vaporizers vs. humidifers
Date: Thu, 6-Dec-84 14:15:48 CST
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Allentown, PA
In my experience I've found that a vaporizer emits steam (obviously
by heating water) while a humidifier puts water vapor into the air
by agitating the water into small droplets.
A vaporizer puts much more humidity into the air so watch out for
your wallpaper if you have any.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Path: tellab1!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!uiucdcsb!faiman
Subject: Re: question -- vaporizer or humidifier? - (nf)
Date: Thu, 6-Dec-84 14:17:00 CST
A room humidifier is a simpler, cheaper mechanism, since it doesn't
heat the water. There's no medical evidence, apparently, that heating the
water does any good. Also the humidifier usually has a humidistat and air
speed control, so that it is more easily set to your comfort.
Mike Faiman
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Path: tellab1!ihnp4!cbosgd!clyde!bonnie!akgua!sdcsvax!bmcg!asgb!net
Subject: Re: question -- vaporizer or humidifier?
Date: 8 Dec 84 22:34:58 GMT
A third alternative is an ionizer. It will produce a
fine mist of water vapor without making much noise.
I have used one every night for the past month or so without
experiencing any trouble.
advantages disadvantages
ionizer quiet expensive (I paid ~$95)
works for 8 hours creates "dust" with hard water
at full intensity
Bob Devine Burroughs-ASG {sdcsvax, sdcrdcf}!bmcg!asgb!moloch!devine
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now here are the responses I received by mail:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
The vaporizer will do a better job getting water in the air. The only thing is
it does to good of a job. The air saturates and wall paper peels off the walls
after time. The humidifier will do a good enough job without the excess of
water or the fire hazard that vaporizers have been known to pose.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
They both do essentially the same thing - put moisture into the air. For
your situation, a humidifier would be the best choice. With it, you can
control the amount of moisture. Vaporizers I'm familiar with generally
put a lot of moisture into the air (e.g., to help a very congested person
with croup, etc. breathe), and have only one output level - high.
Another thought - you can get combo humidifier/air cleaners (see Sears
catalog), if that's a concern.
Finally, get a humidity guage to monitor the moisture level. According
to my wife's allergist, 50% - 60% is a good range. If you maintain much
higher levels on a regular basis, you risk water damage to your ceilings
as the moisture rising into an attic can condense in the cold air and
run back down (happened to us a couple of years ago). So after getting
the ceilings repainted I now have an attic vent fan that I run occassion-
ally and make sure the level stays below 60%.
Hope this helps.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I use one of those ultrasonic humidifiers, or vaporizers, I'm not sure
which you'd call it. It's quiet, the vapor is cool, you can vary the
ammount of water it puts out, and many models have a humidistat. I
would recommend one of these very highly.
Ours is Corona - I think. There are many models selling around here
at least (Boulder Colorado).
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I don't know which is better, but I do know that you want
to get one with a built-in humidistat(sp?). The more expensive models
of both come with one. I own a small humidifier without one and it
works, but it's very tough to get the humidity where you want it.
I'd walk into my bedroom and it would feel like a temperate jungle,
or if I turned it off, it would be back to a desert. A bit of a pain.
The vaporizers are very nice and quiet, but they are kind of expensive.
The cheapest humidifer I could find with a built-in humidistat was
around $70. The sophisticated vaporizers were even more.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
My 2 cents worth:
I currently live in an appartment with hot water heating, so it is very
dry in the winter. I have tried to correct this situation with two
devices: one was called a vaporizer, the other was called a "cool spray"
humidifier. I am not sure if this terminology is at all standard.
The first device seems to be primarily intended for treating colds. It
has two electrodes that project into a plastic tank of water. Ordinary
house current passes between the electrodes producing steam that comes
out of a nozzel on top. The amount of steam is much too heavy for
maintaining a reasonable level of humidity. The electrodes quickly cake
up with calcium deposits which causes uneven boiling and an unpleasant
boiling spitting noise. Often the nozzle sprays out boiling hot
(unvaporized) water. Not very useful for my (our?) situation.
The humidifier seems to be intended for maintaining a pleasant level of
humidity. It does this by using a small phonograph motor (very small
induction motor such as used in the turntable of a $30 "stereo") to drive
a small centrifugal pump. Water pumped to the top of the pump is spun into
a coarse grating that is supposed to break it up into a fine spray that
blows out a large opening. This device works better, but far from perfect.
The moisture output is much less than the boiling water device.
There is also a problem with calcium buildup. Flakes of lime get into the
pump, so it sometimes fails. Worse, the pump frequently becomes unballanced
and makes a horrible vibrating noise. It is difficult to regulate the
amount of moisture delivered. Possibly the lime problem could have been
prevented by buying distilled water.
Neither of these devices seems to properly do the job. They are both
cheap items ($20 or less). There are also humidifiers that are much
more expensive, but I have had no experience with them. The recently
introduced "ultrasonic" humidifiers seem very nice. I saw one on display
in a hardware store (Ace) and way impressed. It put out a good stream of
cool vapor at its maximum setting, and was continuously adjutable down to
nearly zero output. It was also silent (a big plus in my book). It cost
about $90.
An article in Consumer Reports (or maybe Consumer Digest) agreed with much
of what I say above (boiling water devices dangerous and awkward, cool
vapor devices weak output and frequently clogged). This was several yeaars
ago, so they did not review the ultrasonic devices.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
well, uh, I guess that's it.
Thanks to all who contributed to this.
-etan the infamous