Interested In Advertising? | Contact Us Here
Warning!

 

Welcome to Clean It Up; the UK`s largest cleaning forum with over 34,000 members

 

Please login or register to post and reply to topics.      

 

Forgot your password? Click here

john martin

  • Posts: 2699
Airflex custom
« on: May 11, 2013, 01:33:32 pm »

 Just spotted this demo vid  ...   

 This would be the Airflex in full Ashbys Enforcer spec  ...
 Series electro motors  ... 400psi ... built in heater

 interesting alternative to a storm too  ...  wonder how price compares
 an enforcer in this spec would be 2600


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HgvS0xSeufQ



john martin

  • Posts: 2699
Re: Airflex custom
« Reply #1 on: May 11, 2013, 04:40:46 pm »

 also noticed that Ashbys have removed their infamous video from youtube , in which they showed incredible / false performance measurements of the Airflex turbo and enforcer .

I presume  Cleansmart won  ... :)


Do like the Enforcer design despite that though ...

Noticed a polish version of their Enforcer video ,  Radek might appreciate the effort   :)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v7uWdOlldGQ

dazzy

  • Posts: 2
Re: Airflex custom
« Reply #2 on: May 11, 2013, 07:39:06 pm »
This was the out come.

I am pleased to report the Advertising Standards Authority have now formally ruled on the video Ashbys Cleaning Equipment made about our Airflex Turbo machine. For the full ASA report please see the ASA website:

 

http://www.asa.org.uk/Rulings/Adjudications/2013/4/Ashbys-Cleaning-Equipment/SHP_ADJ_214784.aspx

 

Or search for compaint ref: A12-214784

 

Obviously we are very pleased with the ASA's decision. However, although the ASA found in our favour, I was disappointed they omitted some important points from their report - so I'd like to make these points now for anyone who's taken an interest in this:

 

1. We collected the Airflex machine Ashbys used in their video and found that a large chunk of gasket was missing from one of the vacuum motors - here is a photo we sent to the ASA:

 

http://www.cleansmartsupplies.co.uk/photo1.JPG - showing the gasket with the motor removed.

 

Obviously this machine would have been leaking a lot of vacuum! The ASA would not include this in their report though because Ashbys said the damage to the gasket could have occurred after they made their video. We pointed out that the low waterlift reading on Ashby's video showed that the Airflex machine was leaking air when they made their video, and that after replacing the gasket the waterlift reading went up to the correct reading, but the ASA would still not include this in the report. Ashbys even admitted they had 'trimmed' a gasket 'protruding into the vacuum area'...'to ensure that it did not block the inlet of the vacuum motor' (see ASA report).

 

2. Lamb Ametek (the manufacturers of the vacuum motors used in the Airflex Turbo), confirmed in writing that the readings we took on our video were inline with what they would expect for the vacuum motor system in the Airflex Turbo machine.

 

3. We offered to send the Airflex machine for independent testing to corroborate our figures, but the ASA declined this offer on the basis that they had already "adequately covered the concerns raised by you in the report and we are not going to delay the investigation further pending any additional information you may provide which will not add anything material to our assessment".

 

4. Ashbys said they tested the vacuum on the Airflex, which proved it was working properly: However, to check if vacuum is correct you have to 1. Measure the vacuum and 2. Check the vacuum reading against the manufacturer's stated vacuum figure. Ashbys did not even ask us what the correct vacuum strength figure should be for the Airflex machine - so how can they say the checked the vacuum was working properly? If Ashbys had contacted us we could have told them straight away there was a problem with the Airflex and then worked with Ashbys to locate the problem and fix it, which is really what should have happened here.

 

5. The flowmeter Ashbys used in their video is an Omega FL-550. The instructions for this flowmeter are here:

 

http://www.omega.com/Manuals/manualpdf/M2473.pdf

 

If you look on the right side of page 3 you can see that this Flowmeter only gives a meaningful reading at 90psi. If the pressure is not 90psi a correction factor must be applied to the reading from the table on the right hand side of page 3. As you can see, this makes a huge difference to the reading - it can reduce the initial reading taken from the flowmeter by around 50%!

 

Also, there are no correction factors for readings taken under vacuum conditions, so there is no way of taking a meaningful airflow reading from these machines using this flowmeter.

 

The Omega flowmeter could only be used to give comparible readings between the two machines if the waterlift figure on both machines was identical (and if both machines were working properly!). In other words, the high waterlift reading of the Enforcer is also causing the (incorrect) high airflow reading on the Omega flowmeter.

 

Ashbys may have bought this flowmeter in good faith, but they have known for many months now that it gives a totally false reading on their machine. I wonder how many Enforcer users were pursuaded to buy an Enforcer machine on the back of Ashby's video. Ashbys removed from YouTube another video they made using the same flowmeter, but they have left the Airflex video on YouTube all this time knowing that the airflow reading on their machine was completely false.

 

Now that the ASA have concluded their investigation and Ashbys have removed their video, we intend to remove our video from YouTube and hopefully we can put this behind us and look forward to a good summer now the sun has finally decided to come out!

 

I'd like to take this opportunity to thank all the people who've supported us throughout this, in particular those who commented or 'liked' our YouTube video or who supported us on any of the forums - thank you very much!


 

 

 

 

john martin

  • Posts: 2699
Re: Airflex custom
« Reply #3 on: May 11, 2013, 08:14:14 pm »
 Very interesting thanks ,

 Congratulations to Cleansmart for successfully defending their Products and integrity .

 Im sure Ashbys knew what they were doing from the start and set out to deceive and discredit .
And even after many individuals and even their own customers  expressed disdane for  the video  , Ashbys claimed they stood by their figures , claimed cleansmart rigged their own test  ,  and left the video up on youtube for months ...

Ashbys have demonstrated their absolute arrogance .

 

Russ Chadd

  • Posts: 1261
Re: Airflex custom
« Reply #4 on: May 12, 2013, 10:21:18 pm »
So after all that went on between Ashbys and Cleansmart... Enforcer vs Turbo.. and all that...
Cleansmart choose to build a machine based on the Enforcer!  ;D

john martin

  • Posts: 2699
Re: Airflex custom
« Reply #5 on: May 12, 2013, 10:52:27 pm »
So after all that went on between Ashbys and Cleansmart... Enforcer vs Turbo.. and all that...
Cleansmart choose to build a machine based on the Enforcer!  ;D


Might be just rubbing the victory in    :-X

Its probably all good in the end  , they both got publicity out of it and both have good machines .

Doug Holloway

  • Posts: 3917
Re: Airflex custom
« Reply #6 on: May 13, 2013, 07:04:23 am »
Hi Guys

One of the things that was paramount when I worked in R&D was to make sure results were credible.

If a result appeared wrong make sure you tested again to see if you had actually found something interesting or merely a rogue reading.

In the case of the Ashby's video the result was obviously nonsense, why would two machines with very similar specs produce such widely differing results.

In my opinion either Ashby's have a very poor understanding of science or deliberately used a misleading result.

Cheers

Doug

Russ Chadd

  • Posts: 1261
Re: Airflex custom
« Reply #7 on: May 13, 2013, 09:30:57 am »
Doug,

The two machines tested were totally different in the Ashbys video so you would expect different results.
At the end of the day videos which contain evidence of CFM and lift results are all pointless in my opinion, its comes down to actual performance in a real world situation which matters and i am sure both Derek and Mat will agree.

I am kind of chuffed that the new Airflex has the same spec as my Enforcer, im sure its a good machine.

john martin

  • Posts: 2699
Re: Airflex custom
« Reply #8 on: May 13, 2013, 11:55:26 am »
Doug,

The two machines tested were totally different in the Ashbys video so you would expect different results.
At the end of the day videos which contain evidence of CFM and lift results are all pointless in my opinion, its comes down to actual performance in a real world situation which matters and i am sure both Derek and Mat will agree.

I am kind of chuffed that the new Airflex has the same spec as my Enforcer, im sure its a good machine.

I would disagree with you there  ...
The series vs parallel comparison is a separate argument .

You wouldn't like to be sold a twin vac machine only to find out it was a single vac for example .

Even before Ashbys got there hands on the Airflex they were stating the Enforcer as having 230"lift and 200cfm ...
With 30? years in the business im sure they knew well that you cant have both high lift and high cfm in a twin vac configuration .
Its likely they got their hands on the omega meter ... found it was inaccurate ..  but figured mere carpet cleaners would believe what they are shown so decided to use it in videos and when doing demos for calling customers .
I e-mailed them around that time politely asking them to explain how the high reading was possible ....   but got no reply .

But , they went too far and shot themselves in the foot when they took in the Turbo for repair and came up with those ridiculously incredible  figures for a triple vac parallel machine ...
And removing half the gasket seal  from the turbos motor ?  they would know well the air seal would be compromised by doing that ..  or would be incompetent beyond belief  ..

I think one of the lessons is ...   there is not one example of a machine exceeding what is possible using motor manufactures provided test data .
And any machine manufacturer that quotes performance figures exceeding those will be eventually exposed and have their credibility compromised .