Miscellaneous desk
< November 30	<< Nov \| December \| Jan >>	December 2 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Miscellaneous Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

December 1[edit]

The 17 mm lens mount for smartphones[edit]

Most, if not all, smartphone lens are using a 17 mm thread clip-on lens mount. At least several Aliexpress pages call them 17 mm lens. Do they have an official name? Can I get more information about it? I want to use them on my Raspberry Pi camera module v.2.1 or v.1.3. -- Toytoy (talk) 11:01, 1 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

bagless vacuum cleaners[edit]

Why are almost all vacuum cleaners bagless now? That means you have to dump out the canister, getting all kinds of possibly toxic dust into the air, instead of throwing away a bag full of the collected sweepings. I have to clean out some nasty stuff and using a shop vac seems like a bad idea for this reason. Suggestions? I do have an NSF dust mask and will use it. Blecch. Thanks. 67.164.113.165 (talk) 23:06, 1 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I would suggest that as most vacuum cleaners are used in the home the residue collected is not toxic and is convenient to collect with a bagless machine. If you are collecting "some pretty nasty stuff" then a bag is a sensible option. To answer your question there are at least three specialist companies in various parts of California that sell cleaners with bags, as I discovered with Google. Richard Avery (talk) 08:47, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

From Vacuum cleaner: "In fixed-installation central vacuum cleaners, the cleaned air may be exhausted directly outside without need for further filtration. A well-designed cyclonic filtration system loses suction power due to airflow restriction only when the collection vessel is almost full. This is in marked contrast to filter bag systems, which lose suction when pores in the filter become clogged as dirt and dust are collected." If - as Richard Avery suggests - most people aren't dealing with toxic materials, the I guess that not losing suction until the cylinder is almost full is a big advantage with relatively small disadvantages. Iapetus (talk) 10:13, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know how things are where you live (California, according to your IP), but I just checked the top 40 vacuum cleaners on the website of a retailer here in Europe. Half the models still have a bag. The main advantage of bagless designs seems to be that they don't turn obsolete within five years as they stop selling a fitting bag. The disadvantage of bagless designs seems to be that they make more noise and consume more energy. I think that some European rules concerning energy use by vacuum cleaners put a brake on the proliferation of bagless vacuum cleaners in Europe. But that's all from looking at the specs of about 10 random models, which may be misleading.

The dust you get from vacuum cleaning your home isn't really toxic. It's the same dust you breath every day, just in a higher concentration, but only for a few seconds per month. PiusImpavidus (talk) 10:46, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Turn obsolete within 5 years" is a bit much. I can still get bags for a 1960s Hoover Constellation (the spherical hovercraft), but Dyson, who have made such a feature of being bagless, are churning models very rapidly and often have parts sourcing problems, including the essential filters for them. Most bags are a very simple design of a cardboard plate and a generic paper bag, so they're easily supported by third party sources. Even if the model is obscure, it's not hard to either find something which fits, or which can be trimmed to fit.

Dyson's perennial claim for their cyclone machines is that they don't lose suction power as the bag fills and filtration clogs.

Personally I wish Dyson would change their plastics. I don't particularly need a transparent dust catcher (you want to watch that?) but I'd like one that was more conductive, so that it didn't have a surface charge to attract dust all over the outside whenever I empty it. My bags I can just empty, but the Dyson needs to be washed and dried (a coat of sprayed Aquadag helped fix that).

Also that dust may be toxic. If you have a dust allergy, you may be vacuuming frequently to reduce this and you really want to limit your exposure to it. If you bother to have a HEPA filter on the machine, presumably you also care about the emptying? Andy Dingley (talk) 12:44, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The OP mentioned shop vacuums (sometimes called wet/dry vacuums) implying that they are bagless. Not true. I am a licensed contractor in California and use Ridgid brand shop vacuums in my business, and they accept dust bags, which I always use for dry vacuuming. This brand is sold at Home Depot, they are quite reasonably priced, and have a very long life. In my business, I operate my vacuum cleaners much more heavily than in any normal household application. The suction is normal until the dust bag is almost full. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 21:14, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I've never seen a wet vacuum with bags (although some are convertible to use either). Don't the bags get wet? Workshop vacuums in the UK/ Europe are nearly all bagless: short squat drums with motors in the lid and a drum-shaped filter below that. The only ones which regularly use bags are for asbestos, and that's to simplify disposal. Andy Dingley (talk) 12:57, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Andy Dingley, I am unfamiliar with vacuums sold in Europe and the UK, but I am very familiar with the Ridgid vacuums sold in over 2,200 Home Depot stores throughout the United States, Canada and Mexico. Many of their wet/dry vacuums accept dust bags for use when vacuuming dry things. No, the bags do not get wet if the operator has common sense. When you want to vaccum liquids, you open up the vacuum and remove the dust bag, and set it aside. When you are done vacuuming liquids, you pour out the liquid, wipe the tank dry, and reinstall the dust bag. Easy, peasy, as Jamie Oliver says. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:33, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks, the specific nasty stuff I have to clean up is rat poop which I think is supposed to be treated as hazmat. Thanks for the info that some shop vacs use bags. I was looking at the small portable wet/dry vacs from Milwaukee, DeWalt, and Ryobi (all on special at home depot this weekend) and they are all bagless. It seems weird because they are sold to tradies and construction workers who deal with all kinds of fine particulates which don't seem nice.

I haven't really noticed problems getting bags or belts for old vacuum cleaners like my mom's old Dirt Devil, and as Andy mentions, filters can be a bigger problem than bags.

FWIW There is a good video review (BOLTR/AvE if that means anything to you) of a Dyson cordless handheld vac here and a brilliant one of their $500 CDN hair dryer here. Warning, both reviews are NSFW due to language and innuendo. 67.164.113.165 (talk) 22:06, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Btw does anyone think this looks like a cyclonic machine, and should I care? I kind of want a small vac like that. There is also a Ryobi one (box shaped like a mini shop vac) on sale whose filter is non-HEPA and I don't know if that makes a difference either. Both are bagless and I don't think I'd want to use them on rat poop though. 67.164.113.165 (talk) 22:11, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]