Abstract

The Dyson Hot is a commercial air heater that became available during autumn 2011. Dyson claims that it is a very efficient heater which excels beyond the more conventional heater by quickly and evenly heating a room. Being many times more expensive than most of the other heaters on the market it was of interest to scientifically quantify the claims by Dyson. The aim of this experiment has been to assess the performance of the Dyson Hot by comparing it to a standard heating oven. Although this has not done in a professional test lab, great care has been given to make sure the measurements were as accurate as possible.

Instrumental Setup

The two heaters, the Dyson hot and the conventional heater, were placed at a distance of 3.04 meters (10 ft) away from a temperature module based on the DS18B20 (info). The temperature module was suspended in the air so that it was not affected by the material it would have otherwise been lying on. The power consumption was measured using a energy meter. The relative humidity in the room was controlled by a Duracraft Dehumidifier. The uncertainty of the power consumption is only an estimate from watching the readings change with time.

 

Heater Power consumption
Conventional Heater 2125 ± 12 W
Dyson Hot 1951 ± 3 W

Data Acquisition

The data was sampled at a frequency of once per minute. Prior to recording the data the room temperature was measured to be stable within 0.5 °C. The error of the temperature module is given to be ± 0.5 °C by the manufacturer. The measurements were both started at 15.0 ± 0.5 °C and stopped after 90 minutes.

Results

Temperature curves between the conventional heater and the Dyson Hot, both rotating and non-rotating. The Dyson Hot, regardless of mode, is more efficient at heating a room.

The conventional heater

The conventional heater started heating the room at 15.0 ± 0.5 °C with a relative humidity of 73 ± 5 % as measured by the TFA humidty meter. 90 minutes later the room had reached 19.63 ± 0.5 °C with a relative humidity of 66 ± 5 %.

The Dyson Hot (without rotation)

The Dyson Hot started heating the room at 14.75 ± 0.5 °C with a relative humidity of 73 ± 5 % as measured by the WH2080 Weather Station. 90 minutes later the room had reached 21.50 ± 0.5 °C with a relative humidity similar to the conventional heater.

The Dyson Hot (with rotation)

The Dyson Hot started heating the room at 14.88 ± 0.5 °C with a relative humidity of 72 ± 5 % as measured by the WH2080 Weather Station. 90 minutes later the room had reached 20.56 ± 0.5 °C with a relative humidity similar to the conventional heater.

Discussion

It is clear from the results that the Dyson Hot is indeed more efficient at heating a room. Not only was the room warmer after 90 minutes, but the Dyson Hot had also used less electricity. After 90 minutes the conventional heater had used 3.188 kWh whilst the Dyson Hot used in the same time 2.927 kWh, a difference of 0.262 kWh. Initial tests showed that a similar relative humidity was required for an accurate comparison. The Dyson Hot also seemed to push the hot air around more efficiently as shown in the figure below. We are not able to quantify just how much more efficient the Dyson Hot is at distributing heat as the heaters were placed at a fixed distance during all the measurements. Neither the Dyson Hot or the conventional heater gave off a burnt dust smell. The major downside of the Dyson Hot is the price. Assuming a conventional heater costs about £ 12 the Dyson Hot currently priced at £ 269.99 is then 22.5 times more expensive. One might thus argue that it is more convenient to use two or more conventional heaters to warm several rooms instead of having to move the Dyson Hot around from room to room.

A figure from the Dyson website showing the distribution of heat between a conventional heater and the Dyson Hot.

Conclusion

The Dyson Hot is without doubt more energy efficient and thus more cost effective. It is also better at heating a room, both in terms of speed and heat distribution. The major setback is the price. If you decide to get the Dyson Hot and you liked this scientific review please buy from the link below: