Consumer Council: Energy Efficiency of 12 Air Circulator Fans Vary by Over 60%

4 Samples Scored Highest with a Total Rating of 4.5 Points

Four samples received a rating of 4.5 points, while the most expensive one received 4 points. Consumers are reminded to compare before purchasing. (Produced by The Epoch Times)

The Hong Kong Consumer Council tested 12 air circulator fans, with a full score of 5 points. Four samples received a rating of 4.5 points, while the other eight failed some safety test items, including two whose component flame retardancy did not meet standards. The Electrical and Mechanical Services Department (EMSD) announced yesterday that suppliers have decided to arrange product recalls to replace parts. The test also found that the air volume between different fans can vary by more than 50 percent, and energy efficiency can vary by up to 67 percent.

Four samples received a rating of 4.5 points in the Consumer Council's 12 air circulator fans test. (Sung Pi-Lung/The Epoch Times)

The price range of these 12 air circulator fans is between HK$398 (US$50.9) and HK$1,149 (US$147), with eight models having larger fan diameters ranging from 18 to 21 cm and the remaining four ranging from 14 to 16 cm. Four samples received a rating of 4.5 points, while the most expensive one received only four points. Consumers are reminded to compare prices when purchasing.

Among the four air circulator fans with the highest total ratings, three only had shortcomings in their labeling instructions, namely “German Zoller Summe” (model: CF-S85RD), “Mi Home” (model: ZLXHS01ZM), and “Rasonic” (model: RCF-8YE). These three models are fans with large fan blades, with “Mi Home” being the cheapest at HK$459 (US$58.7).

Another sample that scored highest with a total rating of 4.5 points and passed all tests is “Origo” (model: CF1515). However, its fan diameter is smaller at 15 cm, and it is the most expensive among the four samples with the highest total ratings, priced at HK$798 (US$102).

The 12 air circulator fans include eight with larger fan diameters and four with smaller ones. (Courtesy of the Consumer Council)

Eight Samples Failed Some Safety Tests, Two are Being Recalled

The Consumer Council found that the insulation distances of four samples needed to be increased. Some sample instructions indicated that the fan cover or blades could be removed for cleaning. The Consumer Council reminds consumers to ensure the power plug has been unplugged before removing the fan cover or blades for safety.

In mechanical safety tests, one sample’s simulated child finger was caught between the fan head and base gap when it swung up and down. The force exerted on the finger was 16 Newtons (6.3 pounds force), exceeding the upper limit of standards, meaning that children may be at risk of injury if their fingers accidentally get caught in the gap.

A staff of the Consumer Council demonstrated how one sample might pinch fingers. (Sung Pi-Lung/The Epoch Times)

In addition, two air circulator fan samples, branded “SANSHIN” and “imarflex,” did not meet standard requirements for material flame retardancy, while their parts failed the needle-flame test. The EMSD announced on June 15 that suppliers had arranged recalls for affected products to replace parts.

Another sample’s motor winding temperature rose 93.1 Kelvin (636 Fahrenheit) when operated at a higher voltage, exceeding the upper limit (90 Kelvin) by 3.1 Kelvin.

Eight samples failed some safety tests. (Produced by The Epoch Times)

Differences in Maximum and Minimum Airflow Can Reach 52%.

The Consumer Council also tested the 12 models for airflow. The “Rasonic” model reached 21.2 cubic meters per minute, and the lowest was only 10.1 cubic meters per minute, a difference of 52 percent. The Consumer Council also pointed out that the larger the fan blades, the higher the airflow.

Regarding energy efficiency, the 12 samples produced airflows ranging from 0.4 to 1.2 cubic meters per minute per watt, with a maximum difference of up to 67 percent. The two most energy-efficient models are “Mi” and “Origo.” the Consumer Council stated that five samples using dc motors were more energy-efficient than seven samples using traditional ac motors.

Maximum and minimum airflow can reach 52%, and energy efficiency can differ by up to 67%. (Courtesy of the Consumer Council)

‘Summe’ is the Quietest

When using electrical appliances, noise is always a major concern. The Consumer Council found that the quietest model was the “Summe,” with low noise levels measured regardless of whether it was set at its lowest fan speed, automatic oscillation function, or its highest fan speed and automatic oscillation function.

Two models produced higher noise levels during operation, receiving only a score of three for the quietness level rating.

The consumer council offered several tips for using fans, including not allowing plastic fan casings to be exposed to sunlight for extended periods to prevent them from becoming fragile or aging, placing fans on stable surfaces that are not easily tripped over, and leaving space for fans to oscillate and dissipate heat; and using fans with preset start timer function in conjunction with air conditioners’ time shut-off function to save electricity.