Fowler Associates Labs

We Challenge Wireless Wrist Strap Manufacturers!!!!!!
October 27, 2005

Send in yours for evaluation if you dare!

Go ahead, Make our Day!

If we are Wrong, we will put up an apology and a free advertisement for one year.

New reports of another wireless wrist strap being sold brings up a question from our readers: "Do they work?" The article listed below was published a few years ago when our labs evaluated one style of wireless wrist strap. We found no evidence that they do or ever could significantly reduce the charges on a person. This new one reports it works on the "Selglard" principle. To quote: "It operates "Selglard' electric halo principles, making body's static electricity to discharge through discharge box." Does anyone know what that is? A few prepositions in the statement might help us understand.

Most wireless wrist straps try to use passive ionization even if they do not recognize what they are stating. The problem with passive ionization is that it is distance and potential related. We have never seen a passive ionizer reduce a charged body below 1000 Volts in the best of conditions. The new strap even states that it is not for use in dry climates. We do not believe it is for use in any climates.

At the ESD Journal, we have developed a new more effective personnel neutralization system. It operates on the Fowler Halo Principle. Price for this device starts at $15 depending on head size. Note the stylishness of the device. It comes with an optional "pony tail" addition for higher efficiency at an additonal price.

We will soon have our version of the wireless wrist strap,which will sell for $5 and also comes with the high efficiency "pony tail" addition.

The following is an artice we published a few years ago. We stand by it now.

Evaluation of Wireless Wrist Straps
by: ESD Journal Lab

We have been asked many times over the past few years about the viability of wireless wrist straps. The following is our evaluation of one wireless wrist strap.

We used a wireless wrist strap that is advertised as:

"It operates using a combination of several physics phenomena like "Ion Neutralization, Skin Effect, Point Discharge and Corona Discharge Effect" combined with the principle of differential potential to collect and dissipate static electricity.

It is a combination of bio-industrial and electronic technologies.

In effect, the wireless wrist strap neutralizes over 80% of the static electricity on a human body and maintains the potential of a human body below 150V which is low enough to protect electronic components."

The following is a summary of our evaluation of the strap:

The wrist strap came with a conventional cord for use at the workbench. However, it is claimed to neutralize the static on a person without the cord attached "after 15 seconds."

• Our tests showed that the wrist strap when connected by it cord had a resistance from the wearer's hand to ground of 1.3 MegOhms.
  
  
• Our technician wore insulative shoes (> 10,000 MegOhms) and walked on an insulative floor.
  
  
• We charged the technician to 2,000 volts.
  
  
• When and he walked around with the uncorded wrist strap on, we saw a decay of the static charge to about 1,000 Volts in 90 seconds.
  
  
• When and he walked around without the wrist strap, we saw a decay of the static charge to about 1,000 Volts in 90 seconds.
  
  
• There was no difference in the time to decay to 1,000 with or without the wrist strap in place.
  
  
• With the wrist strap on the walking technician, his potential never went below 700 volts for over 3 minutes.

We dissected the wrist strap to see what inside would account for the claimed neutralization. We found only a 1 MegOhm resistor. This supports our findings that the wireless wrist strap no method for neutralizing a person not connected to ground by a conventional cord.

It is our opinion that no currently available methods or devices exist which will effectively ground a person without a tethered cord to ground or at least a large capacitance.

Sorry! Something that sounds too good to be true probably is.