![]() |
|
|
We Challenge Wireless Wrist
Strap Manufacturers!!!!!! 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.
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.
The following is an artice we published a few years ago. We stand by it now. Evaluation
of Wireless Wrist Straps 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, 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."
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.
|