(no title)
wakeforce | 1 year ago
However, reading the docs, they seem written more to discourage any kind of DIY attempt by saying things A, B or C are difficult, than actually explaining how to do them correctly. I'd love to contribute to the project, but it feels like it's not set-up to foster community contribution.
If I'm mistaken, I'd love to donate some of my time on this!
turtlebits|1 year ago
IMO, this feels like a more marketing project than anything open. ERVs are already very simple (a recovery core + blowers/fans). Commercial units last an extremely long time (some with 10 year warranties) and have comprehensive parts availability.
Also a long term window install is a bit janky and is likely to lose out on efficiency due to glass being a poor insulator.
NavinF|1 year ago
In the photos it seems to be a bunch of nested single-perimeter cylinders that are joined at a few points to maintain spacing. Easy enough to model, but I agree the documentation is horrible and there's no way to contribute.
Commercial units are not comparable because they're way more expensive despite being so simple
open_erv2|1 year ago
Aurornis|1 year ago
It looks like a fun project. I don’t want to discount what has been designed and built. It is confusing to start reading about the project and discover that it’s more of a business than a community project while simultaneously being unavailable for purchase. The person who built it commented on HN that they’re focused on a 3rd different fan project right now, which brings the future of this project into question.
It would be great if a community effort could fork this project and work on making it easier to DIY so the community could push it forward.
EDIT: After exploring the files I’m not sure I’d even call this open source. I either can’t find some key files or they’re deliberately excluded. True open source projects would also include the CAD source, not only .STLs so others could adapt and modify the source. I think the open angle on this project is more marketing than substance.
open_erv2|1 year ago
The most likely scenario for longer term is that people may submit minor patches or suggestions, which I roll into the hardware or firmware. In reality, hardware is not like software. You can't make changes easily. Some wizards may take it upon themselves to spruce up the firmware with fancy features and release something, which anyone is free to do. There would then be multiple compatible versions of the firmware, one which I curate for reliability with minimal features, and others which others can provide. Same as for 3d printer firmware.
zajio1am|1 year ago
outlog|1 year ago
I also have this DIY bookmarked: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wJB3dyHDa-8