View allAll Photos Tagged Cleaner
The rug character has "MAKE YOUR RUG HAPPY / CLEAN IT!" written below where I cropped this, just so you know
We had the opportunity to visit Houtan Park in Shanghai, a "regenerative living landscape" designed by the firm Turenscape. Water from the heavily polluted Wuangpu River is pumped through a series of landscape features and filters: cleaned naturally by the plants and organisms living in the park. The park is open to the public, and the design is beautiful on its own with carefully selected swaths of grasses and trees bordering a series of ponds. Boardwalks wind their way over and along the waterways, preventing access to the dirtier areas, and gradually allowing contact at the end when the water has reached a satisfactory level of purification.
Are you thinking of buying a vibrator rabbit for a pet? Looking to enhance your daily satisfaction in life? Yes, we have partially lost our mind, but until your have had a rabbit that you love, you just can't understand what we feel!
Here is a great online store to...
This is actually a thing, it seems. Big cars with giant vacuum cleaner machines that power long hooses, which in turn can vacuum flat roofs. There were three people total up on that roof, and they were very busy cleaning lots of dirt and water.
I had seen a report on these things in German TV before, but didn't expect to encounter one in action...
The marketplace has numerous options for vacuum cleaners, each with a plethora of options in features.
A lot of individuals purchase the very first vacuum that looks midway good since they do not like vacuum cleaner shopping and wish to invest their cash on things that appear more exciting. There are different types of vacuums in the market, and each of them has its advantages and disadvantages. The top place to start is by learning more about the various standard designs of areas that are out there, so I've included a short introduction to each in the paragraphs below.
Upright Vacuums
Many businesses that sell upright vacuum cleaners provide very similar accessories and claim the same advantages. Upright vacuum cleaners were regularly having a motor, bag, as well as a hose & beater in a single system. Carpeted floorings, as well as wood floorings, can be cleaned well by the usage of an upright vacuum cleaner, particularly if the appliance has different height settings.
Bagless Vacuums
The benefit of a bagless vacuum cleaner is that you can see what has been picked up and are less likely to forget to empty the collection cup. If not Some vacuum cleaners require that you tidy or replace their filters regularly. Leaving the dirt cup itself could be an untidy procedure based upon your vacuum cleaner.
Canister Vacuums
A Canister vacuum cleaner and some upright ones deposit dust and debris into a container rather than a vacuum bag. These hard bag vacuum cleaners, which likewise known as bagless vacuum cleaners, customarily consist of HEPA filters that much better get rid of dirt particles, dust, pollen, and dander from the air passing through the vacuum cleaner and make an ideal choice for homes with allergic reaction victims.
Stick Vacuums
Those who face difficulty in maneuvering a full-sized vacuum and for those who reside in lofts with tough surfaces, Stick vacuum is the besthe t option. Beaters and rollers are left out from stick vacuum, which is otherwise similar to upright models. Vacuum cleaner like the Eureka broom vacuum cleaners and dirt devil broom vacuum perform well on the wood floor covering, furnishings, curtains, hard-to-reach places, and in tight areas. A number of the more compact "stick" vacuums use a removable cup instead of a bag to hold what's being pulled off the floor. The smaller sized motors furthermore don't need as much energy as their bigger counterparts in the vacuum arena, and many systems are cordless.
Handheld Vacuum Cleaners
A handheld vacuum could be taken out to rapidly dispose of a small mess. Lots of people delight in the benefit of portable space for smaller sized messes. Handheld vacuum cleaners have the majority of the same features.
Robotic Cleaners
A robotic vacuum is the latest pattern utilized for the vacuum cleaning procedure. They conserve a long time, inconvenience as well as some work. Robotic vacuums have integrated into dirt sensors that assist direct their movement. The heads on the robotic vacuum are adjustable for the various heights of carpet and wood floors. Most of them are offered with side brushes for washing the edges of the room and around furniture. The majority of vacuum cleaners have a bagless system, and there the clearing out the collection location is secure.
Roombas and other self-guided vacuums may appear like appealing options because they seem to require little work on your part. However, there are some issues that you ought to think about in the past purchasing one. These vacuums are a mixed bag, so to speak because they are not very comprehensive at cleaning. Some of them also tended to close doors behind them, having themselves secured a space.
Central Installed Vacuums
Instead of hauling the motor and cleansing bag around behind you, check out adding a centralized vacuum, like an Imperium central vacuum, Kenmore o, r a Beam centralized cleansing system.
The central vacuum system has pipelines in the walls which get linked to a hard motor in some area like the garage or the closet. Whenever you want to clean any space, attach a vacuum tube to one out of the 3 or 4 inlets set apart all over your home and allow the ducts to collect the filth and trash in the motor and sack. The procedure is so quiet, considering that the engine is not near but remains in a remote location.
You may be lured to purchase a central vacuum. However, you should know that they cost way more than a cylinder or upright vacuum, and you may have to employ someone to install it also. The main benefit is that they are much easier to utilize than a cylinder. You need to bring the tube and powerhead, and there is no vacuum body that you need to pull along. While quiet in contrast, central vacuums require less emptying.
Carpet Steamers and Shampooers
Steam vacuums, such as Hoover and Bissell carpet steamers, make use of hot water and soap to deep-clean carpets. Carpet cleaners feature a tank that holds water, soap a, and dirt, but beyond that, they look a lot like vacuum cleaners. The carrying manages to make it easy to move and empty. Carpet steamers have multiple revolving heads instead of beaters, that upset the dirt out of the carpet and make the cleansing option gets deeper into the nap. The suction of a vacuum cleaner is what gets dust from your carpeting. Some carpet cleaners have a spray to focus on the dirtiest of areas. If your carpet is filthy and appears like it has a greasy residue on it, a vacuum cleaner might not suffice to make your carpet appearance respectable once again, so you ought to consider a carpet shampooer. After the shampoo has dried, the rug can be vacuumed. If you utilize a carpet cleaner you, carpets will be far cleaner than if you just vacuumed them.
By contrast this bus, which by its registration is older than the Gross Polluter, is CNG powered and wasn't emitting any smoke at all.
Sign for the Hand Craft cleaners. Because of the weird spacing around the pipes, I always thought it was Hand C Raft cleaners.
Not strictly a Finsec event, but here's a few photos of the Service and Food Workers' Union Nga Ringa Tota rally in Wellington on International Cleaners Day.
The 'Fair Deal for Cleaners' campaign that this rally is part of aims to provide a voice to the low-waged largely immigrant female workforce, in cities across Australia and New Zealand, who are calling on big property owners to support decency in their workplaces.
Country: South Korea
Designer: Gyu Ha Choi
School: Handong Global University
The Robo TAP is a smart evolution of the robotic vacuum cleaner used to target an exact area for cleaning. An IPS system aligned with a simple remote control is attached to the shoe or slipper of the user. Two taps on a dirty spot directs the Robo TAP to the precise area for cleaning. Two more taps will cancel the order and three taps returns the vacuum cleaner to its automatic programme. It’s as fun as tap dancing, but much easier.
A new bathroom in our house was being done. I'm pretty sure this is a vacuum cleaner, forgive me if I'm wrong.
Photographed using the Canon Sure Shot 60 Zoom, and Kodak Ultramax 400 film.
Kenting, Taiwan -- A cleaner shrimp is cleaning the mouth of a spotnape cardinalfish.
I love this shot! This is one of the tiny everyday spectacles nature has to offer.
This cleaner shrimp hangs out at a cleaning station, to which the fish come to have their mouths and dentures cleaned. Think dentists clinic under water!
The fish perform a certain motion to indicate that they need cleaning and patiently queue up for the 'dentist' to do its job.
Even big fearsome predators like moray eel often live in symbiosis with cleaner shrimps, which perform a valuable service for the health of their 'patients'.
© Thomas Koenig
+++ DISCLAIMER +++
Nothing you see here is real, even though the conversion or the presented background story might be based on historical facts. BEWARE!
Some background:
The Folland 150 was directly inspired by the (modest) successes experienced by the Saro SR./A.1, a jet-powered flying boat fighter that went through trials in the late 1940ies.
The project had been kicked-off in the end phase of the 2nd World War, when the Imperial Japanese Navy with seaplane fighters such as the Nakajima A6M2-N (an adaptation of the Mitsubishi Zero) and the Kawanishi N1K demonstrated the effectiveness of a fighter seaplane.
In theory, seaplanes were ideally suited to conditions in the Pacific theatre, and could turn any relatively calm area of coast into an airbase. Their main disadvantage came from the way in which the bulk of their floatation gear penalized their performance compared to other fighters.
The new jet engines offered more power and aerodynamically cleaner designs, and the Saro SR./A.1 proved the soundness of the concept. But while the Saro SR./A.1 proved to have good performance and handling, the need for such aircraft had completely evaporated with the end of the war. Furthermore, the success of the aircraft carrier in the Pacific had demonstrated a far more effective way to project airpower over the oceans. The project was suspended and the prototype put into storage in 1950, but it was briefly resurrected in November 1950 owing to the outbreak of the Korean War, before realization of its obsolescence compared with land-based fighters, the prototype last flying in June 1951.
Anyway, this was not the end of the jet-powered flying boat fighter. After the Korean War, Saunders-Roe came up with a design called the "Saunders Roe Hydroski" (reminiscent of the Convair F2Y Sea Dart) to improve the performance closer to land-based aircraft but "received no official support". Other ship-based fighter concepts were developed and proposed, too. In the early Fifties, Folland made several proposals based on its newly developed light fighter, which would evolve into the Gnat.
The Gnat was the creation of WEW "Teddy" Petter, a British aircraft designer formerly of Westland Aircraft and English Electric. It was designed to meet the 1952 Operational Requirement OR.303 calling for a lightweight fighter. Petter believed that a small, simple fighter would offer the advantages of low purchase and operational costs. New lightweight turbojet engines that were being developed enabled the concept to take shape.
In 1951, using company funds, he began work on his lightweight fighter concept, which was designated the "Fo-141 Gnat". The Gnat was to be powered by a Bristol BE-22 Saturn turbojet with 3,800 lbf (16.9 kN 1,724 kgp) thrust. However, the Saturn was cancelled, and so Petter's unarmed proof-of-concept demonstrator for the Gnat was powered by the less powerful Armstrong Siddeley Viper 101 with 1,640 lbf (7.3 kN / 744 kgp) thrust. The demonstrator was designated Fo-139 "Midge".
From this land-based basis, several navalized variants for the use on board of smaller ships were deducted and taken to the hardware stage. The Gnat's selling point was its very small size and low weight, so that it would be easy to handle, operate and stow, even if it was no dedicated carrier.
One development direction focused on rocket-assisted ZELL (Zero-Length-Launch) and conventional landing on land-based airstrips, while another direction reverted to the idea of a light jet-powered flying boat conversion for reconnaissance and (daylight) interception and attack duties.
Both were taken to the hardware stage as private ventures (even though supported by the MoD since both concepts were regarded as fundamental research), and the flying boat project took shape under the handle Folland Fo-150, internally referred to “Project Volans”.
The Fo-150 had only rudimentary similarity with the land-based aircraft, though. Beyond the addition of a hydrodynamic, lower hull, the fuselage was stretched between the cockpit and the wings, for a better CoG distribution. The wing area was increased considerably in order to compensate for the higher all-up weight, improve handling and lower landing speed. The horizontal stabilizers were moved away from the original low position, higher onto a new cruciform tail, in order to keep these surfaces away from spray. The fin itself was slightly enlarged, too.
Power came from a modified Bristol Siddeley Viper turbojet, rated at 3,100 lbf (14 kN). In order to protect the engine from water ingestion the air intakes were extended forward under the cockpit canopy and featured spray dams. Balance in the water was achieved through semi-retractable stabilizer floats. These could be folded backwards under the wings, behind bullet-shaped fairings at about half the wing span that also contained a pair of 30mm Aden cannons. Hardpoints above and under the wings allowed the carriage of light external weapons like unguided rocket pods, or, alternatively, test equipment and camera pods.
The first airframe for Project Volans was built in Folland's facility on the western side of the Hamble peninsula and later taken to the Solent in May 1955. On 14 June 1955, the aircraft inadvertently made its first short flight during a fast taxi run – the enlarged wing created a massive ground effect that easily lifted the light aircraft up into a glide when the nose raised through wakes to a certain degree. The Fo-150’s official maiden flight was on 9 July 1955.
The underpowered engine made the fighter sluggish, and the strong uplift close to the ground made handling complicated and created violent vibration during takeoff and landing. Work on the wings leading edge profile improved this situation somewhat, but they could not cure the sluggish performance.
Otherwise, handling turned out to be good, but the Fo-150 could never show its full potential due to the weak engine. A second airframe was finished until late 1955 and joined the flight tests from early 1956 on, while a third airframe was reserved for static tests.
Anyway, even before that, the Navy had been losing interest (problems with supersonic fighters on carrier decks having been overcome, and ship-based missiles filled the aerial defense role much more efficiently than aircraft). This relegated the Fo-150 and the whole Volans program to pure experimental status. As a consequence, the two airworthy airframes were de-militarized and the aircraft kept in service as testbeds for hydrodynamics, especially for the development of planing bottoms, hydrofoils and hull shapes for high speed ships.
In 1960, WS685 was also used for the development and tests of hydroskis, while its sister ship was retired and used for spares. This program lasted until 1963, and after that, the worn-out airframe was scrapped, too.
General characteristics:
Crew: 1
Length: 10.44 m (34 ft 5 in)
Wingspan: 8,71 m (28 ft 6 in)
Heigh (keel to fin tip)t: 3.74 m (12 ft 3 in)
Wing area: 19.00 m² (204.5 ft²)
Empty weight: 2,560 kg (5,644 lb)
Max. takeoff weight: 4,235 kg (9,336 lb)
Powerplant:
1× Bristol Siddeley Viper turbojet, rated at 3,100 lbf (14 kN)
Performance:
Maximum speed: 695 km/h (375 knots, 432 mph) at sea level
Cruise speed: 324 km/h (175 knots, 201 mph)
Stall speed: 145 km/h (92 knots, 106 mph) with flaps down
Endurance: 1 hour 45 min
Service ceiling: 30,000 ft (9,150 m)
Armament:
2× 30mm ADEN cannon with 80 RPG in underwing pods
Two overwing hardpoints for 500lb (227kg) each,
e.g. for SNEB rocket pods containing seven 68 mm rockets
or pods with 7.62 mm machine guns
Two underwing hardpoints for 500lb (227kg) each,
for bombs or a pair of 50-Imp Gal (226 litre) drop tanks
The kit and its assembly:
Another submission to the 2016 “In the Navy” Group Build at whatifmodelers.com, and actually the consequence of a spontaneous post/comment on another modeler’s project just called “Royal Navy Gnat”, when the means and degree of navalization were still shrouded in mystery. I suggested a flying boat, inspired by the real Saro SR./A.1 and the Gnat’s high-mounted wings, which make the aircraft – or at least a model of it – suitable for a conversion.
Well, since the other Gnat turned out to become a ZELL aircraft, and I had a Matchbox Gnat in the stash, I decided to take my weird alternative idea to the (model) hardware stage.
Even though it is not obvious, pretty much of the Matchbox Gnat was used for this build, but it is masked under lots of putty and donation parts. These include:
- The lower half of a Smer SC-1 Seahawk float – a bit wide, but perfect in length
- The SC-1 also donated its stabilizer floats
- Leftover parts from a vintage (35+ years!) Matchbox F-14’s stabilizers, used as wing extensions
- Air intakes from a Matchbox F-5A, mounted upside down
- Stabilizers from a Hobby Boss MiG-15
The build went pretty straightforward: after the fuselage was done the SC-1 float was trimmed down and glued under it. Putty conceals the seams, and I am actually surprised how good these parts that were surely never meant to be united went together.
The cockpit features only the front seat, the rear position was omitted. The clear canopy was cut into three pieces, and the rear part glued onto the fuselage and blended into the overall shape with putty.
I felt that the deeper fuselage necessitated bigger wings, and instead of mounting complete donation parts I decided to keep the OOB parts and their shape, but extend them slightly with plugs – these are leftover parts from F-14 stabilizers from former projects, their width, length and also the sweep angle were perfect. In order to keep the relative wing tip position, the wing roots had to be moved forward, so that they ended up close to the cockpit and the air intakes. Again, putty conceals the intersections and was used to blend everything into each other – and with the enlarged wings this converted Gnat reminds a bit of the Me 163 Komet rocket fighter? At least, as long as the stabilizers were not mounted yet.
These come from a MiG-15 – bigger than the OOB parts, which appeared just too small for the bigger wing surface and their new position: in order to keep them clear from spray and the waterline I moved them upwards, together with a bullet fairing into the fin, which was simply divided above the rudder. The resulting fin extension was an appreciated extra, and the new cruciform tail looks very retro.
Placing the original air intakes onto the fuselage I found them to be too susceptible to water ingestion, so I wanted to extend them forward. But instead of using the OOB parts and bridging gaps with styrene pieces and putty, I found an old pair of F-5A air intakes with relative long ducts in the spares box. They were of good shape and size for the conversion, I just mounted them upside down, so that the longer leading edge is now on the intakes’ lower end, looking like a spray protector. A pair of spray dams was added to the nose, too.
How to balance the aircraft while afloat caused some headaches. The initial plan had been to place the SC-1 stabilizer floats with their slender pylons close to the wing tips, but I found this to be a very draggy solution for a jet aircraft.
The solution came while wondering where to place some armament: I used the Gnat’s (shortened) OOB slipper tanks as integral gun pods and modified their rear end into fairings for a semi-retracting float installation. The respective struts were scratched from wire and styrene.
The beaching trolley was highjacked from a vintage Revell F-16 kit (the rather clumsy one that represents the prototypes and which comes with a separate jet engine, its dolly and a small tractor). It was slightly modified and lowered, paper tissue cushions hold the model in place.
Painting and markings:
Since the flying boat version of the tiny Gnat (even if is based on the bigger trainer version!) is already exotic enough I decided to keep the livery true to the post WWII Royal Navy style, with Extra Dark Sea Grey upper surface, Sky undersides and a high waterline. In this case, Humbrol 123 and 95 are the basic tones, later treated with a black ink wash, panel lines drawn with a pencil and some panel shading with Humbrol 79 and 23, respectively. The planning surfaces were in the first place painted/primed with acrylic aluminum, so that later the enamel paint cover could be chipped away, for a lightly worn look.
The cockpit interior was painted in very dark grey (Humbrol 32). Thankfully, no landing gear had to be built and painted, but instead the custom beaching trolley became trainer yellow.
The RN markings come from various sources, and finally the kit was sealed under a coat of semi-matt acrylic varnish.
A funny project, and despite the weird idea and combination of parts the result does not look bad at all – in fact, one could think that it is a design or prop from a 1960’s James Bond movie or a Gerry Anderson creation?