Half a croissant, on a plate, with a sign in front of it saying '50c'
h a l f b a k e r y
We got your practicality ... right here.

idea: add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random

meta: news, help, about, links, report a problem

account: browse anonymously, or get an account and write.

user:
pass:
register,


                                       

A Vibrating Hanger Gathers No Moths

  (+5, -3)
(+5, -3)
  [vote for,
against]

No one uses mothballs anymore, but moths are persistent buggers and not easily deterred. The solution is of course to be found in the use of my new vibrating coat hangers, appropriately named A Vibrating Hanger Gathers No Moths.

These are simple enough hangers, apart from the interjection of a vibrating device placed between the lower part, from where the clothes hang, and the upper suspension hook. This device plugs into a separate power unit via a flexible lead, meaning that several vibrating hangers can be attached like an array and driven simultaneously using a single supply.

Once you place your precious coat on the hanger, and press the optional remote control, the hanger begins vibrating up and down vigorously, meaning that no moths can settle anywhere on the surface of the suspended garment.

Can also be used in stand alone mode when placed above a suitable trough to shake water off wet raincoats.

xenzag, Aug 08 2013

Prior Art Wrinkle-Release_20Hanger
[21 Quest, Aug 08 2013]

http://www.youtube....outube_gdata_player Shaking all over.... ///////// [xenzag, Aug 09 2013]

[link]






       However, the Rolling Stones these days seem to be gathering plenty of moss. Have you seen Mick Jagger lately?
RayfordSteele, Aug 08 2013
  

       Ha - he could always gather Kate Moss.
xenzag, Aug 08 2013
  

       I guess so [21 Quest], but will retain with your kind permission as a type of stand alone annotation. My search for Moths, Vibrations and Coathanger revealed no matches.
xenzag, Aug 08 2013
  

       Would it not be more efficient to vibrate the pole on which the clothes hangers hang?
MaxwellBuchanan, Aug 08 2013
  

       Too restrictive, and not enough individual control possibilities ie a light garment may require less vibration than a heavy overcoat.
xenzag, Aug 08 2013
  

       At the risk of disagreeing, I disagree. The amplitude and frequency of vibration necessary to discourage a moth should be independent of the weight of the garment.   

       If you disagree with my disagreement, I will require some substantiating evidence.
MaxwellBuchanan, Aug 08 2013
  

       Your call, Xen. It's in the same category with only 9 others to get lost amongst, but I leave the decision in your honorable hands.
21 Quest, Aug 08 2013
  

       21 - I'm leaving this idea intact, with the full acknowledgement that there was a prior dated submission as listed. I'm doing this because my own idea is entirely based on a set of drawings I made in one of my notebooks many years ago, prior to even having heard of HB, and because of its entirely different purpose. If anyone thinks this is unfair, for whatever reason, I'll delete it and transfer it in the form of an annotation to 21's idea.
xenzag, Aug 09 2013
  

       Max - I disagree. Ha. I would, wouldn't I? Imagine if you will, someone clinging unto a heavily textured wall, and someone clinging unto one that was much smoother. Which one will require the greater amount of vibration to shake them off?
xenzag, Aug 09 2013
  

       Hide and Seek is no challenge any more. The girls always pick the closet.
Grogster, Aug 09 2013
  

       I think you'd find that the natural frequency of the clothing will vary a great deal, and so the weight, material, and shape of the garment would be important variables.   

       Or, you could always blow a fan in the closet.
RayfordSteele, Aug 09 2013
  

       //always blow a fan in the closet// I prefer my fans to blow me.
xenzag, Aug 09 2013
  

       //The girls always pick the closet// - They'll prefer it even more if they know there's a row of vibrating coat hangers and a remote control just waiting in there.
xenzag, Aug 09 2013
  

       //Max - I disagree.// That's fine, I never mind people disagreeing as long as they realize they're wrong. What is required, shirley, is not so much the displacement of the moth (which does no harm), but sufficient vibration to prevent its mating and laying eggs on your clothing.
MaxwellBuchanan, Aug 09 2013
  

       Ah - but they have to land and remain in position in order to do that. Victory is mine!
xenzag, Aug 09 2013
  

       You may be unaware of the fact that the male clothes moth, in order to attract a mate, sits and vibrates its wings to produce a sort of infrasonic buzz. It is thusfore entirely possible that a male moth sitting idly on one of your vibrated garments might find himself converged upon by female moths from miles around, attracted by the phenomenal flutter. And, given that one male clothes moth is capable of fertilizing at least 700 females, this could end badly.
MaxwellBuchanan, Aug 09 2013
  

       But given the pheromone dispersal is artificial, he might not be in the mood. That just leaves 700 hungry females near your suit.   

       Personally I think [xenzag] has spent far too long in the closet. He claims it was just researching this idea, but I think we know better.
bigsleep, Aug 09 2013
  
      
[annotate]
  


 

back: main index

business  computer  culture  fashion  food  halfbakery  home  other  product  public  science  sport  vehicle