What scheme does this remote use, optical, RF, acoustic? I would disable the remote, disable* the sensor that receives its signal, and see what happens. But my guess from this sparse information is that the unit is not well shielded from noise on the electrical lines. Some filtering of the feed power would be called for in that case. (Not something you would design yourself unless your doctorate is in electrical engineering.) However, suitable and economical devices are probably out there. Also, if electrical noise is the culprit, one has to wonder at your wiring, and whether the house-wide grounding/bonding approach is functional. * block or disconnect if you can get to it

I've just had a Zephyr Cyclone range hood installed in my new kitchen and have noticed something that concerns me and I'm wondering if other Cyclone owners could comment on whether or not they have a similar situation. The bulbs it came with, which are 40w, get very very very hot very quickly. One minute with them on high or low and you'd burn your hand if you put it within 1/2" of the bulb, which is exposed. It heats up the metal of the hood, too. It seems beyond what is normal, but I called Zephyr and they were vague about it, saying they didn't rate the heat level and that it is normal for lightbulbs to get warm! How do I know if this is safe or not? It is hot to the point that I'd never want it on in warm months. Thanks!

Here's the latest on our situation. I called Zephyr and they said technically the duct should be a minimum of 7". It isn't "extremely critical" (hesitation in service person's voice) "but it would be better all the way around if specs had been followed. If it were mine, I'd have them change it out." Talk with our contractor went well. He wants us to be happy so tomorrow morning they will change out the 6" duct for the 7" duct. Thank you all for you advice! If it hadn't have been for GW-ers I probably would have swallowed hard and agreed to the smaller duct. Then every time I used the hood I would wonder how much quieter etc it would have been if true specs had been followed. Whew ! Tonight's looking good thanks to you!

In this response, I am interpreting your term efficiency to mean plume capture and containment efficiency by the hood. Initially we shall assume that the flow rate at the hood in the presence of all pressure losses is adequate, and then revisit that issue. Establish a perimeter at the cooktop level that roughly represents the locus of all pan bases that might be used. For computational convenience, attempt to eyeball smooth this contour into an equivalent rectangular contour. (If you have access to a planimeter, or have a suitable drawing program, the area calculations can be performed more exactly without smoothing.) Draw this on a piece of paper to scale Multiply the height of the range hood by the tangent of 10 degrees. Extend the step 2 shape by this value on the sides and front. (Extend the back also if an island hood is being analyzed.) Draw this extended contour onto the paper over the initial contour. Now draw the hood aperture to scale over this expanded contour, with hood back fitted to contour back. Note that the aperture may be smaller than the external size of the hood, however, at the wall the hood aperture may be assumed to extend to the back of the hood exterior. Also, if cabinets are in use at the sides, the hood aperture (at the cabinets) may be effectively extended, but this depends on the cabinet base height vs. the expanding plume size at that height -- for part of the side capture. Calculate the fraction of the expanded contour that the hood aperture contour overlaps. This is a measure of the capture efficiency of the hood aperture being analyzed. Redo for the other aperture. The loss or gain in efficiency is the difference between these two measurements. For the listed hoods, the efficiency of the 20-inch unit should be less than that of the 24-inch unit, noting that it is the internal dimensions of the apertures that have to be used for analysis. Assumed above is that the effluent entering the hood aperture is contained by successfully moving past the baffles or mesh filter. For this to occur for the hottest plumes, the air velocity averaged over the hood aperture (ideally uniformly) should be about 90 ft/min. (A bit less can be tolerated for induction cooktops due to lack of a hot gas combustion plume mixing with the hot greasy pan plume and raising its temperature and velocity.) 90 ft/min is equivalent to 90 CFM per square foot of aperture. For a six square foot aperture, for example, the requirement for actual flow at full cooking heat is 90 x 6 = 540 CFM. Blowers only achieve their touted flow rate at zero static pressure; i.e., hanging in the air. With baffle or mesh pressure losses, duct losses, hood interior transition losses, losses in the MUA system, the pressure across the blower will not be zero. It may be a few tenths of an inch of water column. Without a careful analysis using a lot of guesswork, along with the fan curve of the blower, or otherwise performing a house experiment with each hood, it is not possible to know the achieved flow rate. Instead, it is probably safe to assume that a rated zero static pressure flow rate of 1.5X the required actual flow rate will achieve the required actual flow rate. In the case of the six square foot aperture example above, this takes us from 540 CFM required to around 810 CFM rated. Calculating the requirements for your two candidate hoods based on their interior apertures is left as an exercise for the student. kas