I think there's some imprecision in language going on here.

Yes, that page claims that the system efficiency of current state-of-the-art electrostatic coating booths is 95%, through a combination of electrostatic attraction and paint recovery equipment.

I think Toyota is saying that 95% of the paint ends up on the piece on the first pass.

But just to make things extra confusing, the source material for the Wikipedia page already has a section on rotary nozzles:

> Rotary atomizers are one of the possible methods of atomization used with electrostatic coating processes. Instead of air or fluid pressure, rotary atomizers use centrifugal force to atomize coating material. As a general rule of thumb, the faster the rotational speed, the greater the centrifugal force and the finer the atomization.

So I still have no idea what it is they're claiming.

Seems novel in that they are combining the best of current rotary atomizers and electrostatic guns, and removing the need for compressed air.

If you look at current electrostatic guns, they mostly seem to use compressed air to atomize the paint. Rotary atomizers still use air to direct the paint to the surface.

So they get better transfer efficiency through electrostatics, and the rotary atomizer part probably allows them to use paints with lower VOCs further reducing emissions.

That said it does look like there already exists rotary atomizers that also use electrostatics. But also still use air.

https://www.graco.com/us/en/in-plant-manufacturing/solutions...

My dad worked for a company that manufactures electrostatic painting devices. They had high speed rotating atomizers in the 80s, possibly earlier. In the early 90s they started using air bearings, wherein the rotating parts are magnetically coupled with strong permanent magnets and separated by compressed air.