7/29/2019 Air Filtration Technology
1/38
Air Filtration,
ASHRAE 52.2 2007-B - App JFine vs. course fiber
How filters are testedEnergy Impact
LCC
John German
April 20, 2012
7/29/2019 Air Filtration Technology
2/38
Respirable ParticlesAre those that penetrate in to andare deposited in the non-ciliatedport ion of the lung. Particles largerthan 10 microns aerodynamicallyare not respirable.
ASHRAE 62-2004
Urban Environment200,000 to over 2 million particles
Typical Offices100,000 to over 1 million
Hospital Surgery Room50,000 to 500,000
Semiconductor Cleanroom
10 to 100
State of the Art Cleanroom0.1 to 1
Dr. Ken Goldstein, Lockwood Greene
7/29/2019 Air Filtration Technology
3/38
Why we filter the Air Fine Particlesan underestimated health risk
Ultra-, Nano- or Fine- Particles: Clear connection between fine particles and health effects
(mortality and respiratory problems)
Underestimated risk (long term studies)
WHO No harmless concentration limit JAMA Vol 287 # 9, March 6, 2002
Provides the strongest evidence to date that long-termexposure to fine particulate air pollution common to manymetropolitan areas is an important risk factor for
cardiopulmonary mortality. Official requirements under review
Europe and U.S.A.
PM10 to PM2.5
7/29/2019 Air Filtration Technology
4/38
Particles In Outdoor Air
> 99 % of the number < 1 m70 % of weight comes from >1 m
Clean Air Dirty Air
(magnification 5,000x)
7/29/2019 Air Filtration Technology
5/38
wet laid mediaat 500X magnification
M 11 ASHRAE
M14 ASHRAE
HEPA 99.97%
ULPA 99.999
7/29/2019 Air Filtration Technology
6/38
Is Fiber Size an Issue?
6Glass Fibers Fine Fibers Synthetic coarse fibers
MV 13 glass media MV 13 synthetic media
7/29/2019 Air Filtration Technology
7/38
particle clusters
What is a filter used filter (SEM slide)
Fine fibers catch all
Large fibers
Support structure
They do little for efficiency
Small particles Grow into large
Coagulation in the air
7/29/2019 Air Filtration Technology
8/38
In-Situ Testing per ASHRAE Guideline 26-2008
Measurements
Air Velocity
Temperature/RH
Resistance to Airflow
Filter Efficiency
Particle Counting
Consistent Repeatable Setup,eliminates questions
Calibrated Met-One 237B
6 Channel laser counter
0.3m-3.0m
2,000,000c/ft3coincidence
Upstream Verification
10:1 Dilution system it needed
7/29/2019 Air Filtration Technology
9/38
9
CAMFILFARR2012-05-14
7/29/2019 Air Filtration Technology
10/38
Field Study Data Large office buildingMERV 14 Filters
* 16 week /52 week
Tested AHU next to test AHUs
common intake
12 months in use
Office Building 16 Weeks
35 Filters
(100% Outdoor
air)
Manufacturer
Type 4V Syn Box
Media fine coarse
Initial performanceP (inWG) 0.15 0.20
0.4m Eff. (%) 73 72
Final performance
P (inWG) 0.17 0.41
0.4m Eff. (%) 74 25/19*
7/29/2019 Air Filtration Technology
11/38
MERV 14 Filter
1,500,000Particles/ft3
420,000
Particles/ft3
Penetration
72% @ 0.3
Outside Air
72% @ 0.3
25% @ 0.3
1,125,000
Particles/ft3
Coarse Fiber Media
Fine Fiber Media
7/29/2019 Air Filtration Technology
12/38
What is MERV?
MMinimum
EEfficiency
RReporting
VValue
This standard establishes a
test procedure for evaluating
the performance of air-
cleaning devices as afunction of particle size.
MERV is a single number value for theengineering community by which to
select an air filter. It indicates how a
filter performs at its lowest point of
particle capture efficiency.
ASHRAE StandardASHRAE Standard 52.252.2--20072007--BB
With Appendix JWith Appendix J
7/29/2019 Air Filtration Technology
13/38
Non Mandatory App J
SPECIFIABLE MERV-A
The filter should be tested perASHRAE 52.2 (includingAppendix J)
The resulting MERV-A must
have the same (or higher)numerical value when comparedto the MERV value.
Also Added to 52.2 Dust Holding Capacity
Dust Weight Arrestance
7/29/2019 Air Filtration Technology
14/38
ASHRAE 52.2 2007-B with appendix J
Two filters will be tested
One per the current method MERV One per the Appendix J MERV-A
The MERV is still based on the E1, E2 and E3 values andTable 12.1 in the current standard
The MERV-A is based on the E1-A, E2-A, E3-A values anduses the same table only with the discharged efficiency values
7/29/2019 Air Filtration Technology
15/38
Range Size
Lower Limit
Range
Upper Limit
Geometric Mean
Particle Size (m)
1 0.30 .40 .35
2 0.40 .55 .47
3 0.55 .70 .62
4 0.70 1.00 .845 1.00 1.30 1.14
6 1.30 1.60 1.44
7 1.60 2.20 1.88
8 2.20 3.00 2.579 3.00 4.00 3.46
10 4.00 5.50 4.69
11 5.50 7.00 6.20
12 7.00 10.00 8.37
Allows the evaluation of a
filters efficiency on
respirable size particles
Allows selection of
a filter based upon
the most commonparticle size of a
contaminate.
ASHRAE 52.2 B appendix J
7/29/2019 Air Filtration Technology
16/38
52.2 Equivalent
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90100
0.3
0
0.4
7
0.8
4
1.4
4
2.5
7
4.6
9
8.3
7
Particle Size,m
Efficiency,
%M 14
M 13
M 11
M 8
M 4
Typical Minimum Efficiency Curves
7/29/2019 Air Filtration Technology
17/38
7/29/2019 Air Filtration Technology
18/38
18
7/29/2019 Air Filtration Technology
19/38
19
7/29/2019 Air Filtration Technology
20/38
Does Lower Resistance Compromise Air Quality?
Fine Fiber Media
- Maintained Performance
- Maintained Low Resistance
Coarse Fiber Media
- Declining Performance
- Higher Resistance
7/29/2019 Air Filtration Technology
21/38
Coarse Fiber vs. Fine FiberFilter Pressure Drop
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
Pressure
Drop
Time
Filter Pressure Drop
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
Presuure
Dro
p
Time
7/29/2019 Air Filtration Technology
22/38
22
7/29/2019 Air Filtration Technology
23/38
23
7/29/2019 Air Filtration Technology
24/38
24
7/29/2019 Air Filtration Technology
25/38
25
CAMFILFARR2012-05-14
Note:CO2Emissions basedGCO2a nd TreeCanada we bsitesEnergy Usage Calculation
KwhCost 0.076 Hrs. 8760 CO2/100Kwh 90.0Enter(CFM) 2000 EnterFanEffic.(Indecimal) 0.60in/w.g. Cost/Yr.
Kg/CO2
/Yr. in/w.g. Cost/Yr.Kg/CO2
/Yr. in/w.g. Cost/Yr.Kg/CO2
/Yr. in/w.g. Cost/Yr.Kg/CO2
/Yr. Prov./State CO2/100Kwh KwhCost0.1 $26.06 309 0.49 $127.70 1,512 0.88 $229.35 2,716 1.27 $330.99 3,920 Alabama 60 0.071
0.11 $28.67 339 0.5 $130.31 1,543 0.89 $231.95 2,747 1.28 $333.60 3,950 Alaska 50 0.128
0.12 $31.27 370 0.51 $132.92 1,574 0.9 $234.56 2,778 1.29 $336.20 3,981 Alberta 98 0.121
0.13 $33.88 401 0.52 $135.52 1,605 0.91 $237.17 2,809 1.3 $338.81 4,012 Arizona 60 0.082
0.14 $36.49 432 0.53 $138.13 1,636 0.92 $239.77 2,839 1.31 $341.42 4,043 Arkansas 60 0.0690.15 $39.09 463 0.54 $140.74 1,667 0.93 $242.38 2,870 1.32 $344.02 4,074 BritishColumbia 3 0.0720.16 $41.70 494 0.55 $143.34 1,697 0.94 $244.99 2,901 1.33 $346.63 4,105 California 30 0.128
0.17 $44.31 525 0.56 $145.95 1,728 0.95 $247.59 2,932 1.34 $349.23 4,136 Colorado 90 0.076
0.18 $46.91 556 0.57 $148.55 1,759 0.96 $250.20 2,963 1.35 $351.84 4,167 Connecticut 30 0.148
0.19 $49.52 586 0.58 $151.16 1,790 0.97 $252.80 2,994 1.36 $354.45 4,197 Delaware 80 0.101
0.2 $52.12 617 0.59 $153.77 1,821 0.98 $255.41 3,025 1.37 $357.05 4,228 DistrictofColu 160 0.1110.21 $54.73 648 0.6 $156.37 1,852 0.99 $258.02 3,055 1.38 $359.66 4,259 Florida 60 0.105
0.22 $57.34 679 0.61 $158.98 1,883 1 $260.62 3,086 1.39 $362.27 4,290 Georgia 60 0.076
0.23 $59.94 710 0.62 $161.59 1,914 1.01 $263.23 3,117 1.4 $364.87 4,321 Hawaii 80 0.207
0.24 $62.55 741 0.63 $164.19 1,944 1.02 $265.83 3,148 1.41 $367.48 4,352 Idaho 10 0.049
0.25 $65.16 772 0.64 $166.80 1,975 1.03 $268.44 3,179 1.42 $370.08 4,383 Illinois 50 0.071
0.26 $67.76 802 0.65 $169.40 2,006 1.04 $271.05 3,210 1.43 $372.69 4,413 Indiana 100 0.065
0.27 $70.37 833 0.66 $172.01 2,037 1.05 $273.65 3,241 1.44 $375.30 4,444 Iowa 90 0.069
0.28 $72.97 864 0.67 $174.62 2,068 1.06 $276.26 3,271 1.45 $377.90 4,475 Kansas 80 0.069
0.29 $75.58 895 0.68 $177.22 2,099 1.07 $278.87 3,302 1.46 $380.51 4,506 Kentucky 90 0.054
0.3 $78.19 926 0.69 $179.83 2,130 1.08 $281.47 3,333 1.47 $383.11 4,537 Louisiana 50 0.083
ListofSelections
(CFM) x (Average Pressure Drop) x (Operating Hrs.)x PC (Cost/Kwh.)
Fan Efficiency % * 8515Energy (E) =
7/29/2019 Air Filtration Technology
26/38
EnergyCosts
InventoryControl
MaintenanceCosts
LaborCosts
WasteRemoval
IndoorA
irQuality
ApparentExpense
Hidden Costs
Filter First Cost
ComplianceIssues
Performance Problems
AdministrationCosts
1st Cost
TOTAL COST OF OWNERSHIP
7/29/2019 Air Filtration Technology
27/38
Total Cost of Ownership of Air Filters
Labor &
Waste
10%
Energy70%
Filters
20%
What does this mean foryour facility?
Average Facility300,000 to 400,000 CFM
$25,000 to $30,000 in
Potential Energy Savings?
7/29/2019 Air Filtration Technology
28/38
Life Cycle Costing
(LCC)
Why?
The HVAC system is typically thelargest energy consumer
What?
Optimizing filter selection at a
given level of efficiency
Maximize IAQ, minimize total cost How?
Analyzing the cost of a system
over its entire life span
Goal?
minimize total cost of ownership make knowledgeable choices
(i.e., first cost shouldnt be the
only consideration)
What is your philosophy on Energy consumption/conservation and how can HVAC filters help toachieve savings on Energy Cost?
7/29/2019 Air Filtration Technology
29/38
LCC = Investment + PCenergy + PCmaint. + PCcleaning + PCdisposal
Investment capital cost of filters, frames, installation
PCenergy present total cost of power
PCmaintenance present total cost of maintenance including filter replacement,
etc.
PCcleaning present cost of duct cleaning
PCdisposal
present total cost for removal and disposal of the used filters
components of Life-Cycle Cost
7/29/2019 Air Filtration Technology
30/38
lab P vs. real life P
Simple averaging (Lab) P)
(PI+PF)/2 = 0.8 WG (200 Pa)
Actual (Real Life) P
PFDx = 0.67 WG (167 Pa)PI
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
0.70
0.800.90
1.00
1.10
1.20
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
time
Resistance
Lab (Average)
Life (Actual)
PI = 0.40 WG (100 Pa)PF = 1.20 WG (300 Pa)
PI
PF
7/29/2019 Air Filtration Technology
31/38
LCC - the increased cost of energy in USA
7/29/2019 Air Filtration Technology
32/38
LCC Software Analysis
Provides documentation of system design scenarios for
up to 3 stages of filtration, includes report, graphs, bar
charts
Provides ability to run multiple scenarios with same globalparameters and different filter selections
Offers an optimized solution to you and your client
32
7/29/2019 Air Filtration Technology
33/38
Life Cycle Cost analysis
# of filter stages 2 Fan operating hours p/yr. 8760
LCC period 2 years
Total CFM 400,000 % return air 70%
Outdoor air environment Mod AQ PM 2.5 = 51 to 65
Indoor environment Typical
Fan efficiency 60%
CO2 emissions 1.323 Lb/kwh33
7/29/2019 Air Filtration Technology
34/38
Example LCC on 3 different options
34
CAMFILFARR2012-05-14
SOLUTIONONESCPLEAT
SYNBOXM14ACTUALMA=11QUANTITY200
INITIALDP .88"FINALDP 4.63
AVERAGEDP 1.9"#CHANGES 9&2
MLE 37.6%ECI 11.29
SOLUTIONTWO
HCPLEAT
4VCARTRIDGEM14
ACTUALMA=14
QUANTITY200
INITIALDP.60
FINALDP1.42
AVERAGEDP.92"
#CHANGES4&1
MLE78.7%
ECI2.60
SOLUTIONTHREE
NOPREFILTER
POCKETFILTERM14
ACTUALMA=14
QUANTITY200
INITIALDP.45"
FINALDP1.31
AVERAGEDP.76
#OFCHANGES 0&2
MLE75%
ECI4.52
7/29/2019 Air Filtration Technology
35/38
Results of Life Cycle Cost Analysis
Solution 1 Solution 2 Solution 3
Energy Cost $169,803 $81,942 $67,820
Filter Cost $30,000 $31,800 $26,000
Labor Cost $8,400 $3,600 $2,400
Waste Cost $1,300 $600 $400
CO2 Impact 3,456,146 1,667,845 1,380,402 Landfill Impact 116 yd3 54 yd3 19 yd3
Total Cost TCO $209,503 $117,942 $96,620
35
7/29/2019 Air Filtration Technology
36/38
The best LCC solution for filtration will Meet Leed
Reduce waste and disposal Reduce labor
Reduce energy cost
Reduce your CO2 foot print
Reduce your product cost
Have a written guarantee
Deliver the correct required efficiency
Be a Five Star energy product
Will be Green 36
7/29/2019 Air Filtration Technology
37/38
In Conclusion
Not all filters deliver advertised MERV-A
Not all filters last as long DHC
Not all filters have the same pressure curves
Efficiency on sub micron particles is critical
ASHRAE has a standard that when full test reports are
viewed will help you select the best filter for your
application
TCO & LCC will offer the best value to you and your
customers37
7/29/2019 Air Filtration Technology
38/38
Thank You