FiZter Standard

Comparison of ASHRAE dust spot and

fiactional aerosol efficiencies of air filters
Dale Montgomery

scenario occurs, companies with

ABSTRACT Thispaper outlines a particle-sine-based, their own test equipment will face
fiactional eficienq test method, compares it to the current the considerable expense of adding
a new test bed. Manufactdrers will
standard method, and then examines the results ofAmerican need to retest existing products un-
Society of Heating, Refiigerating and Air-conditioning der the new standard to update per-
Engineers dust spot eficiencies with particle count equivalent formance data. Consumers may start
to purchase filters based on the fil-
dust spot eficiencies of 90% and GO%jlters.An accurate tration performance on a specific
correlation existed between the dust pot eflciency and the particle size. Such information will
fractional e@cienq by particle size. The correhtion was 99% provide the buyer of air filters with
more data upon which t o judge the
accurate on the 90%Jlter and 9G% on the GO%jlter. effectiveness of a product. Air filtra-
KEmORLlS: Airjlters, dust, eficiency, measurement, par- tion selection will become more of a
science based upon data and less of
ticle size, stanhrd, test metbod. an art wrapped in mystery.
This paper will compare the two
test methods and will also show how
data for efficiency by particle size
R esidential and commercial
W A C applications have used
air filters for many decades to pro-
measure the filtration capture effi-
ciency on particles of any specific
size.
can predict the ASHRAE efficiency
of air filters.
tect equipment and to prevent the Consumers are becoming aware
discoloration of ceilingtiles and other of the detrimental health effects Comparison of existing and
surfaces. In the United States, the which exposure to air borne contami- proposed standards
American Society of Heating, Re- nants can cause. ASHRAE has re-
frigerating and Air-conditioning sponded to this concern by starting The two test methods accomplish dif- %,*

Engineers (ASHRAE) 52-76 and the development of a test method to ferent goals and require completely
52.1-1992 are the test methods that measure filtration performance different equipment. The existing
compare the performance of filters based upon efficiency by particle standard, 52.1-1992, measures the
(1, 2). These tests are gravimetric size. ASHRAE will designate the filter’s average effectiveness in pro-
and atmospheric dust spot proce- standard as 52.2, “Fractional Effi- tecting equipment and surfaces from
dures that measure the efficiency by ciency Test Method,” and will prob- discoloring or blinding dusts. The
a weight-based percentage of dust ably release it in late 1994 (4-6). new standard will test the filtration
captured (arrestance) and by a dis- The new standard will create sub- collection efficiencyon narrow bands
coloration comparison between up- stantial changes in the industry. Con- of specific particle sizes.
stream and downstream targets sumers may require testing of
(dust spot‘efficiency). They do not products by both standards. If that Equipment
There are practically no similarities
between the equipment for the ex-
isting standard and the proposed test
Montgomery is product development engineer for Snyder General Corp., Filtration
Products Group, Box 35690, Louisville, KY 40232.
method. Although both methods can

240 June 1994 Tappi Journal

1. ASHRAE 52-76 and 52.1-1992 air filter test duct with blower downstream of filter (Copyright 1992 by ASHRAE. Reprinted by permission
from ANSVASHRAE, 52.1-1992.)
I
Vertical manometer
Manometer Manometer

Dust
Static tap Static tap

Filter device and

transitions (if any)

2. Top view of test duct configuration for proposed standard (Copyright 1993 by ASHRAE. Reprinted by permission from draft final report,
ASHRAE Research Project 6% -RP, April 1993.)
I
American Society of
Mechanical Engineers
Exhaust Outlet filter bank nozzle Downstream mixer

Room air

Devlce Backup
section filter
I ? 1 I Ilnci.a.m holder
I
Inlet filter Aerosol w~""~q'"
(used when
Blower
(3000 CFM at
\Contra' bank generator mixer dust loading)
13 in. H20) valve

use stainless steel ducts, the configu- It then exhausts the air either inside ficiency portion of the test uses dust
rations differ. Figures 1 and 2 show or outside. The proposed standard residing in ambient outside air. Al-
the equipment configurations for the will use humidity and temperature though the dust present in the ambi-
existing and proposed standards. It controlled, high efficiencyparticulate ent air changes with time, the test
is apparent from these diagrams that (HEPA) (3) filtered room air for the method averages the variation.
it is not possible to modify the exist- intake. It will exhaust HEPAfiltered The proposed standard will use a
ing equipment to perform both tests. air back into the room. A high level mixture of 93.5% by weight standard-
An estimate of the cost of the equip- of control is necessary to maintain ized air cleaner test dust and 6.5%
ment necessary for the new standard the test aerosol in a dry state and to cotton linters as the loading mate-
is US$ 100,000. Table I outlines the eliminate background particles. rial. Atomizing a solution of potas-
major differences between the dust sium chloride and water and drying
spot and fractional efficiency test Test dusts it in a spray tower to provide salt
methods. Standard 52.1-1992 uses a mixture particles will produce the efficiency
of 23%by weight carbon black, 72% test dust. Changing the liquid feed
Air intake and exhaust standardized air cleaner test dust, rate, atomization air pressure, and
Standard 52.1-1992 uses unfiltered, and 5% cotton linters as the loading solution concentration will control the
ambient, outside air for the intake. dust to measure dust holding capac- particle size distribution.
ity and arrestance. The dust spot ef-
Vol. 77, No. 6 Tappi Journal 24 I
 Filter
_- Standard
I. The major differences between the dust spot and fractional efficiency test methods

Tesf equipment or method ASHRAE 52.7-1992gravimetric and ProposedASHRAE 52.2 fractional

dust-spot procedure efficiency test

Fan location Upstream or downstream of tested filter Upstream of tested filter

Air intake Outside, ambient air Inside, conditioned air
Air intake filtration None HEPA
Duct Any material, straight section Stainless steel, 180" section
Loading dust Carbon black, SAE fine dust, and cotton lint SAE fine dust and cotton lint
Efficiency test dust Dust present in ambient aerosol Potassium chloride
Efficiency measurement equipment Balance, dust-spot opacity meter Balance, optical particle counter
Air exhaust Inside or outside, ambient duct air Inside, HEPA filtered air

SAE: Society of Automotive Engineers

Efficiency measurement II. ReDresentative Darticle count used for calculations

Standard 52.1-1992 uses a custom Particle ranae. um Particles presenW

built opacity meter that compares
the light transmission of upstream 0.3 - 0.4 1,400,000
and downstream targets before and 0.4 - 0.5 800,000
after dust loadingthe filter. The opac- 0.5 - 0.6 108,000
0.6 - 0.8 72,000
ity meter is simple to use and is rea- 0.8 - 1.0 6,000
sonably consistent in the results at 1.o - 1.5 3,600
efficiencies above 20%. 1.5 - 2.0 680
The new method will use an opti- 2.0 - 3.0 100
cal particle counter (OPC) with 15
sizing channels. The OPC will take
upstream and downstream particle
counts before and after dust loading
the filter. It will be able to count
particles from 0.3 to 10 pm.

Data produced from test

The current standard reports filter 111. ASHRAE and particle count efficiency data of 90% rated barrier filter
performance by dust holding capac-
ity, synthetic dust weight arrestance, Calculated
particle count
and dust spot efficiency. This infor-
Filter ASHRAE dust spot equivalent
mation is very important t o the engi- Dust fed, g resistance, Pa efficiency, % efficiency, %
neer who requires a filter t o protect
equipment. It is not as important, 0 160 60.60 62.57
however, to someone attempting to 100 198 86.20 87.35
200 248 96.40 96.16
protect equipment or individuals 400 388 97.70 99.17
from particles of a particular size. 600 625 98.30 99.24
The proposed standard, 52.2, will
probably report filter performance Overall average 92.47 93.41
by dust holding capacity, synthetic
dust weight arrestance, and frac-
tional efficiency. The test data will
be important to those who know the
sizes of dust that are most important
to remove from the air. The informa- I

242 June 1994 Tappi Journal

3. ASHRAE and particle count equivalent dust spot efficiencies 4. Efficiency by particle size of 90% barrier filter

0 Particle dust
Clean and dust loaded conditions

'0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

FILTER LIFE, % PARTICLE DIAMETER, pin

5. Efficiency by particle size of 60% barrier filter of the test. In addition, the proposed
test equipment for 52.2was not avail-
100 able. A commercial air filter testing
e- facility performed the tests. The test
8 duct matched the ASHRAE 52-76
$ 80 /
/
/
0 and 52.1-1992 duct shown in Fig. 1
z
E! with the addition of upstream and
60 downstream 3/16-in. diameter
I&
Lu sample lines running to a 16 channel
z OPC. The OPC counted particles
z!
I-
40
present in the ranges shown in Table
dI- 11.
20
Filters were tested at an air flow
Clean and dust loaded conditions
of 3400 m3/h(2000 ft3/min)according
0 to 52-76 with the same equipment,
0.25 0.75 1.25 1.75 2.25
dust, and test method as the stan-
PARTICLE DIAMETER, pin dard with one difference. After each
dust spot measurement, the OPC
took an upstream isokinetic air
tion will be less valuable to consum- between the existing and proposed sample for 1min. After line purging
ers without that technical knowl- standards would give filter consum- for 15s, the OPC took a downstream
edge. ers the data needed to compare re- sample for 1 min. The data from 48
sults from either method. The measurements was averaged to ob-
Numerical relationship remainder of this paper reports on tain the reported results for that in-
the attempt to develop a correlation crement of dust loading. The test
between dust spot and particle between the fractional particle size continued in this manner until reach-
size efficiency and dust spot efficiencies of air fil- ing the final resistance of 625 Pa (2.5
The original standard uses an opac- ters. in. water).
ity meter and the proposed standard
uses an OPC. Both standards there- Test method Results of ASHRAE and particle
fore use white light for measure- The tested filters were pleated, wet- count equivalent dust spot
ments. Because of this similarity, it laid glass paper barrier filters rated efficiency comparison
was thought it might be possible to 90% and 60% efficient according to To calculate the fractional efficiency
develop a numerical relationship be- ASHRAE standard 52-76. Note that by particle size at each dust spot
tween dust spot and fractional par- standard 52.1-1992 is a revised ver- increment, the average downstream
ticle size efficiency. A correlation sion of 52-76 not released at the time particle count was divided by the

Vol. 77, No.6 Tappi Journal 243

 Filter Standdrd
average upstream particle count for IV. ASHRAE and particle count efficiency data of 60% rated barrier filter
that specific particle range and then
subtracted that number from one. Calculated
particle count
The same technique was used for all Filter ASHRAE dust spot equivalent
particle ranges at each dust spot in- Oust fed, g resistance, Pa efficiencv, % efficiencv, %
crement.
The results for the average and 0 115 25.30 19.32
incremental ASHRAE dust spot ef- 100 143 51.90 43.58
200 160 66.00 62.60
ficiencies were calculated according
400 243 87.80 86.02
to the existing standard. Assuming 700 650 96.80 97.27
that opacity depends upon measur-
ing the light blocked by the total Overall average 75.46 72.58
projected area of particles captured,
a numerical relationship was devel-
oped between the ASHRAE and the
particle count equivalent dust spot
efficiency. The dust spot efficiency
was equivalent to the total projected count equivalent dust spot compares Literature cited
area of particles captured by the fil- to the ASHRAE efficiency. There is
ter divided by the total projected 1. ASHRAE 52-76 “Method of TestingAir-
minimal difference between the two Cleaning Devices Used in General Venti-
area of particles present in the am- over the life of the 90% filter. The lation for Removing Particulate Matter.”
bient aerosol. This assumes that a overall average ASHRAE efficiency 2. ASHRAE 52.1-1992 “Gravimetric and
single representative particle count DustrSpot Procedures for Testing Air-
was 92.47% and the overall particle Cleaning Devices Used in General Venti-
distribution for ambient air is pos- based average was 93.41%-a dif- lation for Removing Particulate Matter.”
sible for all calculations even though ference of 1.0%. 3. U.S.GSA Federal Standard 209E “Air-
it changes from moment t o moment. The correlation was not as accu- borne Particulate Cleanliness Classes in
Cleanrooms and Clean Zones.”
Equation 1 allows calculation of rate for the 60% filter. The average 4. Hanley, J. T., Smith, D. D., and Ensor, D.
the particle count equivalent dust ASHRAE efficiencywas 75.46% and S., Dra8 Final Report of ASHRAE 671-
spot efficiencies: RP, ASHRAE, Atlanta, 1993.
the particle based efficiency was 5. Ensor, D. S., Hanley, J. T., and Sparks,
72.58%-a difference of 3.8%. L. E., IAQ 91, H e a l t h y Buildings,
Tables 111 and IV present the

‘
2 ASHRAE, Atlanta, 1991, pp. 334-336.
d=3. Op 6. Hanley, J. T., Smith, D. D., Ensor, et al.,
data for drawing Fig. 3, and Table I1 Indoor Air ‘93, Proceedings of the 6th
d=O. 3p’d(ad) ‘d details the representative distribu- International Conference on Indoor Air
N= ,. tion of particles in the ambient at- Air Quality and Climate, Indoor Air ‘93,
Helsinki, 1993, vol. 6, pp. 369-375.
d=3. Op mosphere used for the calculations.
Figures 4 and 5 show the efficiency The author thanks C. Rose of Snyder General
d=O. 3p by particle size as the filter loads Corp. and D. Murphy of Air Filter Testing Lab
for the useful information and direction that
with dust. made this paper possible as well as M. Dever of
where the University of Tennessee for her encourage-
N = Incremental particle count dust ment to continue this research.
Summary
spot efficiency Received for review Dec. 17,1993.
pd = Ambient particle count for that The new standard 52.2 will be
particle diameter available in late 1994 and will pro-
Q = Average particle diameter for vide more detailed data about the
that range of particles capture efficiency of air filters on
specific particle sizes.
q = Efficiency by particle size for
that particle diameter. The results of an efficiencyby par-
ticle size test can accurately pre-
The overall average particle count dict the ASHRAE dust spot
equivalent dust spot efficiency was
efficiencies. W
calculated according to the
ASHRAE standard using the incre-
mental calculations.
Figure 3 shows how the particle

244 June 1994 Tappi Journal