4 ms·
I spent the weekend researching, implementing, etc. air filtration as one of those affected by the CA fires. It was worth it! The first step for me was getting
by Dave_Rosenthal 8y ago
I spent the weekend researching, implementing, etc. air filtration as one of those affected by the CA fires. It was worth it!
The first step for me was getting a device to measure particles in the air. The air quality index (AQI) is an aggregate score that is made up of contributions from several harmful components. Of these, the quantity (weight/volume) of small particles (<2.5um) is often the large contributor. This is called the PM2.5.
Directly measuring PM2.5 is very hard, requiring a device that eliminates the larger particles from the air (typically a cyclonic separator it seems) combined with some way of capturing and weighing of the very small quantity of remaining particles (we're talking ug/m^3).
Many home air quality sensors instead measure the count/volume of particles larger than 2.5 um and call that the "2.5um measurement". You can see the problem. I bought a laser particle counted called Dylos DC1100 Pro. The Dylos measures particles counts larger than 2.5um as is common, but also counts particles larger than 0.5um. Of these two numbers, the 2.5 count is only vaguely correlated with the actual PM2.5 measure, but the 0.5um count is highly correlated.
A bit of internet research (it seems many people have used the Dylos meter in various projects) and I was able to construct a scale to correlate 0.5um+ counts to PM2.5, and therefore AQI. (0.005*count~=ug/m^3)
OK, all that done, to the filtration. First, I installed 3M 1550 MPR furnace filters (~MERV11). The "1550" is a measure invented by 3M 'MicroParticleRating' (or something) and is supposed to speak to how well the filters remove small particles. However these furnace filters don't really knock down very small particle counts in once pass. Sure enough, putting the particle meter at an air duct, the large (2.5+) particle count was way down, but the small particle count was only down a little bit (15-25%?) from the ambient air. Net effect is that after running for several days my house numbers are about 1/3 of the outside air counts.
I also bought a BlueAir HEPA filter for my bedrooms. HEPA is supposed to be 99+% effective for particles 0.3um and up. This filter is in a whole different league. The particle counter placed on top of the filter returns near-zero small particle counts and does a much better job eliminating smells. The room they were in got down to 1/10 of outside levels.
Overall I'm glad I got both types of filters, we are sleeping better, and the meter was very helpful to understand what was going on.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- Kadin 8y agoDid you put the filter on the intake or outflow side of the fan? I have built one of these (20x20 furnace filter on a box fan) and always put the filter on the intake side of the fan. However it seems like people are placing the filters on the outflow side of the fan instead, for reasons that are not clear. Since it seems like you did some measurements, do you have any idea whether it's preferable to have the filter on the intake or outflow side of the fan? (I note that in furnaces and other air handling equipment, filters are almost universally on the intake, not the outflow, side, presumably because this keeps dust out of the blower/heating mechanicals.)
- sgc 8y agowhen you place it on the intake, it is sucked against whatever you are using to stop it pulling into the fan, if it is on the outtake, it can bubble out on the edges and the air can escape rather than pass through the filter. Intake is the only correct solution for these homemade devices without a metal diaphram.