4 ms·
This is a fairly good concept but it is not efficient, especially if you're using 1" filters. The operating cost is high because the fan uses a lot of electrici
by pxx 3y ago
This is a fairly good concept but it is not efficient, especially if you're using 1" filters. The operating cost is high because the fan uses a lot of electricity compared to better designed units. See this analysis:
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ina.13163 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ina.13163
Even with fairly reasonable electricity numbers you should look into building a more complicated box. And if your time is of import the dedicated purifiers start winning again after you amortize the startup cost (also they typically are better engineered for noise concerns).
- Ajedi32 3y agoThanks, that's exactly the sort of information I've been looking for! Though I disagree with the methodology used to calculate ongoing (operating) costs, as it seems that doesn't include the cost of replacement filters, only the cost of electricity. Many dedicated air filters have replacements that cost hundreds of dollars, so that seems like a huge oversight when comparing to standard MERV 13 furnace filters that I can pick up for $10 a pop. (The electricity price they used in their calculations is also nearly double what I pay, but that's an understandable deviation given that electricity prices can vary wildly by region.)