Premium
Fine and ultrafine particle removal efficiency of new residential HVAC filters
Author(s) -
Fazli Torkan,
Zeng Yicheng,
Stephens Brent
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
indoor air
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.387
H-Index - 99
eISSN - 1600-0668
pISSN - 0905-6947
DOI - 10.1111/ina.12566
Subject(s) - ultrafine particle , aerosol , environmental science , scanning mobility particle sizer , hvac , particle (ecology) , particle size , particle number , environmental engineering , hepa , air filter , indoor air quality , particle size distribution , particle counter , filter (signal processing) , materials science , inlet , meteorology , chemical engineering , air conditioning , engineering , nanotechnology , physics , oceanography , plasma , quantum mechanics , mechanical engineering , electrical engineering , geology
Particle air filters used in central residential forced‐air systems are most commonly evaluated for their size‐resolved removal efficiency for particles 0.3‐10 µm using laboratory tests. Little information exists on the removal efficiency of commercially available residential filters for particles smaller than 0.3 µm or for integral measures of mass‐based aerosol concentrations (eg, PM 2.5 ) or total number concentrations (eg, ultrafine particles, or UFPs) that are commonly used in regulatory monitoring and building measurements. Here, we measure the size‐resolved removal efficiency of 50 new commercially available residential HVAC filters installed in a recirculating central air‐handling unit in an unoccupied apartment unit using alternating upstream/downstream measurements with incense and NaCl as particle sources. Size‐resolved removal efficiencies are then used to estimate integral measures of PM 2.5 and total UFP removal efficiency for the filters assuming they are challenged by 201 residential indoor particle size distributions (PSDs) gathered from the literature. Total UFP and PM 2.5 removal efficiencies generally increased with manufacturer‐reported filter ratings and with filter thickness, albeit with numerous exceptions. PM 2.5 removal efficiencies were more influenced by the assumption for indoor PSD than total UFP removal efficiencies. Filters with the same ratings but from different manufacturers often had different removal efficiencies for PM 2.5 and total UFPs.