2013 Buyers' Guide 2013 Buyers' Guide - Filtration News

user was still left with expensive inplant
testing.
In the ensuing years since the 2004
paper in Ref. 1, PMI has significantly
upgraded their High-Flow CFP for cartridges
(Refs. 8, 9), and it seemed appropriate
to revisit this technology and
determine how it compares to the wellpracticed
ISO Test Dust Challenge Testing
(per the old ASTM F795-88 &
F316 procedures) utilizing approved
outside labs (IBR – Ref. 10 and IFTS –
Ref. 11). Additionally, some selected
tests were conducted at Dow with their
more realistic industrial-type testing
(Refs. 12, 13). Further discussion of the
approved European IFTS test procedures
can be found in Refs. 14-16.
Before the work is presented, it would
be instructive to summarize the basic
findings of the cartridge tests in Ref. 1
(and subsequent work not shown
here), namely:
• Low-cost depth cartridges’ micron
ratings are overly optimistic and
cartridge-to-cartridge variation
is significant.
• Medium-cost depth cartridges’
micron ratings are far more realistic;
and the CFP B.Pt./1.65 ratings
compare well with the manufacturers’
ratings.
• High-cost depth cartridges’ micron
ratings compare very well at the low
micron values, but diverge
somewhat at the higher > 20µm
ratings, but overall the
manufacturers’ ratings are
quite good.
• High-efficiency pleated cartridge
micron ratings also compare very
well, as expected, since more
uniform than the molded or spun
depth ones.
Thus, this paper will attempt to
compare actual ISOCTD Challenge
testing with both CFP and selected
NIST glass bead data in a rigorous and
extensive fashion.
TEST RESULTS
Updated Depth Cartridge Porometry
Comparisons
As discussed above, there were some
discrepancies in the cartridge data (Ref.
1) such that additional testing was
done and Table I details the updated results,
and shows:
• Low-cost spun cartridges are rated
verly optimistic by most vendors;
and rarely do they report greater
than 90% efficiency.
• Medium-cost cartridges are
somewhat better (vendor B), but
their ratings seem to be more
conservative than found here.
• Absolute-rated vendor B cartridges
are quite good and reasonably rated.
• Generally, high cost cartridges
(vendors A, C, D, & E) are fairly
accurately rated; and if anything are
conservative in their ratings. Only
the very fine 0.5µm and very coarse
cartridges seem to deviate.
• A high-cost wound cartridge
(vendor F) compares well, but their
nominal ratings are very conservative
and their 1 and 5µm ones were
basically the same. This is generally
the case for many of the wound-type
depth cartridges.
• A high-cost pleated cartridge
www.filtnews.com • August 2012 • 25