Environmental Technology Verification

Test Report of Control of Bioaerosols in
HVAC Systems

Tri-Dim Filter Corporation
Predator II, Model 8VADTP123C23CCOOO

               Prepared by
            Research Triangle Institute

           HRTI
           INTERNATIONAL
             Under a Contract with
          U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
            JgLppA
            wu£ ^™ I  • m
EIV EW  ET

-------
            THE ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGY VERIFICATION PROGRAM


  &EPA                                                           HRTI
                                                                               INTERNATIONAL
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency                                                        Research Triangle Institute
                                 ETV Joint Verification Statement
        TECHNOLOGY TYPE:    VENTILATION MEDIA AIR FILTER

        APPLICATION:           FILTRATION EFFICIENCY OF BIOAEROSOLS IN
                                   HVAC SYSTEMS

        TECHNOLOGY NAME:   Predator II, Model 8VADTP123C23CCOOO

        COMPANY:               Tri-Dim Filter Corporation

        ADDRESS:                93 Industrial Drive, PO Box 466 PHONE: 800-458-9835
                                   Louisa, VA 23093          FAX: 540-967-5430
        WEB SITE:                http://www.tridim.com
        E-MAIL:                  b.duffv@tridim.com
     The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has created the Environmental Technology
     Verification (ETV) Program to facilitate the deployment of innovative or improved
     environmental technologies through performance verification and dissemination of information.
     The goal of the ETV Program is to further environmental protection by accelerating the
     acceptance and use of improved and cost-effective technologies. ETV seeks to achieve this goal
     by providing high quality, peer-reviewed data on technology performance to those involved in
     the design, distribution, financing, permitting, purchase,  and use of environmental technologies.

     ETV works with recognized standards and testing organizations; stakeholder groups which
     consist of buyers, vendor organizations, permitters, and other interested parties; and with the full
     participation of individual technology developers. The program evaluates the performance of
     innovative and improved technologies by developing test plans that are responsive to the needs
     of stakeholders, conducting field or laboratory tests (as appropriate), collecting and analyzing
     data, and preparing peer-reviewed reports.  All evaluations are conducted in accordance with
     rigorous quality assurance protocols to ensure that data of known and adequate quality are
     generated  and that the results are defensible.

     EPA's National Risk Management Research Laboratory  contracted with the Research Triangle
     Institute (RTI) to establish a homeland-security-related ETV Program for products that clean
     ventilation air. RTI evaluated the performance of ventilation air filters used in building heating,
     ventilation and air-conditioning (HVAC) systems.  This verification statement provides a
     summary of the test results for the Tri-Dim Filter Corporation Predator II filter.
                                             S-l

-------
VERIFICATION TEST DESCRIPTION
All tests were performed in accordance with RTFs "Test/Quality Assurance Project Plan:
Biological Testing of General Ventilation Filters," which was approved by EPA. Tests were
performed for the following:
   •   Bioaerosol filtration efficiency tests of the clean and dust-loaded filter. Three bioaerosols
       were used in the testing:
          o  The spore form of the bacteria Bacillus atrophaeus (BG), a gram-positive spore-
             forming bacteria elliptically shaped with dimensions of 0.7 to 0.8 by 1 to 1.5 //m,
          o  Serratia marcescens, a rod-shaped gram-negative bacteria with a size of 0.5 to 0.8
             by 0.9 to 2.0 //m, and
          o  The bacterial virus (bacteriophage) MS2 dispersed as a micrometer-sized
             poly disperse aerosol.
   •   American National Standards Institute (ANSI)/American Society of Heating,
       Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) Standard 52.2-1999 test. The
       test uses inert (potassium chloride (KC1)) particles for a filter when clean and through
       five levels of dust loading. The filtration efficiency results (average of the minimum
       composite efficiency) are given for three size ranges of particles: El, 0.3 to 1.0 //m; E2,
       1.0to3.0//m; andE3, 3.0//mto 10//m.
   •   Inert aerosol filtration efficiency tests similar to the  ASHRAE 52.2 test (0.3 to 10 |im)
       but with extended fractional efficiency measurements down to 0.03 jim particle diameter
       on a filter when clean and when fully dust-
       loaded.

VERIFIED TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION
As shown in Figure  1, the Tri-Dim Filter Corporation
Predator II filter, Model 8VADTP123C23CCOOO, is a
4-panel V-cell filter with nominal dimensions of 0.61
by 0.61 by 0.30 m (24 by 24 by 12 in.). The glass
microfiber media is white.

VERIFICATION OF PERFORMANCE
Verification testing of the Tri-Dim Filter Corporation
Predator II filter began on June 21, 2004 at the test
facilities of RTI and was completed on July 22, 2004.
The results for the bioaerosol filtration efficiency tests
are presented in Table 1 for the clean and dust-loaded
filter.  Table 2 presents the results of the ASHRAE 52.2 test. All tests were conducted at an air
flow of 0.93 mVsec (1970 cfm).
Figure 1. Photograph of the Tri-Dim Filter
      Corporation Predator II filter.
                                           S-2

-------
                             Table 1.  Bioaerosol Filtration Results
Filter Condition
Clean
Dust loaded
Pressure Drop
Pa (in. H2O)
134 (0.54)
348(1.4)
Filtration
Efficiency for
Removal of
B. atrophaeus , %
94
99.8
Filtration
Efficiency for
Removal of
S. marcescens, %
95
99.9
Filtration
Efficiency for
Removal of
MS2 phage, %
96
99.7
                           Table 2. Summary of ASHRAE 52.2 Test
Filter
Tri-Dim Predator II
Filter
El
0.3 to 1.0 //m,
%
80
E2
1.0 to 3.0 //m,
%
98
E3
3.0 to 10 Aim,
%
99
Minimum Efficiency
Reporting Value
(MERV)
14 at 0.93m3/sec
(1970 cfm)
The quality assurance officer reviewed the test results and the quality control data and concluded
that the data quality objectives given in the approved test/QA plan were attained.

This verification statement addresses three performance measures of media air filters: filtration
efficiency for inert particles; removal efficiency for selected bioaerosols and pressure drop.
Users of this technology may wish to consider other performance parameters such as service life
and cost when selecting a media air filter for bioaerosol control. In accordance with the test/QA
plan1, this verification statement is valid for 3 years following the last signature added on the
verification statement.
Original signed by E. Timothy Oppelt, 9/16/04

E. Timothy Oppelt                    Date
Director
National Homeland Security Research Center
Office of Research and Development
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Original signed by David S. Ensor,   8/24/04
David S. Ensor
Director
ETV-HS
Research Triangle Institute
Date
   NOTICE: ETV verifications are based on an evaluation of technology performance under specific, predetermined
   criteria and the appropriate quality assurance procedures.  EPA and RTI make no expressed or implied warranties
   as to the performance of the technology and do not certify that a technology will always operate as verified. The
   end user is solely responsible for complying with any and all applicable federal, state, and local requirements.
   Mention of commercial product names does not imply endorsement.
                                             so

-------
Environmental Technology Verification
     Test Report of Filtration Efficiency of
         Bioaerosols  in HVAC  Systems
                 Tri-Dim Filter Corporation
          Predator II, Model 8VADTP123C23CCOOO
                        Prepared by:

                   Research Triangle Institute
                 Engineering and Technology Unit
                 Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
              GS10F0283K-BPA-1, EPA Task Order 1101
                    RTI Project No. 08787.001
                     EPA Project Manager:
                       Bruce Henschel
              Air Pollution Prevention and Control Division
             National Risk Management Research Laboratory
                Office of Research and Development
                U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                 Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
                       September 2004

-------
                                        Notice

This document was prepared by the Research Triangle Institute (RTI) with funding from the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) through the General Service Administration Contract
No. GS1OF0283K per EPA's BPA-1, Task Order 1101.  The document has undergone RTF s
and EPA's peer and administrative reviews and has been approved for publication. Mention of
corporation names, trade names, or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or
recommendation for use of specific products.

                                       Foreword

The Environmental Technology Verification (ETV) Program,  established by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), is designed to accelerate the development and
commercialization of new or improved environmental technologies through third-party
verification and reporting of performance.  The goal of the ETV Program is to verify the
performance of commercially ready environmental technologies through the evaluation of
objective and quality-assured data so that potential purchasers and permitters are provided with
an independent and credible assessment of the technology that they are buying or permitting.

EPA's National Risk Management Research Laboratory contracted with the Research Triangle
Institute (RTI) to establish a homeland-security related ETV Program for products that clean
ventilation air. RTI developed (and EPA approved) the "Test/Quality Assurance Plan for
Biological Testing of General Ventilation Filters1." The test described in this report was
conducted following this plan.
                                 Availability of Report

Copies of this verification report are available from

•      Research Triangle Institute
       Engineering and Technology Unit
       PO Box 12194
       Research Triangle Park, NC 27709-2194

•      U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
       Air Pollution Prevention and Control Division, E305-01
       109 T.W. Alexander Drive
       Research Triangle Park, NC 27711

Web site:      http://www.epa.gov/etv/verifications
                                           11

-------
                                    Table of Contents

ETV Joint Verification Statement	S-l
Notice	ii
Foreword 	ii
Availability of Report	ii
Table of Contents	iii
Acronyms/Abbreviations	iv
Acknowledgments	v
1.0    Introduction	1
2.0    Product Description	1
3.0    Test Procedure	1
4.0    Bioaerosol Filtration Efficiency Calculation	4
5.0    Test Results	5
6.0    Limitations and Applications	7
7.0    References	7
Appendix:  ASHRAE 52.2 Test Report	8
                                        Figures

Figure 1. Photograph of the Tri-Dim Filter Corporation Predator II filter	1
Figure 2. Schematic of Test Duct	2
Figure 3. Summary of the Inert Aerosol Filtration Efficiency Data for the Clean and
       Dust-Loaded Filter, # 2 	6
Figure A-l. Filtration Efficiency and Flow Resistance for Tri-Dim Filter Corporation Predator II
       filter   	11
                                         Tables

Table 1.  Numbers of Filters and Expected Utilization	4
Table 2.  Bioaerosol Filtration Results for Filter # 2	5
Table3.  Summary of Removal Efficiency Using ASHRAE 52.2 Test for Filter # 1	6
Table 4.  DQOs for Precision of Filtration Efficiency Measurements for Culturable Bioaerosol... 7
                                           in

-------
                               Acronymns/Abbreviations
ANSI         American National Standards Institute
ASHRAE     American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc.
ASME        American Society of Mechanical Engineers
B             Bacillus
BG           Bacillus atrophaeus (formerly B. subtilis var niger and Bacillus globigif)
cfm           cubic feet per minute
CPU          colony forming unit(s)
cm           centimeter
dso           cutoff diameter, the aerodynamic diameter where the collection efficiency of the
              sampler is 50%
DQO         data quality objective
EPA          U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
ETL SEMKO  Electrical Testing Laboratories, Svenska Elektriska Materielkontrollanstalten AB
ETV          Environmental Technology Verification
F             Fahrenheit
fpm           feet per minute
HS           homeland security
in.            inch(es)
KC1           potassium chloride
kPa           kilopascal(s)
L             liter(s)
MERV        minimum efficiency reporting value
m             meter(s)
mm           millimeter(s)
mL           milliliter(s)
min           minute(s)
//m           micrometer(s)
NAFA        National Air Filtration Association
nm           nanometer(s)
OPC          optical particle counter
QA           quality assurance
QC           quality control
Pa            pascal(s)
PFU          plaque forming unit(s)
psig           pounds per square inch gauge
RTI           Research Triangle Institute
SAE          Society of Automotive Engineers
SMPS        scanning mobility particle sizer
                                           IV

-------
                                  Acknowledgments

The authors acknowledge the support of all of those who helped plan and conduct the
verification activities. In particular, we would like to thank Bruce Henschel, EPA's Project
Manager, and Shirley Wasson, EPA's Quality Assurance Manager, both of EPA's National Risk
Management Research Laboratory in Research Triangle Park, NC.  We would also like to
acknowledge the assistance and participation of
   •   our stakeholder group for their input,
   •   Al Veeck and the National Air Filtration Association (NAFA), and Intertek ETL SEMKO
       (Electrical Testing Laboratories, Svenska Elektriska Materielkontrollanstalten AB),
       especially Theresa Peck, for their help in acquiring the filters, and
   •   Tri-Dim Filter Corporation for donating the filters to be tested.

For more information on the Tri-Dim Filter Corporation Predator II filter, contact

Bruce Duffy
Tri-Dim Filter Corporation
93 Industrial Drive
PO Box 466
Louisa, VA 23093
Tel: 800-458-9835
Fax: 540-967-5430
Email: b.duffy@tridim.com

For more information on RTFs ETV program, contact

Debbie Franke
Research Triangle Institute
POBox 12194
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709-2194
Telephone: (919) 541-6826
Email: dlf@rti.org

-------
1.0    Introduction
EPA's National Risk Management Research Laboratory contracted with the Research Triangle
Institute (RTI) to establish a homeland-security related ETV Program for products that clean
ventilation air. RTI convened a group of stakeholders representing government and industry
with knowledge and interest in the areas of homeland security and building ventilation.  The
group met in December 2002 and recommended technologies to be tested. RTI then developed
(and EPA approved) a test plan. Reports from the first series of tests can be found at
http://www.epa.gov/etv/verifications/vcenterlO-l.html. There are four filters in the second series
of tests. The tests described in this report were conducted following Version 2 of the
"Test/Quality Assurance Plan for Biological Testing of General Ventilation Filters1."

2.0    Product Description
As shown in Figure 1, the Tri-Dim Filter Corporation
Predator II filter, Model 8VADTP123C23CCOOO, is a
4-panel V-cell filter with nominal dimensions of 0.61
by 0.61 by 0.30 m (24 by 24 by 12 in.). The glass
microfiber media is white.

3.0    Test Procedure
The test program measured the culturable bioaerosol
removal efficiency of general ventilation filters.  Three
tests were required to accomplish this goal. First, the
American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-
Conditioning Engineers, Inc. (ASHRAE) Standard
52.22 test was performed on one filter of the test filter        R     L phot     h of the Tri.Dim

^ivf^11?,!  ^ ™7*f?°    H LeP°±n!vf ^   Filter Corporation Predator II filter.
(MERV)  of the filter. ASHRAE designed the MERV to
represent a filter's minimum performance over multiple particle sizes in the 0.3 to 10 |j,m range
and the filters tested under ASHRAE 52.2 can range from MERV 5 to 16. In general, a higher
MERV indicates higher filter efficiency. For reference, clean room HEPA and ULPA filters are
rated at between MERV 17 and 20.  Most commercial filters and high end home filters are now
marketed using the MERV.  After determining the MERV, the biological test using three
different bioaerosols and an inert aerosol test were performed on a second filter. This test
extended the standard 52.2 test down to 0.03  |j,m and included both clean and fully dust-loaded
conditions.  All tests were at an air flow rate of 0.93 mVsec (1970 cfm) to conform to the
conditions described in ASHRAE Standard 52.2.

All testing was performed in a test duct as specified in ASHRAE Standard 52.2. A schematic of
the test duct is shown in Figure 2. The test section of the duct is 0.61 m (24 in.) by 0.61 m (24
in.) square.  The locations of the major components, including the sampling probes, device
section (filter holder), and the aerosol generator (site of aerosol injection) are shown.

The inert testing and the ASHRAE Standard 52.2 test were performed using a solid-phase (i.e.,
dry) potassium chloride (KC1) aerosol.  The filters were loaded using ASHRAE dust, composed
of 72% Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) fine, 23% powdered carbon, and 5% cotton
linters. The final pressure drop was determined by the Standard's requirements.
                                           1

-------
  Room
   Air
                 Exhaust
                   to
                  Room
           X
          6
it ASME
NOZZ!G
Outlet Filter Bank . Downstream Mixer
i Biological \
1 1 Sampling ^
1^ If r< i



t I \ <3
^ ^ '|^
%


)

Si Device Backup
m Section Filter
           Flow Control
              Valve
 Aerosol
Generator
Biological
Sampling
             Figure 2. Schematic of test duct. Filter is placed in device section.
The bioaerosol tests were conducted using three microorganisms, including two bacteria and one
bacterial virus. The spore form of the bacteria Bacillus atrophaeus (formerly B. subtilis var
niger and Bacillus globigii or BG) was used as the surrogate for gram-positive spore-forming
bacteria. The BG spore is elliptically shaped with dimensions of 0.7 to 0.8 by 1 to 1.5 //m.
Serratia marcescens was used as the surrogate for rod-shaped gram-negative bacteria. S.
marcescens is 0.5 to 0.8 by 0.9 to 2.0 //m.

The bacterial virus (bacteriophage) MS2 (0.02 to 0.03 //m), having approximately the same
aerosol characteristics as a human virus, was used as a surrogate for the viruses of similar  and
larger size and shape.  Although the individual virus particles are in the submicrometer size
range, the test particle size for the virus tests spanned a range of sizes (polydispersed bioaerosol).
This test was not designed to study the removal efficiencies for single individual virus particles;
rather, it was designed to determine the removal efficiencies for virus particles as they are
commonly found indoors. A representative challenge would be a micrometer-sized,
polydispersed aerosol containing the phage because:
•   The aerosols created from sneezing and coughing vary in size from < 1 to > 20 //m, but the
    largest particles settle out and only the smaller sizes remain in the air for extended periods for
    potential removal by an air cleaner3;
•   Few viruses have been found associated with particles less than 1 //m4; and
•   Nearly all 1 to 2 //m particles  are deposited in the respiratory tract, while  larger particles may
    not be respired.

Bacteria suspension preparation for the aerosolization process required that the specific test
organism be grown in the laboratory and the suspension prepared for aerosol  generation in the
test rig. The microbial challenge  suspensions were prepared by inoculating the test organism on
solid or liquid media, incubating the culture until mature, wiping organisms from the surface of
the pure culture (if solid media), and eluting them into sterile diluent to a known concentration.
                                            2

-------
The bacterial virus challenge was prepared by inoculating a logarithmic phase broth culture of
the host bacteria with phage and allowing it to multiply until the majority of the host bacteria
were lysed.  The mixture was centrifuged to remove the majority of the cell fragments.  The
resultant supernatant was the phage stock and was used as the challenge aerosol. The
concentration of the phage stock was approximately 1 x 109 or higher plaque forming units per
milliliter, (PFU) /mL.

The challenge organism suspensions were aerosolized using a Collison nebulizer (BGI,
Waltham, MA) at 103.4 kPa (15 psig) air pressure. The nebulizer generates droplets with an
approximate volume mean diameter of 2 //m.  The nebulizer output stream was mixed with
clean, dry air to create the dry aerosolized microbial challenge.  The particle diameter after the
water evaporates depends on the solids content of the suspension. The resulting particle size of
the B. atrophaeus and the S. marcescens in the air stream entering the test filter was believed to
be that of single organisms (singlets). The MS2 aerosol consisted of poly dispersed micrometer-
sized particles, each containing numerous organisms, as discussed previously.

Upstream and downstream sampling of the bacteria was accomplished using a one-stage
Andersen viable bioaerosol sampler. The one-stage Andersen sampler is a 400-hole multiple-jet
impactor operating at 28 L/min. The cutoff diameter (dso) is 0.65 //m - the aerodynamic
diameter where the collection efficiency of the sampler is 50%.  After sampling, the petri dishes
were removed from the sampler and incubated at appropriate times and temperatures for the test
organism being used. Colony forming units (CPUs) were then enumerated and their identity
visually confirmed. A positive hole correction was used to adjust colony counts from the
Andersen multiple-hole impactor for the possibility of collecting multiple colonies through a
hole5.

The microbial viruses were collected in  AGI-30s.  The AGI-30 is a high velocity liquid impinger
operating at a flow rate of 12.3 to 12.6 L/min.  The dso is approximately 0.3 //m.  The AGI-30 is
the sampler against which the other commonly used bioaerosol samplers are often compared.

For the inert KC1 aerosol filtration efficiency measurements, the particle sizing measurements
were made  with two particle counting instruments: a Climet model 500 spectrometer/optical
particle counter (OPC)  covering the particle diameter size range  from 0.3 to 10 //m in 12 particle
sizing channels and a TSI scanning mobility particle sizer (SMPS) to cover the range from 0.03
to 0.5 //m.  Depending upon the quality  of the data from any individual test, the SMPS can
sometimes  reliably quantify particles even smaller than 0.03 //m, and when this is the case, those
smaller sizes are reported here. The ability to quantify sizes smaller than 0.03 //m is determined
as defined in Table A2  of the test/QA plan. According to the test/QA plan, a data control
parameter for the SMPS requires that the standard deviation on upstream  counts be computed for
each efficiency test based on the upstream particle counts and that the standard deviation be less
than 0.30 before the data are used. The lower size ranges for the  SMPS are included in the
verification report only if they meet the  data control parameter.

Quality Control (QC) procedures for running the test duct and the measuring equipment are
defined in the test/QA plan.
                                            3

-------
The filters to be tested were obtained directly from the vendor's warehouse by Intertek ETL
SEMKO - an independent organization recommended by the industry - on June 7, 2004
following the NAF A Product Certification Program Procedural Guide6.  A minimum of four
filters were procured, and were sent to RTI. The four filters were used as shown in Table 1.

Full details of the test method can be found in RTFs test/QA plan1.

                    Table  1. Numbers of Filters and Expected Utilization
Tests
ASHRAE Standard 52.2 test (0.3 to 10 pm)
Initial efficiency for an inert aerosol (0.03 to 10 |j,m)
Initial efficiency for three bioaerosols
Dust load to final pressure drop with ASHRAE dust
Efficiency for inert aerosol after dust-loading (0.03 to 10 |j,m)
Efficiency for three bioaerosols after dust-loading (0.03 to 10 |j,m)
Reserve filtera
Filter #
1
X






2

X
X
X
X
X

3






X
4






X
       Tillers # 3 and # 4 have been kept in reserve to be used if needed.

4.0    Bioaerosol Filtration Efficiency Calculation

Bioaerosol samples were collected simultaneously using multiple samplers. A minimum of six,
usually twelve, replicates were collected for each efficiency determination.

The mean upstream  and downstream CFUs were calculated as:
                  U =
                       i=\
and
            D =
                                                              i=\
                                                                                  (1)
                         n
                                                               n
where:
             D; = Downstream count of the ith sample and n is the number of replicate samples
             collected and
             U;= Upstream count of the ith sample and n is the number of replicate samples
             collected.

The calculation of the penetration was based on the ratio of the downstream to upstream
culturable counts. The penetration with the filter installed in the test rig (Pmeasured) is shown in
the following equation:
where:
                                     P.
  D
                                                                                    (2)
                                      measured
                                                 U

-------
              D = Mean downstream count with a filter installed in the test rig and
              ^ = Mean upstream count with a filter installed in the test rig.
The PIOO (no filter installed in the test rig) was calculated as the Pmeasured but using the results of
the no filter tests.
                                    MOO ~~
                                        -D
                                            100.
                                             /u
                                                            (3)
                                                 100
where:
              Dioo = Mean downstream count with no filter in the test rig and
              C/ioo = Mean upstream count with no filter in the test rig.

To remove system bias, the Pmeasured is corrected by the penetration of a blank "no filter" test for
                                 D     ,  rmeasured.
                                ± corrected -       /
                                                 Pwo
                                                                                    (4)
which no air cleaner is installed in the duct (Pioo).
The filtration efficiency is then calculated as shown in Eq. 5.

                     Filtration Efficiency (%) = 100(1- Pcorrected)
                                                                (5)
The DQOs are the 95% confidence interval and were calculated based on the
standard deviation of the Pmeasured penetration computed from the coefficient of variance of
upstream and downstream culturable counts of as shown in Eq. 6.
Combined Std . Deviation = P measur
                                                    ed
                                                             +
(6)
where:
               = Penetration calculated from the upstream and downstream culturable counts,
       CVu    = Coefficient of variance for the upstream Pmeasured counts, and
       CVD    = Coefficient of variance for the downstream Pmeasured counts.

5.0    Test Results
The bioaerosol filtration efficiency results are found in Table 2.

                      Table 2. Bioaerosol Filtration Results for Filter # 2
Filter
Condition
Clean
Dust-loaded
Pressure
Drop
Pa (in. H2O)
134 (0.54)
348(1.4)
Filtration
Efficiency for
Removal of
B. atrophaeus, %
94
99.8
Filtration
Efficiency for
Removal of
S. marcescens, %
95
99.9
Filtration
Efficiency for
Removal of
MS2 phage, %
96
99.7

-------
The ASHRAE filtration efficiencies and the MERV are shown in Table 3.  The filtration
efficiencies (average of the minimum composite efficiency) are presented by particle size
groupings: El, 0.3 to 1.0 //m; E2, 1.0 to 3.0 //m; and E3, 3.0 //m to 10 //m. The full ASHRAE
52.2 test results are provided in the Appendix.

The filtration efficiency for inert particles is plotted so that the efficiencies for particles from
about 0.03 to 10 //m can be observed  (Figure 3). Note that this is a logarithmic (base 10) scale
on the X axis. Two instruments were used to obtain the measurements.  The  SMPS was used to
measure particles up to 0.5 //m and the OPC was used for particles from 0.3 to 10 //m. There is
good agreement in the size range covered by both instruments. These measurements were made
on a filter when clean and then when dust-loaded.

       Table 3. Summary of Removal Efficiency Using ASHRAE 52.2 Test  for Filter # 1
Filter
Tri-Dim Predator II
El
0.3 to 1.0 Aim,
80
E2
1.0 to 3.0 Aim,
98
E3
3.0 to 10 Aim,
99
MERV
14 at 0.93m3/sec
(1970 cfm)
                            100
                            80
                            60
                            20
                                                         A
                                                         SMPS-loaded
                             0.01     0.10      1.00
                                   Particle Diameter (^m)
                                                     10.00
  Figure 3. Summary of the Inert Aerosol Filtration Efficiency Data for the Clean and Dust Loaded
  Filter, #2

The quality assurance officer has reviewed the test results and the quality control data and has
concluded that the data quality objectives (DQOs) (Table 4) given in the approved test/QA plan
have been attained. The DQOs do not include the variabilities associated with the no-filter
(PI00) measurements or the positive hole correction.

-------
   Table 4. DQOs for Precision of Filtration Efficiency Measurements for Culturable Bioaerosol
Data quality objective
Precision of filtration
efficiency, %
Test organism
Spore-forming bacteria
(B. atrophaeus)
±8a
Vegetative bacteria
(S. marcescem)
±lla
Bacterial virus
(MS2 phage)
±13a
 a 95% confidence level, based on the standard deviation of penetration computed from the
 coefficient of variance upstream and downstream Pmeasured culturable counts.

 6.0    Limitations and Applications

 This verification report addresses three performance measures of media air filters: filtration
 efficiency for inert particles; removal efficiency for selected bioaersols and pressure drop.
 Users may wish to consider other performance parameters such as service life and cost when
 selecting a general ventilation air filter for their application.

 In accordance with the test/QA plan1, this verification statement is valid for 3 years following the
 last signature added on the verification statement.

7.0     References

 1.  RTI. 2004. Test/QA Plan for Biological Testing of General Ventilation Filters, Version 2.
    Research Triangle Institute, Research Triangle Park, NC.

 2.  ANSI/ASHRAE Standard  52.2-1999, Method of Testing General Ventilation Air-Cleaning
    Devices, American National Standards Institute/American Society of Heating, Refrigerating
    and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Atlanta, GA.

 3.  Knight, V.  1973.  Viral and Mycoplasmal Infections of the Respiratory Tract, Lea & Febiger,
    Philadelphia, PA.

 4.  Buckland, F.E., and Tyrell, D.A.S. 1962. Loss of Infectivity on Drying Various Viruses,
    Nature 195: 1063-1064.

 5.  Macher, J.M. 1989. Positive Hole Correction of Multiple-jet Impactors for Collecting Viable
    Microorganisms, American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal. 50: 561-568.

 6.  NAFA (National Air Filtration Association).  2001. Product Certification Program
    Procedural Guide Approved Version 1, Second Revision, February 2001. Virginia Beach,
    VA.

-------
  Appendix ASHRAE 52.2 Test Report
For Tri-Dim Filter Corporation Predator II Filter
    ASHRAE 52.2  TEST REPORT

   Manufacturer:    Tri-Dim Filter Corporation
   Product Name:    Predator II

   RTI Report No.    AY07130401
          Test Laboratory:
                RTI
        3040 Cornwall is Road
   Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
            919-541-6941
            mko@rti.org
                8

-------
                                                                                  Page 1 of 3
                        ASHRAE Std. 52.2 Air Cleaner Performance Report Summary
                       	This report applies to the tested device only.	
Laboratory Data
RTI Report No.
Test Laboratory
Operator
Particle Counter(s):
AY07130401
                Date
                 7-13-04
Research Triangle Institute
Clayton
Brand      Climet
                Supervisor Owen/Hanley
                Model     500
Device Manufacturer's Data
Manufacturer
Product Name
Product Model
Test requested by
Sample obtained from
Catalog rating:
Specified test conditions:
Device Description
Nominal Dimensions (in.):
Generic name
Amount and type of adhesive
Other attributes

Test Conditions
Airflow (cfm)
Face Velocity (fpm)
Test aerosol type:
Remarks

Resistance Test Results
Initial resistance (in. wg)
Tri-Dim Filter Corporation
Predator II
8VADTP123C23CCOOO
ETV
ETV
Airflow rate
Airflow (cfm)
Face Velocity (fpm)
          NA
         1970
         Initial dP (in. wg)
         Final dP (in. wg)
                                                             493
24x24x12
VCell
      (height x width x depth)
                 Media color
                 White
NA
2 V Cells
   1970
Temperature (F)
      74
    493
Final Pressure Drop (in. wg)
                     1.40
    KCI
Plastic Frame
   0.51
      Final resistance (in. wg)
                         NA
                         1.40
                         46
                               1.40
Minimum Efficiency Reporting Data
Composite average efficiencies
Air cleaner average Arrestance per Std 52.1:
        E1
80
Minimum efficiency reporting value (MERV) for the device:
E2
98
                        NA
E3
99
                                     14 @   1970
                                         cfm

-------
                                   Report No.  AY07130401
                                   Research Triangle Institute
         100
Nominal Dimensions (in
         90-
Final Resistance (ii
         80 -
      — .   70 - -
Min. Diaift* (|jml
Max. Dia& (|jffl?
      o
      'o
      E  50
      2
         40 --
         30
         20 --
          10 --
            0.1
                                                                                    -•-Initial Efficiency
                                                                                    -•-After 1st loading
                                                                                    -A-After 2nd loading
                                                                                    -•-After 3rd loading
                                                                                    -*- After 4th loading
                                                                                    -A-After 5th loading
                                    Particle Diameter
                                                   (fpm)
                                                              (m/s)
                                                                                10
(in. H2O)
(Pa)
     .. 100
       90
>- 70
o
§  60
'o
it  50
LU
.1  4°
"ro  30
E  20
   10
                  Minimum Composite Curve
    0.1                    1
              Particle Diameter (urn)
                                                  10
                                                          0.8
                                                         O
                                                         (N
                                                         I
                                                         gO.6
                                                         
-------
                                              TABULATED DATA SUMMARY
                                              Report No. AY07130401
                                              Research Triangle Institute
Summary of Test Conditions:
Product Manufacturer
Product Name
Nominal Dimensions (in.)
Airflow (cfm)
Final Resistance (in.  H2O)
                        Tri-Dim Filter Corporation
                        Predator II
                        24x24x12
                         1970
                          1.40
OPC Channel Number
Min. Diam. (urn)
Max. Diam. (urn)
Geo. Mean Diam (urn)
                                                     Efficiency (%) per Indicated Size Range
1
0.3
0.4
0.35
2
0.4
0.55
0.47
3
0.55
0.7
0.62
4
0.7
1
0.84
5
1
1.3
1.14
6
1.3
1.6
1.44
7
1.6
2.2
1.88
8
2.2
3
2.57
9
3
4
3.46
10
4
5.5
4.69
11
5.5
7
6.20
12
7
10
8.37
Initial efficiency
after first dust load
after second dust load
after third dust load
after fourth dust load
after fifth dust load
Run No.
AY071 30402
AY071 30403
AY071 30404
AY071 30405
AY071 40401
AY071 40402

70
76
88
94
96
98

76
83
93
96
98
98

84
90
96
98
99
99

91
95
98
99
99
99

96
98
99
99
100
100

98
99
99
100
100
100

99
100
100
100
100
100

99
99
100
100
100
100

99
100
100
100
100
100

99
100
100
100
100
100

99
100
100
100
100
100

99
100
100
100
100
100
Minimum Composite Efficiency
                           70    76
                            84
           91
     96    98    99    99    99    99    99    99
E1 =
E2 =
E3 =
80
98
99
(E1 is the average of the minimum composite efficiency values for particle diameters from 0.3 to 1 urn.)
(E2 is the average of the minimum composite efficiency values for particle diameters from 1 to 3 urn.)
(E3 is the average of the minimum composite efficiency values for particle diameters from 3 to 10 urn.)
MERV=   14
Resistance to Airflow for clean filter:    0.93 m3/s (1970 cfm)
   Airflow
     50
     75
    100
    125
     Airflow
     (m3/s)

       0.46
       0.70
       0.93
       1.16
            Airflow
            (cfm)

              985
             1478
             1970
             2463
Air Velocity
  (fpm)

   246
   369
   493
   616
Air Velocity
  (m/s)

   1.25
   1.88
   2.50
   3.13
Resistance
(in. H2O)

  0.22
  0.35
  0.51
  0.67
Resistance
  (Pa)

   55
   87
  126
  167
Resistance to Airflow with Loading at   0.93 m3/s (1970 cfm)

                                  Resistance  Resistance
                                  (in. H2O)      (Pa)
Initial
After first dust load
After second dust load
After third dust load
After fourth dust load
After fifth dust load
                         0.51
                         0.55
                         0.73
                         0.95
                         1.18
                         1.40
                           126
                           136
                           181
                           237
                           293
                           348
Weight Gain of filter after completion of dust loading steps
                                                         11
                                                    100.3 g

-------