portable high efficiency air filtration (pheaf) device field testing and validation standard...
TRANSCRIPT
Portable High Efficiency Air Filtration (PHEAF) Device
Field Testing and Validation Standard
ANSI/IESO Standard 4310-2009
WHERE ARE HEPA FILTERSUSED?
WHERE ARE HEPA FILTERSUSED?
Whenever we need to move contaminated air -
without the contamination coming along for the ride
ASBESTOS, LEAD AND MICROBIAL REMEDIATION . . .
ASBESTOS, LEAD AND MICROBIAL REMEDIATION . . .
AFDs & HEPA Vacuums AFDs & HEPA Vacuums
MERCURY SPILL CLEAN UP, RADIOACTIVE PARTICLES
MERCURY SPILL CLEAN UP, RADIOACTIVE PARTICLES
AFDs & HEPA Vacuums AFDs & HEPA Vacuums
QuickTime™ and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
HEPA FILTERSHEPA FILTERS
HEPA filters are designed to be 99.97 efficient at 0.3 micron size particles
But what happens to that efficiency when youplace that filter into a portable filtration device?
They are no longer HEPA efficient !
1. They leak at the edges2. They leak at the seals 3. They loose their seal
during movement4. They get micro holes
5. They grow stuff
RESEARCHSHOWING ACTUAL PARTICLE
LEAKAGE
PHEAF DEVICE SHOWING NO LEAKAGE
PHEAF DEVICE SHOWING A LITTLE LEAKAGE
PHEAF DEVICE SHOWING SOME LEAKAGE
PHEAF DEVICE SHOWING WORRISOME LEAKAGE
HISTORYHISTORY
That was almost 20 years ago.That was almost 20 years ago.
The first call for a “in field” testing and certification standard for portable HEPA filtered devices
appeared in an article in Outlook magazine in 1990.
HISTORY
Since 1990, the cost and portability of the particle counting equipment required for “in field”
testing and certification has significantly decreased.
This equipment is now within the price range for large contractors or for consultants to test equipment
as part of their oversight of an abatement or remediation project.
HAND-HELD PARTICLE COUNTERS
LIGHTHOUSE KANOMAX MET ONE FLUKEIQAir
HOW CRITICAL IS PHEAF DEVICE TESTING?
• Only the HEPA filters are “certified”•Testing is done by a 3rd party
• PHEAF device manufacturers do not test or certify the complete device
• There is no standard that requires testing or certification of the complete device
WHY SHOULD WE TEST THEM ?
CURRENT DOE EXPERIENCE
Replacement HEPA filter testing prior to installation into the HEPA device
by the Dept. of Energy showed a 20% failure rate of the filters alone
1 IN 5 NEW FILTERSWAS NOT HEPA EFFICIENT !
ACTUAL TESTING EXPERIENCE
1.HEPA filtered equipment contamination of a mold remediation
2. HEPA filtered equipment leaked on anasbestos abatement
3. Testing of numerous pieces ofcontractor equipment showed significant
leakage (shown in std. appendix)
SECONDARY ISSUE
Inability to adequately clean a PHEAF device when installing
a new HEPA filter
(The Kick Test)
DOE performs in field certification ofall HEPA filtered devices
because of their experience of significant failure rates and
leakage problemsevery time the equipment is moved
(USING AEROSOL GENERATION)
Portable High Efficiency Air Filtration (PHEAF) Device
Field Testing and Certification Interim Standard
ANSI/IESO Standard 4310-2009
This standard applies to Portable High Efficiency Air Filtration Devices.
(PHEAF Devices)
This would include vertical and horizontal portable air filter devices, movable vacuums,
hand held vacuums, and other filtered suction devices used for cleaning surfaces for the purposes of removing dust, dirt, mold, asbestos, lead and
other undesired particulate environmental contaminants.
2. Scope
What standard exist related to testing and certification of HEPA devices?
1. ASTM F1471 - 09 Standard Test Method for Air Cleaning Performance of a High-Efficiency Particulate Air- Filter System.
2. ASHRAE Standard 52.2-2007 : Method of Testing General Ventilation Air-Cleaning Devices for Removal Efficiency by Particle Size
3. DOE-STD-3020-97 : Dept. of Energy, Specification for HEPA filters used by DOE Contractors
4. EN 1822-1:1998 : High efficiency air filters (HEPA and ULPA). Classification, performance testing, marking.
5. JIS Z 8909-1 Test method of filter media for dust collection.
3. Filter Testing and Certification Standards
What standard should PHEAF devices be tested to?
ASHRAE 52.2 - Method of Testing General Ventilation Air-Cleaning Devices for Removal Efficiency by Particle Size
THIS IS THE STANDARD THATESTABLISHES MERV RATINGS
FOR AIR FILTERS
MERV RATINGS
Minimum Efficiency Reporting Value
(range from 1-16 and aremeasured in microns)
The PHEAF Device Standard usesthese ASHRAE MERV efficiencies
to establish the in field testing and validation criteria
Class 5 device - A portable high efficiency air filtration device that operates as a fully effective and functional air
filter, meeting all the filter efficiency requirements of a HEPA filter. (MERV 17)
This class of PHEAF device shall be required for all work in hospitals, in other environments
where the PHEAF device discharges into the general air space of the building
(and for vacuums used outside containment for contaminants such as mercury?)
4. Terminology
Class 4 device - A portable high efficiency air filtration device that operates at a level equivalent to a
99% efficient filter.
This class of PHEAF device shall be required for all work in commercial buildings or in
other environments where the unit discharges into the air space of the building
(and for vacuums used outside containment for contaminants such as mold and asbestos?)
Class 3 device - A portable high efficiency air filtration device that operates at a level equivalent to
a MERV 16 filter. (Approx 95% efficient)
This class of PHEAF device can be used for environmental contaminant filtering and/or
air scrubbing within a containment, provided the containment is under negative pressure and
discharges to the outside air.
Class 2 device - A portable high efficiency air filtration device that operates at a level equivalent to
a MERV 15 filter. (Approx 90% efficient)
This class of PHEAF device shall be the minimum class that is required for
portable vacuums that can be used to clean up small, uncontained mold or asbestos releases.
Class 1 device - A portable high efficiency air filtration device that operates at a level equivalent to
a MERV 14 filter.
This class of PHEAF device can be used for environmental filtering / air scrubbing,
within a containment, provided the containment is under negative pressure and discharges
to the outside air.
Class 0 device - A portable high efficiency air filtration device that operates at a level equivalent to
a MERV 13 filter.
This class of PHEAF device can be used to provide general exhaust or negative pressure within a
contained area when it discharges to the outside air.
This class of portable hand vacuums can discharge into a contained area that is under negative pressure and
from which the air is exhausted to outside of the building.
Classification Class 5 Class 4 Class 3 Class 2 Class 1 Class 0MERV * 17 NA 16 15 14 13
Particle size MINIMUM MEASURED PERCENT FILTER EFFICIENCY (in microns)
0.3 99.97 99 95 85 75 75 0.5 99.97 99 95 90 80 75 0.7 99.97 99 95 90 85 75 1.0 99.97 99 95 90 90 80 2.0 99.97 99 95 90 90 85 3.0 99.97 99 95 90 90 90 5.0 99.97 99 99 90 90 90
10.0 99.97 99 99 90 90 90
Table # 1 : Device Classification by Percent Reduction of Incoming versus Discharge Particle Counts by Particle Size
*This table is based on ratings interpolated from ASHRAE 52.2 -2007 MERV for air filters.
GRAPH 1.
The percent efficiency for each particle size range for the unit shall be compared to the percent
removal efficiencies in Table 1 or Graph 1 and recorded on the form in Appendix A.
A data point that falls between two classes should be rounded down to the lower class.
The lowest class recorded for all the size ranges measured will be the
designated efficiency class for the unit.
I. Reporting and Determining Efficiency Class
Test measurement data shall be recorded on the form in Appendix A. The percent particle count reduction (percent efficiency) for each particle size range shall be calculated using the equation below and also recorded on this form.
Discharge particle concentration1 - __________________________ x 100 = % reduction in particle Incoming particle concentration size concentration
H. Calculation and Interpreting of Results
APPENDIX A
PHEAF Device Testing Data Collection Form
Device Data
Device Description ___________________________ Mfgr _____________________
Unit ID # __________________ Owner ____________________________________
Other Info _____________________________________________________________
Test Event Data
Date _____________________ Test Administrator ___________________________
Location of Test ________________________ Temperature _______ RH _______
Particle Counter Model # ___________ Particle Counter Mfgr. __________________
Date of Calibration ____________________ Method __________________________
Background Airborne Particle Data
Size range Test 1 Test 2 Test 3 Average (Bave)(in microns) (B1) (B2) (B3) (B1 + B2 + B3 / 3)
0.3 ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________
0.5 ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________
1.0 ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________
2.0 ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________
5.0 ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________
10.0 ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________
Test Results at Exhaust of Unit
Size range Test 1 Test 2 Test 3 Average (Tave)(in microns) (T1) (T2) (T3) (T1 + T2 + T3 / 3)
0.3 ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________
0.5 ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________
1.0 ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________
2.0 ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________
5.0 ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________
10.0 ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________
Unit Evaluation
Size range Background Unit Test Efficiency Maximum (in microns) Ave. (Bave) Ave. (Tave) 1-(Tave/Bavex100) Class Rating*
0.3 ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________
0.5 ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________
1.0 ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________
2.0 ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________
5.0 ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________
10.0 ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________
* See Table 1 or Graph 1 for Minimum Particle Efficiencies for Different Classes of Portable High Efficiency Air Filtration Devices (Round down to lower class when data is between two classes)
Overall Classification of Device (minimum rating above) __________________
Comments ______________________________________________________
However, a rating under this method may not be the same
as the aerosol method.
Standard Challenge Concentration
Aerosol Equip. 100 µg/l 100 mg/m3 ASHRAE 52.2 16.3 x 109 p/ft3 70 mg/m3
ASTM F1471 7.0 x 109 p/ft3 30 mg/m3 EU 1822 3.52 x 107 p/ft3 0.15 mg/m3
STANDARDS FOR TESTING HEPA FILTERS
Standard Acceptable Leakage (1- 99.97%= 0.03%)
Aerosol Equip. 0.03 µg/m3 ASHRAE 52.2 4.89 x 105 p/ft3 0.021 µg/m3 ASTM F1471 2.1 x 105 p/ft3 0.009 µg/m3 EU 1822 1.05 x 103 p/ft3 0.00045 µg/m3
STANDARDS FOR TESTING HEPA FILTERS
Consultants in Northern California in the San Francisco Bay area
have been specifying mandatory testing of PHEAF devices
(using aerosol generation) on asbestos abatement projects
for the past 3 years.
TYPICAL TESTING RESULTS
• a leak in the seal against the filter housing (bead of silicone caulk can often fix it)
• physically-damaged HEPA filter - small hole (dab of silicone caulk can fill it)
• degraded HEPA filter (oil mist suspect) (may have to replace the HEPA filter)
• there may be a design flaw in the equipment
IF YOUR EQUIPMENT FAILS
QUESTIONS ?
And Hands-OnExercise