Aerosol Science and Technology

ISSN: 0278-6826 (Print) 1521-7388 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/uast20

Optimizing the Design of Room Air Filters for the

Removal of Submicrometer Particles

Stephen N. Rudnick

To cite this article: Stephen N. Rudnick (2004) Optimizing the Design of Room Air Filters for
the Removal of Submicrometer Particles, Aerosol Science and Technology, 38:9, 861-869, DOI:
10.1080/027868290503109

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/027868290503109

Published online: 15 Apr 2013.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 4289

View related articles

Citing articles: 4 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=uast20
Aerosol Science and Technology, 38:861-869, 2004
Copyright © American Association for Aerosol Research
ISSN: 0278-6826 print/1521-7388 online
DOl: 10.1080/027868290503109
Optimizing the Design of Room Air Filters for the Removal
of Submicrometer Particles
Stephen N. Rudnick
Exposure, Epidemiology and Risk Program, Department of Environmental Health,
Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts
Room air filters, which usually closely resemble high-efficiency
particulate air (HEPA) filters, should be designed to maximize the
clean air delivery rate (CADR) rather than operate at the very high
collection efficiencies and relatively high pressure drops associated
with HEPA filters. That is, for fixed electrical energy consumption,
filters should remove the most particles possible. This can be accom-
plished by designing room filters that operate at lower collection
efficiencies and higher airflow rates than HEPA filters. Based on
filtration theory, the CADR of a fibrous filter is maximized with re-
spect to filter thickness and air velocity at fixed energy consumption
and filtration area. For very small particles for which diffusional
deposition is the predominant collection mechanism, it is shown
that a filter thickness resulting in a collection efficiency of 82% is
optimal. For somewhat larger particles having diameters close to
the filter's most penetrating size, direct interception is included in
the analysis. The importance of inertial impaction and electrostatic
deposition is also considered. This article supports the belief that
room air filters used for enhancing indoor air quality can be im-
proved significantly and suggests a methodology to accomplish this
improvement.
INTRODUCTION
A number of studies have evaluated portable room fan-filter
units used to improve indoor air quality in residences (Offer-
mann et al. 1985; Sextro et al. 1986; Nelson et al. 1988; USEPA
1990; Consumers Union 2002). However, very little has been
done to improve their performance. At the present time, room
air-filtering devices are essentially adaptations of devices used
for other applications; many closely resemble high-efficiency
particulate air (HEPA) filters, which are used in nuclear facili-
ties, clean rooms, biological safety cabinets, and other critical
applications requiring that very few particles penetrate the filter.
According to the strict definition of a HEPA filter, it is at least
Received 8 August 2003 ; accepted 23 June 2004.
Address correspondence to Stephen N. Rudnick, Environmental
Health, Harvard School of Public Health, 665 Huntington Ave., Room
I-B21, Boston, MA 02115, USA. E-mail: srudnick@hsph.harvard.edu
99.97% efficient at removing 0.3 J-tffi particles (DOE 1997),
and it has greater efficiency for smaller and larger particles. A
HEPA filter is made from fiberglass paper and is essentially a
fibrous mat composed of very fine glass fibers held together
with a binder. The fiberglass paper is pleated to increase the area
available for filtration in order to permit greater air throughput
without an increase in pressure drop; thus, air velocity through
the filter media is significantly lower than the velocity upstream
of the pleated paper.
Little notice has been taken of the fundamental difference
between room air filters that operate indoors and those used for
critical nonresidential applications and to protect the outdoor
environment. An air-cleaning device used on a source that has
the potential to pollute the outdoor environment cleans the off-
gas and then discharges the cleaned gas directly to the outdoor
environment. For most applications, these single-pass-type air
cleaners must be extremely efficient if federal standards are to be
met. Air-cleaning devices used for improving indoor air quality,
however, generally work on a different principle: indoor air flows
through the air cleaner, airborne contaminants are removed, and
the cleansed air is returned to the original indoor environment,
where it is expected to mix rapidly with relatively dirty air. High
collection efficiency is not inherently important for these recircu-
latory room air cleaners. It seems likely, then, that a HEPA filter
is not optimal as a room air filter because of its high collection
efficiency, which is associated with higher electtical power cost
and noise. This conclusion is supported by a recent publication
on performance of air filtration technologies (Fisk et al. 2002).
Penetration (P) through an air cleaner, which is equal to
one minus its collection efficiency, is defined as the ratio of
downstream to upstream particle concentrations; for a fibrous
filter, as thickness (t) increases penetration decays exponentially
(Hinds 1999, p. 187):
P = exp( -k 1t). [1]
Pressure drop ( !1p) across a high-efficiency fibrous filter, how-
ever, is directly proportional to the filter's thickness, according
861
862 S. N. RUDNICK
to Darcy's law (Pich 1966):
[2]
For filter media having a specified set of properties (except for
filter thickness) and collecting particles of a specific type and
size, k 1 and k2 are constant. Thus, for each doubling of filter
thickness, pressure drop also doubles, whereas the number of
particles removed is less than the number removed during the
previous doubling of thickness. From a theoretical perspective,
the filter's penetration will never be zero, no matter how thick the
filter is or how high pressure drop becomes; its particle collection
efficiency will approach 100% asymptotically. A filter that is
sufficiently thick to have extremely high collection efficiency is
undesirable for indoor use; wasted electrical energy associated
with high pressure drop can be utilized instead to increase airflow
through a thinner filter.
Optimal design of a fibrous filter should maximize particle
collection by the filter or equivalently maximize its clean air de-
livery rate (CADR). The CADR is probably the most commonly
used single parameter for comparing room air-cleaning devices.
The clean air delivery rate (Qcadr) is defined as the product of
airflow rate (Q) and the device's collection efficiency (E) for a
specific material or particle size (McDonald and Ouyang 2000),
Q cadr = EQ. [3]
Thus, for the special case of an air cleaner collecting a spe-
cific material at essentially 100% efficiency, the CADR is equal
to the airflow rate, whereas if collection efficiency is 50% the
CADR is one half of the airflow rate. CADR is generally de-
termined indirectly from measurements of the decay rate of
contaminant concentration in a chamber with and without an
air-cleaning device operating. This experimental method is the
basis for ANSI/AHAM Standard AC-1 (AHAM 1988), an in-
dustry standard for testing of portable household electric-cord-
connected room air cleaners using cigarette smoke, Arizona fine
road dust, and paper Mulberry pollen.
METHODOLOGY
In order to optimize the design of a room air filter; mod-
els for predicting a fibrous filter's pressure drop and collection
efficiency are necessary. These models must be valid through-
out the range of parameter values considered. In that none of
the theories for predicting pressure drop and efficiency are uni-
versally accepted, somewhat different outcomes may be possi-
ble, depending on which models are chosen. Nevertheless, the
methodology used here could be easily adapted to other models
that prove to be more accurate for predicting filter performance.
Practical constraints must be placed on the operation of a
room air-filtering device. In particular, the physical size of the
device and the noise it generates must be reasonable. In addition,
the power consumption of the fan's motor must be less than a
specified amount in order that it can be used in most residences.
In the United States, an electrical power usage of about 1700 W
for houses having 15-A circuits is an absolute limit, although a
fraction of this amount is more realistic as a practical limit for a
portable room air cleaner.
To maximize the CADR of a fibrous filter, the basis on which
the CADR rate is determined must be specified. The filter could
be optimized based on a specific particle size or particle size
distribution. If the optimization is based on a distribution of par-
tide sizes, the method by which particles are quantified must
also be specified (e.g., by number or by mass). Although maxi-
mization of the CADR for a specific particle size distribution is
possible, it is considerably more complicated and is not under-
taken in this article. Another potential complication is that the
deposition of particles in the filter tends to change the structure
of the filter, resulting in an increase in both pressure drop and
collection efficiency. The use of a course-fiber prefilter to re-
move large particles, which is a common practice, will diminish
this effect. In the development that follows, the consequences of
filter loading are neglected.
Pressure Drop across a Fibrous Filter
Based on a theoretical analysis, Kuwahara (1959) derived
equations describing both the pressure drop and flow field in
an idealized fibrous filter. Kuwahara's theoretical pressure drop
(f..p1 ) is given by
[4]
where a is solidity (fraction of filter volume that is fibers), TJ is
air viscosity, t is filter thickness, and df is fiber diameter. Vis
interstitial velocity, the mean velocity within the filter medium:
Vo
V=-- [5]
1-a
Vo is face velocity, the mean velocity directly upstream and
perpendicular to the filter paper:
Q
Vo= A ' [6]
or equivalently
Q = (1 - a)AV, [7]
where Q is volumetric airflow rate and A is filtration area, the
cross-sectional area of the filter medium available for flow. K
is commonly referred to as the Kuwabara hydrodynamic factor
(Hinds 1999, p. 193):
a2 lna 3
K =a------. [8]
4 2 4
For fibers smaller than about 1-2 ttm, Equation (8) should be
corrected for slip (Pich 1966).
 OPTIMIZING THE DESIGN OF ROOM AIR FILTERS 863

Equation (4) overestimates the pressure drop determined ex- collection mechanisms. In fact, it has become accepted practice
perimentally in fibrous filters. This discrepancy is attributed to to simply sum single-fiber efficiencies (Stenhouse 1998):
structural differences between real and idealized fibrous filters.
In real filters, spacing between fibers is nonuniform, one fiber [13]
may screen another fiber, and fibers are not all completely per-
pendicular to the airflow (Davies 1973, p. 42; Brown 1993,
For a given filter, ET depends on the particle properties, partic-
p. 53). These differences are also responsible for the particle
ularly particle size, and air velocity. Based on simple geometric
collection efficiency to be overestimated by theoretical models
consideration, collection efficiency (E) of a fibrous filter can be
based on the Kuwahara flow field. In order to correct theoretical
predicted from the total single-fiber efficiency (Lee and Mukund
prediction of pressure drop and collection efficiency, a homo-
2001):
geneity factor (£ ), defined as the ratio of theoretical pressure
drop to experimental pressure drop (f:..p), has been used (Yeh
and Liu 1974; Stenhouse 1998). E = 1- exp
4aETt ]
[ - n(l - a)df . [14]
f:..p,
c:- --
- f:..p . [9]
Single-Fiber Efficiency for Diffusional Deposition
Pressure drop across a real fibrous filter can therefore be pre- From a theoretical analysis based on the Kuwabara flow field,
dicted from the following equation: Lee and Liu (1982) derived the following equation for single-
fiber efficiency due to diffusion (ED):
[10]
1 ) 1/3
ED=2.6
(
~a Pe- 2/3, [15]
According to Liu and Rubow (1986), the homogeneity factor
is approximately equal to 1.6 for polyester fibrous filters. The
where Pe is the Peclet number,
same value gives acceptable agreement with experimental data
for glass fibers (Kowalski et al. 1999). In general, sis found to lie
between 1.13 and 2.25 (Stenhouse 1998). Use of the Kuwabara [16]
flow field, and thus Equation (1 0)-and Equations ( 19), (20), and
(21) to follow- are valid only when the fiber Reynolds number
The particle diffusion coefficient (D) can be determined from
(Rer) is less than about 0.5 (Davies 1973, p. 37):
the Stokes-Einstein relationship (Hinds 1999, p. 152):
drPaV
Rer=--, [11]
TJ [17]

where Pa is the density of air.

Particle Collection Efficiency of a Fibrous Filter
For the purpose of predicting a fibrous filter's collection ef-
ficiency, the medium is usually modeled as a three-dimensional
array of equally spaced uniform-diameter fibers oriented perpen-
where k is Boltzmann's constant, Tis absolute temperature, and
dp is particle diameter. Cc is the slip-correction factor, which
can be calculated from the following empirical equation (Hinds
1999, p. 49):

= I + d~ [ 2.34 + 1.05 exp ( -0.39;)],

dicular to the direction of airflow. Each fiber collects a fraction
of the particles that would pass through the space it occupies
if no fibers were present. This fraction, which is called total
single-fiber efficiency (ET ), is the result of various collection
mechanisms, each of which is also characterized by a single-
fiber efficiency (E;). If these mechanisms are assumed to act
independently, ET can be determined from the following equa-
tion (Brown 1993, p. 106):
[12]
Cc [18]
where A. is the mean free path of air. Like the theoretical ex-
pression for pressure drop given by Equation (4), Equation (15)
overestimates single-fiber efficiency due to diffusion because
of the inhomogeneity of real fibrous filters . To correct for this,
the theoretical prediction of ED is divided by the homogeneity
factor (Kirsch and Fuchs 1968; Yeh and Liu and Rubow 1986;
Stenhouse 1998; Kowalski et al. 1999) thus

Lee and Liu (1982) have shown that simply summing single-fiber
efficiencies provides an excellent prediction of total single-fiber [19]
efficiency when diffusion and interception are the predominant
864 S. N. RUDNICK

Single-Fiber Efficiency for Direct Interception 65 % depending on type of motor. Fan total efficiency for prop-
Using the Kuwabara flow field, Lee and Liu (1982) also de- erly sized fans with forward-curved blades is about 50%. The
rived a theoretical equation for single-fiber efficiency due to size of the fan should be chosen so as to maximize fan total
direct interception (E R). Because of the inhomogeneity of real efficiency (Jorgensen 1999).
fibrous filters, the value of E R predicted from this equation is too Substituting for Q and !::;.p in Equation (23) from Equations
large. To account for this overestimation, the theoretical value of (7) and (10), respectively, and solving for V gives
E R can be divided by the homogeneity factor (Kirsch and Fuchs
1968; Yeh andLiu 1974; Liu and Rubow 1986; Stenhouse 1998;
Kowalski et al. 1999), resulting in the following equation:
V = d1 eHK [25]
4 a(1- a)rytA

ER 1 +-
=- R [ 2ln(1 + R)- 1 +a
2eK
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
+ (-1
1+R
)2(1- ~)-
2
~(1
2
+ R)z] ' [20] Particles Collected Predominantly
by Diffusional Deposition
where R is the interception parameter, the ratio of the particle For very small particles on the order of 0.1 f-LID or less, such
to fiber diameters. as those that can arise from cooking, cigarette smoking, or radon
decay, diffusion is the predominant collection mechanism (as-
Single-Fiber Efficiency for Inertia/Impaction surning electrostatics plays no role), and other collection mech-
Based on the Kuwabara flow field, Stechkina et al. (1969) anisms can be neglected (Davies 1973). Substituting for ET (as-
numerically calculated single-fiber efficiency due to inertial im- suming ET ~En) in Equation (14) from Equation (19) gives
paction (E 1 ); for R ::::: 0.4 and a ::::: 0.111, they fitted their results
to the following equation: 10.4at D 213 ]
E = 1 - exp - -------=--:-::---- [26]

E1 =
·62 )R2- 27.5R2·8]
(Stk)[(29.6- 28a 0
lK 2 , [21]
[ n(1- a)2!3dY3e Klf3y2!3 .

Optimizing with Respect to Filter Thickness

where Stk is the particle Stokes number defined by the following Substituting for Q and E in Equation (3) from Equations (7)
equation: and (26), respectively, and then replacing V from Equation (25)
in the resultant equation gives
[22]
(1- a)eAHK
where Pp is particle density. aryt
26.0a4/3T/lf3t4f3 A 1/3 D213 ] }
Power Consumption x 1 - exp - _ _ _ _..:._,~-----
{ [ n(1 _ a)lf3dj3 8 4!3 Hl/3 K213 ·
The power required to overcome resistance to airflow, usually
referred to as air power (H), is equal to the product of airflow [27]
rate and fan total pressure (Burgess et al. 1982), which is ap-
proximately equal to the pressure drop across the filter: A dimensionless thickness (X) and dimensionless CADR (Y) can
be defined based on the following equations:
H= Qi::;.p. [23]

The electrical power required by the fan's motor (He) is given

by

H
He=--, [24]
T/mT/T
Substituting for t and Qcadr in Equation (27) from Equations
where 1Jm is motor efficiency (for conversion of electrical energy (28) and (29), respectively, gives
into rotating mechanical energy) and TIT is fan total efficiency
(for transfer of rotating mechanical energy to kinetic and pres-
sure energy of the air). For small single-phase motors, the motor 1 - exp(- X 413 )
efficiency for properly sized motors will vary from about 30% to
Y= .JX . [30]
 OPTIMIZING THE DESIGN OF ROOM AIR FILTERS 865

Setting the derivative of Y with respect to X equal to zero gives be determined. A standard HEPA filter operating at a nominal
the optimal dimensionless thickness (X opt) for a fixed air power, airflow rate of 0.472 m 3 /s (1000 cfm) has a maximum pressure
filtration area, solidity, and fiber and particle diameters: drop of 249 Pa (1 in.w.), which based on Equation (23) corre-
sponds to an air power of 118 W (0.158 hp). It contains a mini-

( 1 + 3x
8 4/3) exp ( 4/3)
opt -Xopt - 1 = 0. [31]
mum of 18.6 m 2 (200 ft 2 ) offiberg1ass filter paper, housed within
a 610 x 610 x 292 mm (24 x 24 x 11.5 in) frame (ASME 1998).
Based on Equation (3) and a minimum efficiency of99.97 %, the
The solution to this equation is CADR is 0.472 m 3 /s (1000 cfm).
The hypothetical fibrous filter will also have a CADR of
Xopt = 1.50, [32] 0.472 m 3 /s (1000 cfm) and contain 18.6 m 2 of fiberglass filter
paper (t: ~ 1.6), but unlike a HEPA filter it will have a solidity
which when substituted into Equation (30) gives the maximum of 0.03 and be composed of 1.5 p,m diameter fibers. Optimal
value of the dimensionless CADR (Ymax): thickness of this filter will be based on collection of 0.05 p,m
diameter spherical particles from air at 20°C and 1 atm. Based
Ymax = 0.670. [33] on Equations (29) and (33), the optimized fibrous filter has an air
power requirement of 12.8 W (0.0 172 hp ), only 11% of what the
The second derivative of Y with respect to X evaluated at X opt = equivalent HEPA filter requires. The thickness from Equations
1.50 is negative, and thus this extremum is the maximum value (28) and (32) is 0.300 mm, the airflow rate is 0.575 m 3 /s (1210
of Y. Optimal particle collection efficiency (Eopt ), which is given cfm) from Equations (3) and (34), and the pressure drop is 22.4
by the numerator of Equation (30) evaluated at X opt = 1.50, is Pa (0.0900 in.w.), based, on Equation (10) after substituting for
as follows: V from Equation (7).
According to Equation (29), there is a tradeoff between filter
Eopt = 82.0%. [34] paper area and power consumption. For an optimized fibrous
filter, if filtration area is decreased, air power requirements will
This efficiency corresponds to a penetration that is about 600 be increased (assuming that other previously specified parame-
times greater than that of a HEPA filter operating at its minimum ters remain unchanged) and vice versa. Due to space limitations,
efficiency of99.97%. Based on Equation (30), the dimensionless it may be advantageous to reduce filter paper area and thus the
CADR and collection efficiency are plotted versus the dimen- physical size of a filter. For the example given above, if area is re-
sionless thickness in Figure 1. This plot is useful in visualizing duced by 50% to 9.3 m 3 , the optimized filter will have a thickness
the variation in CADR and collection efficiency possible when of0.477 mm, air power requirement of 40.8 W (0.0546 hp) , and
filter thickness is not chosen optimally. pressure drop of70.9 Pa (0.285 in.w.). In addition to increasing
For illustrative purposes, the optimal thickness of a hypothet- power consumption and pressure drop, decreasing filter paper
ical fibrous filter that in many ways resembles a HEPA filter will area has the additional disadvantage of increasing noise genera-
tion: for a properly sized fan operating at a specific airflow rate,
the sound power generated is directly proportional to the square
of the pressure drop (ASHRAE 1987).
~Collection
Efficiency
In this last example, use of the Kuwahara flow field is valid
because based on Equation (11), the filter's Reynolds number
is 6.3 X 10- 3 . Direct interception and inertial impaction were
assumed to be negligible compared with diffusional deposition;
from Equations (20) and (21 ), interception and impaction single-
......--- Dimensionless fiber efficiencies Of 6.38 X 10- 4 and 2.14 X 10- S, respectively,
CADR
are small compared with the diffusional single-fiber efficiency
calculated from Equation (19) , which is 0.138.

Optimizing with Respect to Air Velocity

0 ~-=~~--~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Based on Equation (27), the CADR was maximized with
0.01 0.1 10 100 1000 respect to filter thickness holding the other parameters constant.
Dimensionless Thickness (X) Velocity is not a parameter in Equation (27) and is not held
constant. An alternative approach is maximizing the CADR with
Figure 1. Collection efficiency and dimensionless clean air respect to velocity; that is, substituting for Q and E in Equation
delivery rate of a fibrous filter versus its dimensionless thick- (3) from Equations (7) and (26), respectively, then eliminating
ness. The plot is based on collecting particles with diameters thickness rather than velocity using Equation (25), and finally
that are less than or equal to about 0.1 p,m. defining a dimensionless CADR (Y) and dimensionless velocity
866 S. N. RUDNICK

(Z), resulting in the following equation: Particles Collected Predominantly by Diffusional

Deposition and Interception
[35] For particles having diameters between about 0.1 and 0.2 {lm,
in addition to diffusional deposition direct interception of par-
ticles must also be taken into account (Davies 1973). After in-
The dimensionless CADR can be maximized with respect to the
cluding an interception term in Equation (26), that is, letting
dimensionless velocity. Calculated values for all parameters (E,
Er ~ Ev + ER, Equation (27) becomes
t, H, i">.p, and V) will be the same using either approach. Thus,
it can be said that either approach is equivalent to finding the
(1- a)sAHK
optimum velocity to maximize the CADR.

Optimizing with Respect to Fiber Diameter

or Filter Solidity
Starting with Equation (27), CADR can also be maximized
with respect to fiber diameter or filter solidity in place of fil-
ter thickness. Collection efficiency when the fiber diameter is
where
chosen optimally is 77 .9%. If the CADR is maximized with
respect to solidity, the optimal collection efficiency cannot be
determined unless numerical values for the other parameters are
specified.

Collection Efficiency for Particles Collected

Predominantly by Electrostatic Deposition
Taking the derivative of Qcadr with respect to t and setting this
Collection of particles in fibrous filters by electrostatic de- equal to zero gives
position is not well understood, but even if it was the charge
on fibers and particles, which are necessary inputs into any pre- 22.la4/31"/lf3t4f3 A l/3 D213 J
dictive model, are generally unknown. Nevertheless, when par- [1 + (1- a)lf3d}f 3s4f3Hlf3K2f3 +2ft
ticles are removed predominantly by electrostatic deposition,
the approximate collection efficiency of a fibrous filter having
x exp -
8.28a4/31"/lf3t4f3Alf3D2f3
-
J
ft - 1 = 0. [40]
an optimal thickness can be determined by the same procedure [ (1- a)lf3d}f 3s4f3Hlf3K2f3
used for deriving Equation (34). Single-fiber efficiency due to
electrostatic deposition for coulombic, polarization, and image Combining Equations (7) and (25) so as to eliminate V and then
forces will increase if velocity is decreased, because attractive solving for H gives
forces have a longer time to act. According to Brown (1993),
single-fiber efficiency due to electrostatic deposition can vary [41]
from being inversely proportional to V 113 to inversely propor-
tional to V. If V to the one-third power is used, following the
same procedure that was used to derive Equation (30) gives Inserting this expression for H in Equation (40) gives

1 + (8.75aA2f3 D2f3 + 2f)t]

[36] [ d}/3 s K lf3 Q213

whereas using V to the first power gives x exp [

1 - exp(- X 312 )
Y= ./X . [37]
For Equation (36), the maximum dimensionless CADR occurs
at Xopt = 1.42, which corresponds to a collection efficiency
of 77.9%. For Equation (37) it occurs at Xopt = 1.54, which
corresponds to 85.1% efficiency. Thus, the optimal collection
efficiency when electrostatic deposition is the predominant col-
lection mechanism will be between 78 and 85%, which is not
much different than the 82% derived previously when diffusional
deposition is the predominant collection mechanism.
- (3.28aA2/3 D2f3
+f ) t
J-- 1. [42]
df513 sKlf3Q2f3
Equation (42) can be solved for filter thickness.
As an example, the optimal thickness of a fibrous filter col-
lecting 0.2 J.lm diameter spherical particles at 20°C and 1 atm
will be determined. For this example, the filter medium is as-
sumed to be fiberglass paper (s ::::::; 1.6) having a solidity of 0.03
and a filtration area of 10 m 3, and composed of 1.5 J.lm diameter
fibers. The desired airflow rate through the filter is 0.472 m3 /s
(1000 cfm). Except for thickness, all parameters appearing in
Equation (42) are known; substituting for these parameters gives
an optimal filter thickness of 1.45 mm. The required air power
 OPTIMIZING THE DESIGN OF ROOM AIR FILTERS
100 -- -- -- - - ~-- --
@: 95
~ tages. The approach is unconventional, and thus the idea that a
.
1:
·;:;
ffi
1:
90
0
~ vince a skeptical person: a recirculating filter collecting airborne
.!!!
8 85
80+---~--~--~--~---r--~--~--~--~--~
0 0.5
Particle Diameter (dp), I'-m
Figure 2. Fractional efficiency of a fibrous filter whose thick-
ness was optimized based on collecting 0.2 p,m diameter parti-
cles. The filter operates at 0.472 m 3 /s, is composed of 1.5 p,m
diameter glass fibers , and has 0.03 solidity and 10m2 of filtration
area.
is 78.0 W (0.105 hp) from Equation (41), the pressure drop is
165 Pa (0.662 in.w.) from Equation (10) after substituting for
V from Equation (7), and the CADR is 0.380 m3/s (805 cfm)
from Equation (38). Collection efficiency, which is equal to one
minus the exponential term in Equation (38), is 80.5%.
In the development of Equation (38), impaction was assumed
to be unimportant compared with diffusional deposition and in-
terception; from Equation (21), the impaction single-fiber effi-
ciency of0.00130 is indeed small compared with 0.0341, which
is the sum of the diffusional and interception single-fiber effi-
ciencies from Equations (19) and (20), respectively.
For this example in which filter thickness is optimized for a
0.2 p,m diameter particle, collection efficiency versus particle
diameter is plotted in Figure 2. To construct this plot, Equation
(27) was rederived after adding interception and impaction terms
in Equation (26); that is, letting ET :;:: Eo+ ER + E 1• In the
resulting equation, collection efficiency is equal to one minus
the exponential term. As can be seen from this figure, because
0.2 p,m is very close to the particle size having maximum pen-
etration through the filter, smaller and larger particles will have
collection efficiencies that are about the same or higher than
those for 0.2 p,m particles.
Particles Collected by Diffusional Deposition,
Interception, and Inertia/Impaction
For particles somewhat greater than 0.2 p,m, inertial im-
paction cannot be neglected. Equation (27) can be rederived af-
ter including additional terms for interception and impaction in
Equation (26). The CADR calculated from the resulting equation
does not have a maximum; it increases as thickness approaches
zero, and based on Equation (25) velocity approaches infinity as
thickness approaches zero. Well before this point, the model as
described in this article becomes invalid.
867
Optimizing Filter Design Versus Using HEPA Filters
Optimizing filter design rather than using an appropriately
sized HEPA filter, as is commonly done, does have disadvan-
less-efficient filter can be more effective for cleaning indoor air
will not be readily accepted. The following example illustrates in
a very simple way why the approach works and should help con-
particles operates in a sealed room in which air is well mixed,
no other collection mechanisms are important, and no additional
particles are generated. As time goes by, the particle concentra-
tion in the room will decrease exponentially, the time constant
being equal to the room volume divided by the CADR. Clearly,
the higher the CADR, the lower the particle concentration will
be at any given time regardless of the collection efficiency of the
filter.
Another disadvantage of the proposed approach is that the
design is dependent on the predictive capability of the filtration
theory that is used. If the theory is in error, than so will be the
optimal filter design. As a filter loads with particles its struc-
ture changes, and the resulting efficiency and pressure drop will
both increase; current filtration theory is unable to deal with this
change effectively, so the error in the theory will likely increase
with particle loading. This error could potentially be quite sig-
nificant and could invalidate the results presented in this article,
particularly if deposition of particles in the space between the
pleats of a pleated filter restricts the airflow. In addition, if the fil-
ter is not properly sealed or gasketed along its edges-a common
problem-dirty air will bypass the filter, thereby compromising
the validity of the design optimization process. Because of these
reasons, the methodology requires experimental validation to be
convincing and acceptable as a practical approach.
CONCLUSIONS
Portable fan-filter units marketed today for indoor use most
often contain HEPA filters (Fisk et al. 2002). Prior to beginning
this study, intuitive reasoning suggested that the HEPA filters
used in these units may not be the best type of fibrous filter for
this application. Specifically, it was postulated that a fibrous fil-
ter having significantly higher penetration than a HEPA filter is
likely to be more effective at abating a submicrometer indoor
aerosol such as environmental tobacco smoke, particles derived
from cooking, viruses, and radon decay. This intuitive reason-
ing was shown to be correct: based on filtration theory, the filter
thickness was optimized at a fixed energy consumption and fil-
tration area in order to maximize the clean air delivery rate. For
particles having diameters less than about 0.1 p,m, for which
particle collection is due mainly to diffusional deposition, the
optimal collection efficiency was predicted to be 82%; the opti-
mal filter penetration is, thus, about 600 times greater than that
of a HEPA filter. This result appears to have general applicabil-
ity because it was obtained without choosing specific numerical
values for particle size, fiber diameter, solidity, or filtration area.
For somewhat larger particles having diameters close to a fibrous
868 S. N. RUDNICK

filter's most penetrating size, deposition due to direct intercep- X dimensionless filter thickness
tion was also included. An advantage of optimizing particles of Xopr optimal dimensionless filter thickness
this size is that the clean air delivery rate will be higher for both Y dimensionless clean air delivery rate
smaller and larger particles that for the particle size for which Yopr optimal dimensionless clean air delivery rate
the filter thickness was optimized. Z dimensionless velocity
A better, though much more difficult, approach than was
used in this study might be to maximize the clean air delivery rate Greek Symbols
with respect to all three primary structural filter parameters by a Solidity
solving three equations simultaneously: the partial derivatives of t:.p actual pressure drop, Pa
the CADR from either Equation (27) or (38) with respect to fil- t:.p 1 theoretical pressure drop, Pa
ter thickness, fiber diameter, and solidity, each set equal to zero. E: inhomogeneity factor
These three equations would have to be solved numerically. T/ viscosity of air= 1.81 x w- 5 Pa.s (at 20oc and 1 atm)
This article corroborates the belief that room air-filtering de- T/r fan total efficiency
vices sold at the present time for enhancing indoor air quality T/m motor efficiency
can be improved significantly, thereby resulting in a healthier A mean free path of air = 6.60 X w-s
m (at 20°C and
environment at lower cost. The methodology used here may latm)
also be adaptable to two other applications that influence in- Pa air density = 1.20 kglm 3 (at 20°C and 1 atm)
door air quality: (1) fibrous filters used in building ventilation Pp particle density, kglm 3
systems when removal of submicrometer particles is a priority,
and (2) room air cleaners that remove gaseous contaminants by
adsorption. REFERENCES
American Home Appliance Manufacturers (AHAM). (1988). American Na-
tional Standard Method for Measuring Performance of Portable Household
Electric Cord-Connected Room Air Cleaners. ANSI/AHAM Standard AC-1.
NOMENCLATURE Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers, Chicago.
A filtration area, m2 American Society of Heating, Refrigeration, and Air-Conditioning Engineers
(ASHRAE). (1987). ASHRAE Handbook. American Society of Heating,
Cc slip-correction factor
Refrigeration and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Atlanta, GA.
dp particle diameter, m American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME). ( 1998). Code on Nuclear
df fiber diameter, m Air and Gas Treatment. ASME AG-1-1997, American Society of Mechanical
D particle diffusion coefficient, m 2Is Engineers, New York.
E collection efficiency Brown, R. C. (1993). Air Filtration. Pergamon Press, Oxford.
ED single-fiber efficiency due to diffusion Burgess, W. A. , Ellenbecker, M. J., and Treitman, R. D. (1982). Ventilation for
Control of the Work Environment. John Wiley & Sons, New York, P. 289.
E1 single-fiber efficiency due to inertial impaction Consumers Union. (2002). Portable Room Air Cleaners, Consumer Reports,
Eopr optimal collection efficiency February, 4~7.
ER single-fiber efficiency due to direct interception Davies, C. N. (1973). Air Filtration. Academic Press, London, p. 11.
Er total single-fiber efficiency Department of Energy (DOE). (1997). Specification for HEPA Filters Used
f parameter related to direct interception defined by Equa- by DOE Contractors. DOE-STD-3020-97, U.S. Department of Energy,
Washington , DC.
tion (39) Fisk, W. J., Faulkner, D., Palonen, J., and Seppanen, 0. (2002). Performance
H fan air power, W and Costs of Particle Air Filtration Technologies. Indoor Air 12:223-234.
He electrical power required by the fan's motor, W Hinds, W. C. (1999). Aerosol Technology. John Wiley & Sons, New York.
k Boltzmann's constant= 1.38 X w- 23 N.m/K Jorgensen , R. (1999). Fan Engineering: An Engineer's Handbook on Fans and
filter constant for particle penetration, m- 1 Their Application. Buffalo Forge Co., Buffalo, NY.
k1
Kirsch, A. A., and Fuchs, N. A. (1968). Studies on Fibrous Aerosol Filters-
kz filter constant for pressure drop, m- 1 III Diffusional Deposition of Aerosols in Fibrous Filters, Ann. Occup. Hyg.
K Kuwahara hydrodynamic factor 11:299- 304.
p penetration Kowalski, W. J. , Bahnfleth, W. P., and Whittam, T. S. (1999). Filtration of Mi-
Pe Peclet number croorganisms: Modeling and Prediction, ASHRAE Trans. Res. 105:4-17.
airflow rate, m 3Is Kuwahara, S. (1959). The Forces Experienced by Randomly Distributed Parallel
Q
3 Circular Cylinders or Spheres in a Viscous Flow at Small Reynolds Numbers,
Q cadr clean air delivery rate, m Is 1. Phys. Soc. Japan 14:527- 532.
R interception parameter (dpld f) Lee, K. W., and Liu , B. Y. H. (1982). Theoretical Study of Aerosol Filtration by
Re 1 fiber Reynolds number Fibrous Filters, Aerosol Sci. Techno!. 1:147-161.
Stk Stokes number Lee. K. W., and Mukund, R. (2001 ). Filter Collection. In Aerosol Measurement
t thickness, m Principles, Techniques, & Application, edited by P. A. Baron and K. Willeke.
Wiley-Interscience, New York, pp. 197- 226.
T absolute temperature, K
Liu, B. Y. H. , and Rubow, K. L. (1986). Air Filtration by Fibrous Me<lia. In
v interstitial velocity, m/s Fluid Filtration: Gas, Vol. I, edited by R. R. Raber, ASTM, Philadelphia,
Vo face velocity, m/s pp. 1-12.
 OPTIMIZING THE DESIGN OF ROOM AIR FILTERS
McDonald, B. N., and Ouyang, M. (2000). Air Cleaning-Particles. In In-
door Air Quality Handbook, edited by J. D. Spengler, J. M. Samet, and J. F.
McCarthy. McGraw-Hill, New York, pp. 9.1 -9.28.
Nelson, H. S., Hirsh S. R. , Ohman J. L., Plans-M ills, T. A. E., Reed, C. E. ,
and Solomon, W. R. (1988). Recommendations for the Use of Residential
Air-Cleaning Devices in the Treatment of Allergic Respiratory Diseases,
J. Allergy Clin, lmmunol. 82:661-669.
Offermann, F. J ., Sextro, R. G., Fisk, W. 1. , Grimsrud, D. T., Nazaroff, W.
W. , Nero, A. V. , Revzan, K. L. , and Yater, J. (1985). Control of Respirable
Particles in Indoor Air with Portable Air Cleaners, Atmos. Environ. 19: 176 1-
1771.
Pich, 1. (1966) , Theory of Aerosol Filtration by Fibrous and Membrane Fil-
ters. In Aerosol Science, edited by C. N. Davies. Academic Press, London,
pp. 223-285.
869
Sextro, R. G., Offermann, F. 1., Nazaroff, W. W., Nero, A. V., Revzan, K. L.,
and Yater, 1. (1986). Evaluation oflndoor Aerosol Control Devices and Their
Effects on Radon Progeny Concentrations, Environ. Int. 12:429-438.
Stechkina, I. B. , Kirsh, A. A., and Fuchs, N. A. (1969). Studies on Fibrous
Aerosol Filters-IV Calculation of Aerosol Deposition in Model Filters in
the Range of Maximum Penetration, Ann. Occup. Hyg. 12:1 - 8.
Stenhouse, J. l. T. (1998). Fibrous Filtration. In Physical & Chemical Properties
ofAerosols, edited by I. Colbeck. Blacl<ie Academic & Professional, London,
pp. 249-279.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). (1990). Residential Air Clean-
ing Devices: A Summary of Available Information. EPA 40011-90-002, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC.
Yeh , C. Y., and Liu, B. J. H. (1974). Aerosol Filtration by Fibrous Filters-!
Theoretical , Aerosol Sci. 5:191 - 204.