Hi folks;
I've read what seems to be several hundred pages of information regarding IAQ. Lots of great information, some less so. I've noticed some names (breathe easy stands out - thanks for the information you've provided, it is very professional and quality information).
breathe ease, perhaps a question directed mostly to yourself- on a few occasions you've mentioned that you've had a chance to, or are about to, test filter IAQ units. Are the results of this public? I'd sure like to see the research that you've done so that I can make a more informed decision. Some of the issues I've seen written to, and would assume would be in the research results are:
1. The accuracy of particle counts from the Vendor (e.g. vendor says X, but product only achieves Y).
2. Any ozone issues.
3. Any chemical reaction issues.
4. Pressure drop (new), and pressure drop as the product is used.
5. Any efficiency/quality drop (or increase) as the product is used.
6. Any other unknowns, etc.
7. Assumptions and testing criteria.
8. Suggested real world performance (e.g. "works materially the same as advertised", or "MERV rating achieved at very slow airflow/low cfm, not practical for any normal sized house").
...basically, how well does each filter work in a consistent test lab, and what are it's performance characteristics over time.
Of course, I don't mean to put you on the spot at all... if the information isn't available publicly, or not in a format you're willing to share, etc., etc, I understand that too.
If that were the case and if you'd be willing to share information privately, or if it is commercially available information, please let me know. Also as an alternative, if you have some raw data and looking for someone to put it into a comparison format let me know because I'd probably be willing to do this.
If anyone else has similar data, please post!
If NONE of this is possible, what I am trying to achieve is an educated comparison of:
1. A MERV 11 filter (much like what breath easy often recommends)
2. A Lennox HC16 filter (I understand honeywell are near identical)
2a. A Lennox HC16 filter with a "low" rated MERV 8 1" or 2" filter setup as a pre-filter.
3. The IQAir Perfect16.
3a. The IQAir Perfect16 with a "low" rated MERV 8 1" or 2" filter setup as a pre-filter.
Somewhat unrelated:
- The use of a 1" or 2" activated charcoal filter to remove odors.
For reference, my "plan" has been to go with the Perfect16. I've seen no bad information about it and IQAir seems very highly regarded. I was thinking of adding a activated charcoal filter to this, and then depending on what I could find out about the Perfect16 filter lifetime (how well it performs over time / pressure drop issues / effectiveness), add some sort of pre-filter (e.g. 1" or 2") to remove the big stuff.
Thanks!
I've read what seems to be several hundred pages of information regarding IAQ. Lots of great information, some less so. I've noticed some names (breathe easy stands out - thanks for the information you've provided, it is very professional and quality information).
breathe ease, perhaps a question directed mostly to yourself- on a few occasions you've mentioned that you've had a chance to, or are about to, test filter IAQ units. Are the results of this public? I'd sure like to see the research that you've done so that I can make a more informed decision. Some of the issues I've seen written to, and would assume would be in the research results are:
1. The accuracy of particle counts from the Vendor (e.g. vendor says X, but product only achieves Y).
2. Any ozone issues.
3. Any chemical reaction issues.
4. Pressure drop (new), and pressure drop as the product is used.
5. Any efficiency/quality drop (or increase) as the product is used.
6. Any other unknowns, etc.
7. Assumptions and testing criteria.
8. Suggested real world performance (e.g. "works materially the same as advertised", or "MERV rating achieved at very slow airflow/low cfm, not practical for any normal sized house").
...basically, how well does each filter work in a consistent test lab, and what are it's performance characteristics over time.
Of course, I don't mean to put you on the spot at all... if the information isn't available publicly, or not in a format you're willing to share, etc., etc, I understand that too.
If that were the case and if you'd be willing to share information privately, or if it is commercially available information, please let me know. Also as an alternative, if you have some raw data and looking for someone to put it into a comparison format let me know because I'd probably be willing to do this.If anyone else has similar data, please post!
If NONE of this is possible, what I am trying to achieve is an educated comparison of:
1. A MERV 11 filter (much like what breath easy often recommends)
2. A Lennox HC16 filter (I understand honeywell are near identical)
2a. A Lennox HC16 filter with a "low" rated MERV 8 1" or 2" filter setup as a pre-filter.
3. The IQAir Perfect16.
3a. The IQAir Perfect16 with a "low" rated MERV 8 1" or 2" filter setup as a pre-filter.
Somewhat unrelated:
- The use of a 1" or 2" activated charcoal filter to remove odors.
For reference, my "plan" has been to go with the Perfect16. I've seen no bad information about it and IQAir seems very highly regarded. I was thinking of adding a activated charcoal filter to this, and then depending on what I could find out about the Perfect16 filter lifetime (how well it performs over time / pressure drop issues / effectiveness), add some sort of pre-filter (e.g. 1" or 2") to remove the big stuff.
Thanks!
