Well the time has come that I ask for a little help. If you have been following the "100% Useless Garbage" thread, then you know that an air filter study is on its way. As of now the pace for preparation is ahead of schedule, but I need some help. So far all expenses have been out of my own pocket. A couple have offered some assistance but here is what I really need.


KEEP IN MIND....ALL materials requested will only be borrowed and will be returned undamaged. If a filter is donated, the only thing that will happen to it is it will have a lot of air flowed through it and it will be weighed. After it has been tested it you will have data on your filter and some info that will hopefully help you decide what kind of filter you will want to use for your vehicle.


Items Needed:


(1) New UNI filters, Atleast 2, never used, in the packaging if possible.


(2) New OE paper filters, Atleast 2 for testing, never used.


(3) A scale accurate to .01 of a gram, electronic or tripple beam balance.


If you think you may be able to help with this effort, please reply or PM me with the details. THANK YOU for your interest and help!! SPICEREdited by: SPICER

Spicer- I have a UNI in the box never used I will let you use. Send me your shipping address and I will let it fly.

1822, Thank You for offering, and you have a PM awaiting with the address. This will help a ton.


To anyone, regarding the scale needed, even if you don't have one but have a tip or lead for me to follow, it would be appreciated. This will undoubtedly be the hardest acquisition. SPICER

i may try and do this test too. i have an extra stock airbox, Dillon reloading scale which will read in Grains and grams, and UNI filters on the way. i'll just need to buy a couple stock filters which i don't mind..

i may try and do this test too. i have an extra stock airbox, Dillon reloading scale which will read in Grains and grams, and UNI filters on the way. i'll just need to buy a couple stock filters which i don't mind..


Are you implying sending me these items or doing the test yourself? If you are offering this for the study, please let me know! I just don't know if that is what you meant. If you are offering, PM me and I will get you an address.


Your scale, what is its capacity and accuracy? I need about 500 gram capacity and .01 gram accuracy. Having troubles finding one. Thanks!!! http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Approve.gif SPICEREdited by: SPICER

Spicer,


I may be able to borrow one from work. I'm not sure how sensitive it is but I'll look into it. Plus it'll be easy to get to your house http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Cool.gif.

Spicer,


I may be able to borrow one from work. I'm not sure how sensitive it is but I'll look into it. Plus it'll be easy to get to your house http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Cool.gif.








Hey Rick! Wondering where you've been! We need to get together soon, I want some tailgate straps!!


I,ve been searching the net for scales. A 500-600 gram capacity at .01 gram sensitivity is hard to find! .1 grams just won't cut it I don't think. I've seen plenty of 50-300 gram capacity for a decent price. I think our filters may be more than this but not sure. I've found a couple that fit the criteria but WAY out of budget, like $600http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Pinch.gif I'll keep looking, appreciate any help, and nice to see your handle pop up again. SPICER

Arlen,


I'm not sure how sensitive it is, but I'll take a look tomorrow to see what's it's good for.


Where've I been? Busy selling these straps. Thanks to a member here I found out that they fit Avalanche's as well so a new market has opened up for me.


Also I have a new invention brewing. A digital vacuum/pressure gauge with a remote sensor for the fuel systems. Why the remote sensor? It would allow for in cab mounting for daily driving/monitoring yet no risk of leaking since it can be plumbed directly to the filter head.

spicer - actually i would probably do both, but i have to check the max on my scale as it MAY not go high enough. i just don't know until i get back home on Mar. 8th. will let you know.

Why not just run a heppa filter behind the filter your testing. Weigh it after the test.

You can have my cut to pieces (destroy the evidence) uni filter. Maybe uni saved the pieces? Give them a call.
I hear the president is real nice and easy to work with.

Diesel Power, thank you for any help and I will be looking foreward to hearing from you.


PC, actually a HEPA filter would work, but a secure, airtight seal must be made. A post filter will be used, and HEPA element(similar to paper media) will be considered. The media, regardless of my final choice, must be cut to fit. Regular paper filters, cut and opened up, then unfolded and laid flat have proven to work in the past.


RICK, sounds like you are doing well, and I hope to see you around soon. SPICER

Spicer

Im not sure Kennedy will like the "results" of your test.
For that matter neither will UNI or K&N. I want a copy of the results so I can send them Certified mail to the Uni prez.

Denial, its not just a river in Egypt.

1822, Thank You for offering, and you have a PM awaiting with the address. This will help a ton.


To anyone, regarding the scale needed, even if you don't have one but have a tip or lead for me to follow, it would be appreciated. This will undoubtedly be the hardest acquisition. SPICER SPICER, if you live close to a college, maybe you could run the sample over to their chemistry department, they should have very accurate scales that will do the job.

Spicer,


Well when you're near ready to fire up or need a hand give me a holler.

Spicer,


I have a Napa(WIX) replacement paper filter that has not been used yet. If you would like, I can send it with the airbox. It looks like it may be next week before I can get to UPS with the box anyway. Just let me know.

flhrciblueice, actually the napa filter would be nice. The more filters I can look at the better. I do want to test another paper filter outside of the OEM, so please do send it.


keystonekid, I may be forced to do that, but all those miles on my truck with an unproven air filter!!!http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Disapprove.gif


Victory Red, I will let you know, and it would be a good excuse to get together again.


As for the test stand, it is ahead of schedule. I will build a roof for it and awaiting an airbox and filters from those offering them. I will begin looking at post filter media today(probably air filter paper or HEPA media). I do appreciate everyones help, and hopefully the results will be enlightening and educational.


I do still need a few more filters and a scale, 500-600 gram capacity accurate to 1/100th of a gram, all material and equipment will be returned!!! SPICER

Spicer,


I have a used K&N. I also have a brand new K&N upper lip gasket. I will through in a brand new ACDELCO PAPER. You can keep all items. PM me with your address. As far as the scale goes I do not think you will find a reloading scale that goes much above 50-65 grams or 2.5 oz. I use to know lots of people with scales in my younger days. Go down to the cop shop and see if they will lone or sell you a confiscated left over? You know some law enforcement agents don't you?

Spicer,


I have a used K&N. I also have a brand new K&N upper lip gasket. I will through in*a brand new ACDELCO PAPER. You can keep all items. PM me with your address. As far as the scale goes I do not think you will find a reloading scale that goes much above 50-65 grams or 2.5 oz. I use to know lots of people with scales in my younger days. Go down to the cop shop and see if they will lone or sell you a confiscated left over? You know some law enforcement agents don't you?
SPICER
Bronco, thanks for the offer for the filter and K&N sealer. I was just reformulating my notes and added that I will ensure the seal on all test filters to ensure that all air flow is filtered/not bypassed. This filter seal you have will atleast help me refine my plan. I will PM you, thanks again!

Regarding a scale, you are right. The only .01 gram scales capable of >200 grams are WAY too expensive. I just reviewed my expenses and I DO NOT WANT TO BUY A SCALE!!!!

Greg from Lube Specialists is sending me a tripple beam balance to use. So here is my idea.......
I will use the tripple beam for weighing all filters before and after, accurate to 1/10th of a gram.
I will use a more accurate 1/100th of a gram scale for the post-filters. A scale of this accuracy can be found MUCH EASIER if it only needs 100gram capacity or so. In fact, a 50 gram scale will probably work. SO.........

<font size="5">Does anyone have a 1/100th gram scale, 50-100 gram capacity?</font>
Eagerly awaiting, but a big thanks to Greg at Lube Specialists for offering the tripple beam.

Using 2 scales will not influence the results. All filters will be weighed before and after with the same scale AND all post-filters will be weighed before and after with a different, more accurate scale. Will Work FINE!!!!!http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Approve.gif Edited by: SPICER

Spicer
Denial, its not just a river in Egypt.





How did I get involved?http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Embarrased.gif

I found the post-filter media I've been looking for.....My new furnace has a HEPA air filter. They sell replacements that consist of a big folded accordian of HEPA paper in a box. The old filter frame is saved and the new paper is installed. I will get the price tomorrow, but this will be a neutral and very efficient media used to capture that which our air filters miss. AND, it sure beats tearing new filters apart for their paper!http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Big Smile.gif SPICER

p.s. I may rename this post "air filter testing" since that is what we are talking about. I think I can do that. I will wait for a day to prevent losing someone in the process.

p.s. I may rename this post "air filter testing" since that is what we are talking about. I think I can do that. I will wait for a day to prevent losing someone in the process.


I renamed the post. Anyone interested in more info regarding the progress to date on the air filter testing to be done, you can ask here or also read the last couple of pages on the "UNI filter=100% useless garbage" post.


If you would like to help with the testing by donating filters to be tested or other needed equipment/materials, please post here or PM me. Thank You! SPICEREdited by: SPICER

OH! THIS IS SO DIFFERENT...I have a new 8 week old boy. Just after birth, he was having a little trouble with weight gain. We were referred to a lactation consultant. We rented a very accurate scale from them for $2.50/day. I cannot remember the accuracy of the scale but I think it was within 0.25 grams. Baby was weighed before and after feeding to record actual feeding amount of milk. Anyway...This was the only scale that I know of that is fairly accurate and can be rented. As far fetched as it might sound, I still got enough guts to pass along an idea.

Randolph, thanks for the tip. I need something accurate to .01 grams. I am still hoping someone will come up with one. I've seen new for about $100.http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Cry.gif I've already spent too much. For what I've spent so far I could have bought a UMP, almost anyway. This is a critical piece that will validate the work. Without it the speculation will be overwhelming!!!


AN UPDATE:


The power unit is DONE! Now I will build an outdoor shelter to protect it from the weather, and once I get the air box in the mail from flhrciblueice, I will begin doing some preliminary test runs. I will hopefully acquire the post filter material today. I'm planning on using HEPA paper. Thanks to all who have helped so far. I still need more OE filters offered for testing and other aftermarket paper, foam, anything. Especially need a scale as described above! All equipment and filters will be returned, with test data and in perfect working order unless they are sent to me with the understanding that it is a donation. The only "donation" filters I may need would be OE paper. SPICEREdited by: SPICER

Arlen,


I keep forgetting to check the scales at work. I'll do my best to remember tomorrow. Also I'm free all this weekend(trust me it's a shocker, but being a dad yourself you know), so if you want to get together to play....plus I'd love to see your setup and I have a set of straps set aside for you as well.

Rick, Saturday would be good, afternoon is best. I will PM you. In fact, there is a chance I could fire up the test stand for the preliminary test runs.

Please do check on the scale. It is my last remaining issue. I can get one new for $100, but I probably won't need one beyond this study so a borrowed one makes more sense.

I have a lot of people offering help with sending filters, air box, a tripple beam scale (only accurate to 1/10 gram, etc.....The help has been great, but soon I will need more filters to test. Right now I am just watching for these items to arrive so I can drop it in gear and get this project rolling.

SPICER

Spicer,


Good news I checked the scale. It's one of these http://www.racoindustries.com/gsem574.htm. I only had a few minutes to play with it, but it read in kg to .002. Should be more than enough to do the tests. It's made for counting, but should fulfill your needs.


Here's the stickler though. Price on it is around $1400. I can borrow for a weekend, but for obvious reasons(nothing personal) will not leave it for your play. Look it over, let me know if it'll work. I can pick it up in the morning and we can play with tomorrow if all goes good.

Also I have a new invention brewing. A digital vacuum/pressure gauge with a remote sensor for the fuel systems. Why the remote sensor? It would allow for in cab mounting for daily driving/monitoring yet no risk of leaking since it can be plumbed directly to the filter head.








WOW Rick, I want to know about these.

John,


Not a lot of detail can be given out right now. All I can say is that its something we used to use on our robots(vacuum is often used for part grip).


The digital display is around 1 1/2"x 1 1/2". Two problems with it right now.


It's a little confusing since vacuum reads in red and pressure in green. It's also a little on the bright side, so it may be a little of distraction having it in cab, but I'm looking if they have a smoke colored cover vs the plain clear cover.


The upside is it will run from 12 or 24v systems. It can be programmed to 'red light' at any set point which would allow end users to set a time to change filter warning.


Plus keeping it cost prohibitive is always a challenge.

.002 kg is 2 grams... looks like that scale is accurate to 1 gram. I think Spicer needs a scale accurate to .01 gram or .00001kg. A scale that accurate with a 500g capacity is not cheap. Good luck Spicer.


Horace





Spicer,


Good news I checked the scale. It's one of these http://www.racoindustries.com/gsem574.htm. I only had a few minutes to play with it, but it read in kg to .002. Should be more than enough to do the tests. It's made for counting, but should fulfill your needs.

well I spent a few hours with Spicer this afternoon checking out his setup. For now I'll leave it at he's put a lot of thought and effort into this project. I as many of you are eager to see his results when available. It seems he's not quite content with his setup and will tweak it a little more as he's still waiting for filters to arrive. Here's some pics I took so you can what he's done so far.





http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/uploads/4ED_DCP_0911e.jpg





http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/uploads/Z92_DCP_0913e.jpg





http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/uploads/B18_DCP_0916e.jpg

.002 kg is definitely not going to cut it. Greg fron Lube Specialists is sending a tripple beam accurate to 1/10th for the primary filter and I am still looking for someone with a 1/100th gram scale for the post filter. (1/100th grams only needs a capacity of 50-100 grams) These can be had for new for $100, but I will wait a while before I give up and buy one. Diesel Power has a reloading scale that may work.

An Update: Victory Red was over today to examine the test stand. The verdict: It needs a little tweeking.

Victory Red has some pictures of the unit (see last post on previous page). Here is the glitch. Our air box tapers down to a 4" inlet tube. My original prototype for this test stand is a furnace fan/motor assembly housed inside of an airtight box. The only openings are the blower discharge and a 4" inlet tube made of PVC. The problem is that a 4" tube is restrictive and a 4" tube with a layer of MERV 10 filter paper over it is even more restrictive. The air flow was simply not enough to simulate what our trucks can pull.

After doing some brainstorming, Victory Red and I thought of some possible solutions. Here is the first:

We realized that although our trucks have intake tubes that are 4" dia. and although a narrowed intake tube imparts velocity to the airstream via the Bernoilli principle, this velocity is NOT REALIZED BY THE AIR FILTER BECAUSE THE AIR FILTER IS UPSTREAM of the intake tube. In other words, this restriction down to 4" has no influence on filtration because the restriction is after the filter.

SO....Here is plan 1. Get rid of the restriction down to 4" altogether. We want to test the filter media, not the intake tube. My plan is to acquire an airbox for our trucks that I can cut to pieces. Essentially I will take an air box and cut the top off of it, saving the bottom and the sealing/mating surface only. This clean side of the filter box will be sealed against the front face of the test stand. A post filter will be used as previously described.

What this will do is allow the blower unit to draw air from about 80 square inches instead of 13. Hopefully this will give a realistic and comparable airflow that can be used for testing. I will keep everyone posted.

If anyone has any other ideas, please chime in. I know what I want to do with this testing, but a test stand providing comparable air flow is primary. Later. SPICER Edited by: SPICER

Spicer,


I am still in the process of sending you the K&amp;N gasket and ACDELCO paper. I will be UPS 2 daying them Moday morining. You should expect them Wed. or Thursday worst case.

An Update: Victory Red was over today to examine the test stand. The verdict: It needs a little tweeking.

Victory Red has some pictures of the unit (see last post on previous page). Here is the glitch. Our air box tapers down to a 4" inlet tube. My original prototype for this test stand is a furnace fan/motor assembly housed inside of an airtight box. The only openings are the blower discharge and a 4" inlet tube made of PVC. The problem is that a 4" tube is restrictive and a 4" tube with a layer of MERV 10 filter paper over it is even more restrictive. The air flow was simply not enough to simulate what our trucks can pull.

After doing some brainstorming, Victory Red and I thought of some possible solutions. Here is the first:

We realized that although our trucks have intake tubes that are 4" dia. and although a narrowed intake tube imparts velocity to the airstream via the Bernoilli principle, this velocity is NOT REALIZED BY THE AIR FILTER BECAUSE THE AIR FILTER IS UPSTREAM of the intake tube. In other words, this restriction down to 4" has no influence on filtration because the restriction is after the filter.

SO....Here is plan 1. Get rid of the restriction down to 4" altogether. We want to test the filter media, not the intake tube. My plan is to acquire an airbox for our trucks that I can cut to pieces. Essentially I will take an air box and cut the top off of it, saving the bottom and the sealing/mating surface only. This clean side of the filter box will be sealed against the front face of the test stand. A post filter will be used as previously described.

What this will do is allow the blower unit to draw air from about 80 square inches instead of 13. Hopefully this will give a realistic and comparable airflow that can be used for testing. I will keep everyone posted.

If anyone has any other ideas, please chime in. I know what I want to do with this testing, but a test stand providing comparable air flow is primary. Later. SPICER


Spicer,


I have an '01 airbox w/snorkels still attached that I could donate for you to hack up. The only problem is the threaded inserts that the top's screws thread into to make the seal are missing. The box was given to me. I don't know if the inserts are attainable anywhere. Maybe one of the techs would know. Just let me know if you want this box. I will check a couple of parts stores tomorrow after work for the inserts. It would be nice to have some extras anyway, as I tend to strip/break fasteners on a regular basis.http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Embarrased.gif

Spicer,


I have an '01 airbox w/snorkels still attached that I could donate for you to hack up.* The only problem is the threaded inserts that the top's screws thread into to make the seal are missing.* The box was given to me.* I don't know if the inserts are attainable anywhere.* Maybe one of the techs would know.* Just let me know if you want this box.* I will check a couple of parts stores tomorrow after work for the inserts.* It would be nice to have some extras anyway, as I tend to strip/break fasteners on a regular basis.http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Embarrased.gif[/QUOTE]

flhrciblueice,
By all means, send it. Even if you cannot find the threaded inserts, I can work around that. Once the unit is operational and tests are being done, the box will be opened frequently. The threaded inserts are not very durable in my opinion and I would be looking for another option anyway, probably clamps or something quick, easy, and secure. You have my address?

Today I got out the drill and saw. I removed the 4" PVC and replaced it with a test hole cut at 7"x9". This took the surface area of the post filter from 12 square inches up to 63 square inches. This is still smaller than our air filters, so it is an underestimation. I covered the hole with a mesh screen and a layer of MERV 10 filter paper. The airflow was up considerably! Not yet where I want it, but I believe our filters will allow for a post filter of about 12"x8", which is 96 square inches. This would make the actual filtering surface 1.52 times bigger than the test post filter I am running now.
I will run the unit overnight in the garage to get an idea of what it will collect in 12 hours. If after I cut the hole to fit the airbox I still don't have enough flow, then plan 2. What is plan 2? Not Sure! I do believe this may work though.
Thanks goes out to Victory Red for helping me bang my head against the wall. I give him credit for coming up with this latest idea. BTW, Victory Red, the tailgate straps are SWEET!http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Clap.gif My son and I put them on today. They are simple to install, look awesome, work smooth as silk, and the piece of mind is refreshing. I highly recommend them to anyone who doesn't want a broken tailgate strap disaster. Victory Red has links on the bottom of his post/signature.

Peace for now, keep the ideas coming, gotta go lose some teeth in a hockey game now!http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Ouch.gif SPICER

the high kudos on the straps still won't get them free for you Spicerhttp://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Embarrased.gif


Anyhow, I'm glad the bigger opening is helping airflow. If it still doesn't acheive the airflow needed the only thing I've been able to come up with is an additional fan(or fans) to add more suction power through your box. It need not be as big as the blower you have on now, but maybe a few high cfm fans. I'm thinking a trip to science and surplus might be in order. Another squirrel cage fan or just a fast motor(or a slower one with some type of reducer) will do the trick.

Yes, I still have your address. So do you want the '01 box, '04 box, and NAPA paper filter or just the '01 box and filter?

Yes, I still *have your address.* So do you want the '01 box, '04 box, and NAPA paper filter or just the '01 box and filter?* *
If it isn't a problem I could use all of it. I won't hack up the '01 box unless I feel that it will work as is. The '04 box will be kept in good working order.

I am keeping my options and my mind open. I do not wish to start testing filters until I feel I have a system that is a solid representation of our truck's airflow.

I will not rush and I will not worry, There is no deadline.
Ideally I would like a system that would flow adaquate air through a 4" opening. That way I could test other filter systems like the UMP.

BTW, Victory Red and I pulled out his UNI on a bright sunny day and we both saw a LOT of pin-hole sunlight. His intake tube seemed clean though.

Anyone with ideas speak up. Otherwise always diligent......SPICER

The squirrel cage blower motor has to be the best idea. Even a small household furnace unit moves 2000 CFM. Of cource that will be reduced with a tight filter at the inlet. I believe a system that starts large and slowly channelels down to a small size such as our inlet tube will increase flow velocity substantialy. Basically start with a motor capable of huge CFM(2-5K) channel it down to increase velocity and you will be left with a high velocity of the desired 6-800CFM.

The squirrel cage blower motor has to be the best idea. Even a small household furnace unit moves 2000 CFM.*Of cource*that will be reduced with a tight filter at the inlet. I believe a system that starts large and slowly channelels down to a small size such as our inlet tube will increase flow*velocity substantialy. Basically start with a motor capable of huge CFM(2-5K) channel it down to increase velocity and you will be left with a high velocity of the desired 6-800CFM.

What you said is what I originally thought also. When this unit is allowed free air on the intake side, it is like a tornado, up to 2000cfm. When the air is restricted through a tube the motor does not have the power to keep the cage spinning fast. With open air my adjustable dial/speed control creates a noticable, incremental speed increase in the fan and CFM output. With the limited flow of air on the inlet side from the 4" tube, more juice = not much more air.

A more powerful motor could help. However there may be a limit to what this furnace fan is capable of. It is designed for up to 2000cfm in a non-restricted environment.

There are a lot of different fan designs. I got on yahoo and punched in "blower fan". 176,000 hits, the first one had fans for every purpose. I need a fan with plenty of extra power to pull air through a resistant media. I do believe my fan box could work with more juice, Victory Red had some ideas that were way over my head. I know electricity like I know rocket science. SPICER

Is your unit pulley/belt driven? Could you change the gear ratio? Edited by: Bronco

Just get one of those squirrel cage fans, build a box for the filter. Seal the box to the fan. Then throw some talc into the fan. If it blows white powder out the clean side of the filter make a video of it. Send it to me so I can send it to UNI. That will be after I post it here and LMFAO.......

Is your unit pulley/belt driven? Could you change the gear ratio?


It is a direct drive motor. Even if it was belt frive and I could change the gear ratio, it still needs the power to do it. SPICER

I will take the test stand to an electric motor shop tomorrow. They are wizards and will most likely have some ideas and suggestions for me. The test stand has been running continuously for over 30 hours now. I am at the firehouse now and won't be home until morning, but when I saw it after about 12 hours running it seemed to have collected a fair amount of dust(this was in my garage overnight so the air was certainly cycling through over and over). My garage air probably has an ISO cleanliness of 12/9/7!!!http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Geek.gif


I would just like to see a little more power and airflow. I have ideas along with the marbles rolling around in my head. Hopefully we'll be testing soon!http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Cool.gif SPICER

I feel like I am talking to myself!http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Broken Heart.gif But here is what I did today.

I looked at the post filter on the unit today....definitely filtering fine dust, but I want more airflow to simulate our truck.

I took the test stand to the electric motor shop and asked for suggestions. Ultimately there is little I can do with the current set-up to improve airflow without risking blowing it up. So, they referred me to a company locally that specializes in powerful blower/vacuum applications.

The company is called "FPZ regenerative/side channel blowers". This is a company based in Milan, Italy. On the web at www.fpz.com. The office locally is in Grafton, WI. I consulted with them today and they just may have an option that would work.

The unit needed for this application is the SCL V6, which would be their smallest unit that would still provide the flow needed. Here is the kicker...$1100!

HOWEVER, this project will never be important enough for me to go this far, and I explained the scope and budget of this project to the representative. His suggestion was to speak with the owner when he returns at the end of the week. He mentioned that the owner has shown interest in projects of this type in the past and may be willing to loan/lease a unit. He mentioned that they have racks of these units in the back that could possibly be lent out if the bosses graces are shared.

I'll keep my fingers crossed, and keep everyone posted.

And a big thanks to 1822 for sending me his new UNI for testing. Keep 'em coming boyz! SPICEREdited by: SPICER

dear spicer...you are DEFINATELY not talking to yourself...i'm speaking ONLY for myself, but i am monitoring this thread diligently...unfortunately, i have the mechanical/electrical knowledge of a gerbal, so i'm ABSOLUTELY no help at all http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Ermm.gif...the best i can do is to let you know that i am appluding your efforts whole-heartedly...


i AM sure that i speak for many others when i say that i can't WAIT for the results...you have my appreciation and respect...and also those who are helping you, either directly or indirectly...

Well said Pony Driver. I am in the boat with you. We really do appreciate you hard work on this SPICER, I would not be much help, so all I can give is support and set in the stands and watch and read. Thanks again SPICER.

Spicer, there has to be some industry in your area that would let you use their scale but not borrow. You are looking for a lab scale. They are not made to be portable. They are usually bolted to a heavy table in climate controlled room. Later! Frank

Thanks for the support and ideas. At this point I am waiting to speak to the owner of the local FPZ distributor. Hopefully I can approach him in a way that will get him very interested in what we are doing. I don't think I'll have much trouble convincing him that we are on a broken shoe-string budget.http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Cry.gif

There are other obstacles, but one at a time. My approach from a research point of view shouldn't change, but I will always keep an open mind and be ready to modify as needed. SPICER

Spicer,


Hopefully you can convince the owner it's an interesting test, so if he's at all a gearhead it shouldn't be a problem. If not I'm sure some other option will pop up.


Anyhow if you need a hand as always I'm just a phone call away.

Spicer,


I understand that you want to duplicate real life driveing conditions. More power to you! However if for some reason you can not, Your test are still valid. My truck spends alot of time idling,low RPM's and deceleration. These are conditions when air flow and velocity are low. I do not want a filter that leaks at low speed anymore than I want a filter that leaks at high speed. See what I am saying??

Spicer,


I understand that you want to duplicate real life driveing conditions. More power to you! However if for some reason you can not, Your test are still valid. My truck spends alot of time idling,low RPM's and deceleration. These are conditions when air flow and velocity are low. I do not want a filter that leaks at low speed anymore than I want a filter that leaks at high speed. See what I am saying??





Bronco, I agree. If nothing else comes through I will conduct the study with what I currently have. The problem is I am a bit of a perfectionist and the tests themselves will require a LOT of time and effort. I do not wish to invest a ton of time and effort to test filters at a "barely idle" air flow. The results would leave too many question marks and not enough definitive answers.


This is why I mentioned before that I have no deadline and feel no pressure to have results tomorrow. I want a reliable machine(current setup IS reliable) and a machine that will give us airflows that simulate atleast 1500 rpm(cruising rpm at 45 mph).


I am writing up an outline of the study that includes the scope, purpose, and methodology. This is what I will use to propose to FPZ in an attempt to generate enough interest that the owner may want to sponsor the project. These are expensive units and without a grant there just is no way I can afford it. It's just not THAT important to me.


SPICER

Greg fron Lube Specialists is sending a tripple beam accurate to 1/10th for the primary filter and I am still looking for someone with a 1/100th gram scale for the post filter. (1/100th grams only needs a capacity of 50-100 grams) These can be had for new for $100, but I will wait a while before I give up and buy one.


scales from filter vendors may appear to be that they are trying to influence a favorable outcome of posted results by doing you a favor... just an observation.

Greg fron Lube Specialists is sending a tripple beam accurate to 1/10th for the primary filter and I am still looking for someone with a 1/100th gram scale for the post filter. (1/100th grams only needs a capacity of 50-100 grams) These can be had for new for $100, but I will wait a while before I give up and buy one.


scales from filter vendors may appear to be that they are trying to influence a favorable outcome of posted results by doing you a favor... just an observation.


I agree, and that is a consideration. Here is my reality:


I have asked multiple times for help with a scale and nobody has had a viable option. My first choice would be a .01 gram scale that has a capacity of 500 grams. The problem is this falls under the category of "Lab Specs." and costs in the thousands. They can be had for around $100 if the capacity is 100 grams or less. This is fine for a post filter weighing 30-50 grams, but the primary filter will be weighed also. It weighs more than 100 grams. Until somebody has a scale for me to use from a source not connected with a possible "special interest", I have to take what I can get.


I will say that I would not accept an air filter donated by any vendor. It just wouldn't be worth the potential flack. Greg at Lube Specialists can verify that I asked for a refund for an AMSOIL air filter I purchased for a friend's Dodge Dakota because the quality sucked and the perimeter seal looked like my kid got ahold of the caulk gun. My friend is using paper and so am I. My AMSOIL air filter was removed because of a high silicon level in my oil sample and a dirty intake tube. I put it back in the box and am using paper. At this point my AMSOIL air filter has been torn apart so that I could use the reinforcing mesh screen as a backing for the post filters. The rest of my $50 filter is in the garbage.


I honestly believe that Greg is being a nice guy by offering his scale and I believe that he believes that AMSOIL makes the best filter. I actually felt bad accepting his offer for the scale because I don't like his filters and don't think they can live up to their exagerated claims. Unfortunately I do not have an option at this point. I will use Greg's scale, but if another comparable scale comes along from an independent source I will no doubt decline Greg's offer.


Thanks for bringing this up for clarification. SPICER

Spicer,


I have tryed to help witht he scales. No luck! No store has what you are after. You are trying to get to high of resolution. Frank suggested you go to a lab witht a fixed scale in a clean room. I believe he is correct. Machine shop/veternary lab/pharmaceutical/R&amp;D company.

Why not do something that is visual like fly paper or some kind of super sticky paper. Put it in the line of contamination impact. That way you could look at the surface of the dark brown sticky stuff and see the dirt.

I thought of that approach as well, PC, but there are too many potential problems. First of all, once the sticky is covered by dirt, it is no longer sticky. You would run the risk of quickly overwhelming the capacity of the paper. There are of course work-arounds for that, but I don't think it is worth the time.

As to your suggestion of visually assessing the dirt level, that is what Bobistheoilguy.com did and I think it is at best only marginally acceptable. The whole point of the endeavour is to be as scientific as possible. Mass is the only way to go and achieve any level of credibility.

Spicer, I have that balance I pm'd you about torn apart looking for a loose connection. There has to be a reason the stupid thing won't power up, but I haven't found anything amiss yet. Will keep you advised if I have any luck.

Solution for the Balance:


You need an Ohaus 500g balance with a 0.1g indicated resolution. Now the lines on the 0.1g scale are about 0.06" apart. You can interpolate using a magnifying glass much like you use vernier calipers or a ruler. You can easily hit ±0.025g using this, and with patience you can hit ±0.01g.


Price and availability is good on these, I think they are about $150 retail, and most drug dealers have them. http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Clown.gifEdited by: McRat

Another solution to gain accuracy is to increase sample size. If you run for 5min you collect Xg of dirt. If you run for 50min = 10Xg, and 500min = 100Xg of dirt.

McRat, I've considered running longer intervals. That would be a decision made after initial "pre-testing" begins. After running a couple of test runs I should know whether longer or shorter sampling periods are required.


PC, Visual tests will be done via digital camera, but as habanero mentioned, this kind of "data" is not enough. Color is an indicator, but not the whole story.


I mentioned before that a piece of post filter with the accumulated dirt could be dissolved in a pre-measured quantity of water and placed between a couple of microscope slides to "see" what gets past various filters. This is not something I intend to do, but the post filters will be saved and labeled so if someone wanted to do further analysis it could be arranged. SPICER

I have written a letter to the owner of the FPZ distributorship and will fax it tomorrow. I am asking for a sponsorship by allowing us the use of a suitable blower for the duration of the study. This is our best shot at an ideal test stand. By my calculations, these units would provide over 200cfm with plenty of reserve power to accomodate for the filter resistance.

At 45 mph our trucks are at about 1500 rpm in 5th gear. 1500 rpm requires about 155 cfm. At 200 cfm we should be at about 1625 rpm. Keep your fingers crossed! SPICER

Hey Spicer,


I thought we came up with 6-700CFM max for the Dmax? 200 seems a little low? Of course boost pressure willl have a big impact on the total CFM. Any who take what you can get, but I say if they have 400 or 600 CFM available I would go that route. It will make things happen quicker.

You really need it to be a variable cfm. Just like when we drive our trucks. Sayy 200-800 cfm up and down constantly like going from light to light or 700 for a while like driving down the freeway. You would also need to run it in the dirt of introduce heavy dirt into it like when I drive my truck off road in very fine dust from the roads.

Spicer,


Just wanted to give you an update on the boxes and filter. I will not be able to make it to UPS until Tuesday, 03/09/04. Barring any catastrophic events, I will be off work that day and will ship the air boxes and Wix filter. I apologize for the delay, but it has been quite crazy at work lately.

I AM SO STOKED!!!!!!!!!!!!http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Big Smile.gifhttp://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Clap.gifhttp://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Big Smile.gifhttp://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Clap.gifhttp://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Cry.gif


I just recieved a phone call from Mr. David Biancardi at FPZ Regenerative Blowers and he says it is a go!!!!!!!


I will get more details soon, but it will probably be their V6 model which will run @ 200 cfm! I'm about to cry!!!


Bronco, yes the max flow is much higher however max flow is not essential for this study. In fact I believe the post filter may have a tough time staying together with max flow and may get sucked into the unit. This is why we are using a test stand and not our trucks! Turbos are pricey! 200 cfm is about 1650 rpm which is about 50mph in 5th gear.


PC, at this time no dust or other variables will be added. I don't think they are needed, but the plan can always be ammended as we go.


Anyway, here we go! Will keep you posted. SPICEREdited by: SPICER

Spicer,


Just wanted to give you an update on the boxes and filter. I will not be able to make it to UPS until Tuesday, 03/09/04. Barring any catastrophic events, I will be off work that day and will ship the air boxes and Wix filter. I apologize for the delay, but it has been quite crazy at work lately.





Thanks for the update, and I will be looking foreward to their arrival. And to anyone else, STILL NEED NEW AND USED FILTERS WITH DOCUMENTED MILEAGE, AND A SCALE ACCURATE TO .01 GRAMS!!! SPICER

Spicer did you get my package? ACDELCO PAPER NEW, USED K&amp;N, K&amp;N UPPER BOX GASKET?


Have you thought about variable fan speed? Maybe even on a timer?

Spicer,

I may have the scale your looking for. It's a Dillion reloading scale accurate to 0.01 grams or 0.1 grains. I will put a link below so you can see it. Let me know if it is what you need. My scale is an older version and only goes up to 700 grains/57 grams if I remember right. I am not home to check. Mine is the first scale in the link, the D-Terminator scale.

Mike

http://dillonprecision.com/template/p.cfm?maj=70&min=0&dyn=1&

[QUOTE=mike634]Spicer,

I may have the scale your looking for. It's a Dillion reloading scale accurate to 0.01 grams or 0.1 grains. I will put a link below so you can see it. Let me know if it is what you need. My scale is an older version and only goes up to 700 grains/57 grams if I remember right. I am not home to check. Mine is the first scale in the link, the D-Terminator scale.

Mike

http://dillonprecision.com/template/p.cfm?maj=70&amp;min=0&amp;dyn=1&amp;[/QUOTE (http://dillonprecision.com/template/p.cfm?maj=70&amp;min=0&amp;dyn=1&amp;/QUOTE)]


Mike634, Thanks for the link, and yes I do think this would work. If it is in good working condition and you would be able to part with it for a while that would be great. Check it out at home and get back to me.


Bronco, yes I did get the package. I especially appreciate the OEM AC delco filter, as I will need a few of these. If anyone wants to help out in this study but isn't sure how, AC Delco OEM paper filters will be needed. In addition, any new or used after market filter would help. If it is used, I will need to know miles, approximate age, and maintenance (such as cleaning and oiling). All filters will be returned and undamaged.


Regarding variable speed, these blower units can be fitted electrically for this option, but I doubt I will go there. The FPZ rep said it would cost about $400. At 200 cfm an adjustable speed would only allow me to decrease the volume which would be no help. SPICER

Hey Spicer,


Congratulations on getting the high power motor. I know that is what you have been after the entire time. I apreciate all of the time and effort you are putting into making this test happen.


On another note, I know you live in Wisconsin. Is that not where Kennedy diesel is? How far away are you? Is your test Kennedy proof?http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Clown.gif. I don't want him hopping over the fence and throwing dirt in the results.http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Clown.gifEdited by: Bronco

Spicer,

I haven't used it in almost a year but it worked great last time I made up some ammo. I hope to be home sometime early next week and I will double check the max weight for it. I can part with it for awhile as the miltary is keeping me busy and away from my hobbies, but they do provide free ammo.http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Big Smile.gif Edited by: mike634

Arlen,


Let me know if you need a hand with this project. I'm also big time curious about checking out this blower.

<TABLE id=HB_Mail_Container height="100%" cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0 UNABLE="on">
<T>
<TR height="100%" UNABLE="on" width="100%">
<TD id=HB_Focus_Element vAlign=top width="100%" background="" height=250 UNABLE="off">


spicer...do u need NEW delco oem filters?...if so, i will be glad to send one or more to you...just let me know, and post your addy...


i VERY much appreciate your efforts for US!</TD></TR>
<TR UNABLE="on" hb_tag="1">
<TD style="FONT-SIZE: 1pt" height=1 UNABLE="on">
<DIV id=hotbar_promo></DIV></TD></TR></T></TABLE>

SPICER I have a used stock a/c filter I removed with 25000 miles on it . your welcome to it if you want it . tom

mike634, sounds great and looking foreward to hearing from you. Not to be picky, but I want the best scale possible. If anyone else has one speak up, and thanks again 634!


Rick, I do want your involvement. I may need to do some electric modifications. This test stand will require the 230 circuit in the basement. I may need to put an outlet outside to avoid running a line through the side of my house. Any suggestions would be most helpful.


Pony Driver, I need new and used filters, especially OE AC Delco. These will be used as the "benchmark filter" against which all other filters will be initially compared. I will PM you my address and send as many as you want. It is help like this that will make this test a reality.THANK YOU.


FISHHOG, send it as long as it is still in good condition. I will PM you my address.


At this point the biggest obstacle will be getting my electric figured out. I have an outlet in my basement unused at this point, originally for an electric dryer. Since the unit will be outside, I want to avoid a long cord or a hole in the side of my house. SPICER

Rick, I do want your involvement. I may need to do some electric modifications. This test stand will require the 230 circuit in the basement. I may need to put an outlet outside to avoid running a line through the side of my house. Any suggestions would be most helpful.








Ok I'll get the bucket of water and we'll be set. http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Embarrased.gif


Anyhow be more than happy to help. When you figure out your game plan give me a holler.

I will be picking up the unit Monday or Tuesday. Rick, how far can you go when it comes to installing 230 outlet? Will I need an electrician or would we be able to handle it with a 12 pack?http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Confused.gif SPICER

Arlen,


Depends on how far you want to go. If you just want to add another outlet to the house its no big deal. If you're planning on doing something fancy you'll need an electrician(like running a new line to the garage) because of codes, permits and what not.


Whatever you need to do we'll get it done with no major issues.

Arlen,


Depends on how far you want to go.* If you just want to add another outlet to the house its no big deal.* If you're planning on doing something fancy you'll need an electrician(like running a new line to the garage) because of codes, permits and what not.*


Whatever you need to do we'll get it done with no major issues.


*
Rick, Because the plan has changed with regards to the unit used and the electric needed, I am not 100% sure where the test stand will be located. The garage would be nice but the electric woulod be a chore and I would have to cut holes in the walls for fresh and exhaust air.

I will probably make a temporary shelter outside near the house. In fact, my first intention was to put it in the back yard just outside of where the current 230 outlet is. This may be the best option. I will probably get the unit on Monday which will leave Mon., Tues. and Thurs. before I leave town. If you think you might be free, bring the kids over and we'll brainstorm again. Otherwise it will be late the following week for me. SPICER

Sounds good. I'll get some 10-4 portacord(good for 25 amps up to 50ft length). I'll have to know the specifics of the motor and see it to see what is actually needed. Your breaker is rated at 30 amps and your dryer plugin is 20 amp plug.


I'll try and give you a jingle this morning and we can chat some more.

<font size="5">OK Boys, Time to start sending filters!!! </font>

I need OEM paper filters, new and used, AND any and all aftermarket filters new and used. ALL will be returned when testing is done unless you otherwise specify. They will be tested and documented and returned in perfect working order. I still need that scale also.

I have put a huge amount of time and effort into preparing this test. A few have been HUGE in their effort to help. I need some participation, I will not start buying aftermarket filters for testing. Can't do it. I've spent way too much already.

If you have an aftermarket filter and you can afford to lend for a while for testing, speak up. I also need OE AC Delco paper as this will be the "benchmark filter". The FPZ industrial blower will be picked up tomorrow, initial trial runs will begin in about a week.
SPICER

Bump...Just to keep it on top.





Bill

Bradbub, your filter has arrived! Thank You!

So far I have 1 new UNI and 1 with 500 miles. I really need one more of each, 1 new and 1 used. This will allow for a better sampling/representation of these filters. It would not be fair to draw conclusions about UNI based on 1 filter. Although any single filter should be an accurate representation of a brand, I would rather be more scientific in my approach.

On that note, I only have 1 K&N, used. If you have K&N new or used we need them for testing.

So far I have only 1 new AC Delco. I have asked DmaxAlliTech for some and I am purchasing these. If you have a new or used on the shelf let me know.

I intend to test any other brand sent to me. Here is the update:
Went to FPZ and picked up a brand new $1100 industrial blower/vacuum today. It weighs almost 70lbs! Victory Red will be over today to help with the 220 electrical. All of the plumbing and piping is ready to go. I will have pictures in a day or so(need help from the wife). Greg from Lube Specialists will be sending a .1 gram tripple beam balance today. I am waiting on the .01 gram scale still.

Back to work, SPICER

Glad you got the filter. I do not want it back after you are done with it. It is my donation to the cause. Maybe you could sell it to someone on the forum and recoop some of your money.http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Big Smile.gif


My truck is running awesome without it.

The test stand is in place! Victory Red will be here soon to wire it up. Here are the pictures so far, courtesy of my picture savvy wife.


http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/uploads/7Z9_fpz04.jpg


http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/uploads/9DD_fpz03.jpg


http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/uploads/36D_fpz01.jpg


http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/uploads/851_fpz02.jpg

This final picture shows the post-filter setup. It is 4" PVC closet fanges with the faces sanded perfectly flat. The two flanges will sandwich the screen backing(trimmed in red rubber for air tight seal) and the MERV 10 post-filter paper. The FPZ unit is rated for 213 cfm through 2 inch pipe. The 2" pipe has a PVC increaser to the 4" flanges. The factory airbox will be attached to the 4" PVC via a 4" to 4" rubber connector and hose clamps. Soon I will do a complete write-up of the proposed methodology for the study. Of course I reserve the right to make changes as the need arrises. If all goes as planned, full fledged testing should begin in a week or so.
SPICER
A HUGE THANK YOU TO FPZ INDUSTRIAL BLOWERS IN GRAFTON WISCONSIN FOR SPONSORING THIS STUDY. THIS IS A $1100 UNIT. I WROTE A LETTER EXPLAINING THE PROPOSED STUDY AND WITHIN HOURS THEY GAVE ME THE THUMBS UP!!!http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Thumbs Up.gif I CANNOT EXPRESS HOW THANKFUL I AM FOR THEIR GENEROSITY. THEIR KINDNESS WILL HOPEFULLY LEAD TO BETTER UNDERSTANDING. THANK YOU FPZ. Edited by: Diesel Power

Well I saw the blower in person. Actually I've seen this blower before. One of our customers use it for a vacuum setup for their end of arm tool(ball bearing insert). Anyhow didn't get it wired in today but I hope to before the end of the week. This should more than suffice for Spicer's needs for testing purposes. I hope to get him the cable he needs to power tomorrow and install an fire her up before he goes away for the week.


I'm eager to see the results as much as anyone.

Are you taking donations for your electric bill yet?

Los Lobos,

No, and I'm afraid.http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Cry.gif So far I am only asking, almost begging for filters. I'm a little surprised at the few responses so far.

To this point I have 2 UNI's, 1 new and 1 old:
These were sent by "1822" and "Bradbub" respectively.

1 used K&N: This was sent by "BRONCO".

1 new ACDelco: This was sent by "BRONCO".

"Pony Driver" has offered one or two OE filters and "FISHHOG" has sent a used OE.

"flhrciblueice" is sending 2 air boxes ('01 and '04) and a WIX/NAPA paper filter.

BlueOx03 is helping me make contact with UMP since this is a newcomer and should be tested.

These old filters are important because we want to see how well these filters perform after some use, not only when new.

I was hoping to get a lot of different filters both new and used for the tests. I'm sure more will come in. I have faith in this forum and the people involved in it.

I also would like to test a FRAM and maybe a cheap NAPA. There are a lot of filters on the market and sampling as many as possible will broaden our understanding and hopefully narrow our best options.

<font size="4">Hey Mike634, how 'bout that scale?</font>

There is more stuff on the way. Keep it coming!!! SPICEREdited by: SPICER

Hello Spicer,


I see things are coming right along! The power bill should not be to bad, as 230 is more effecient then 120. Not sure what kind of instructions FPZ gave you but it has been my experience that the kind of unit you have includes it's own inlet filter. This will need to be adressed.





P.S. Please ground your test stand.http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Dead.gif

Wheres a moderator when you need one? How come my post goes from here to China?

Bronco, FPZ knows that I will be using an automotive filter and a post-filter on the vacuum side and figured another would be overkill.

Mike634, thanks for the PM and I look foreward to getting the scale. Thank You!

I will be buying electrical connections today and Victory Red will return Thursday to help wire it up.

Nobody withy a newer AMSOIL filter yet? I definitely want to see these on the test stand also.

Later for now! SPICER

Habanero is sending an AMSOIL filter (unsure if it is the new or old style) with 10k on it. VERY USEFUL!
Still will need a new one out of the box.

Mike 634 is sending a $125 scale! Thank You Mike! This was the biggest remaining expense! I just spent $65 on electrical connections!http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Cry.gif Thank you for helping me with these items!

Greg from Lube Specialists is sending me the tripple beam balance today. Thanks Greg!

Now I will go play electrician. WISH ME LUCK! I'm dumb as a stump with electrical! SPICEREdited by: SPICER

Spicer,


Check your pm's. The boxes and a few filters are on their way.

flhrciblueice,
Perfect! And in a nick of time. Victory Red will do the final wiring on Thursday. I will do a 12 hour test run immediately.
AND, Thank You for the extra filters!!! See, The Diesel Place people are pulling through on their word! My faith is multiplying!
http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Big Smile.gif SPICER

I had a brainstorm. BRONCO, you will especially appreciate this....

We will be testing at 200cfm. That is the capacity of this machine. 200 cfm = 1600rpm. HOWEVER: I have an idea that would allow us to RESTRICT the surface area of the filter....like a restrictor plate in NASCAR. Essentially the entire 200 cfm would be forced to travel through a restricted/smaller portion of the filter. If we restrict 2/3 of the filter and leave 1/3 open for flow, That 1/3 would realize a flow equivalent to 600 cfm delivery to the engine!

This is not how the tests will begin, but certainly will be a phase of testing. Restricting the flow will be a fairly simple task, but I will have to restrict the dirty side as well as the clean side to avoid lateral airflow or air sneaking around the restrictor. SPICER

Spicer

Are you just going to suck clean garage air through it?

I drive down dirty/dusty roads in my 4x4. You will have to introduce dirt/dust/sand into the intake correct?

Spicer,

I got home and have the scale. It works fine and it will go up to 1200 grains. I will send it out tomorrow. If I can find the old K&N filter from my 97 Chevy 5.0 pick up I will send that also.
Mike

Mike634, Thank You. However, if the K&N will not fit the Duramax airbox, don't bother. If it is the same size air filter and you do send it, include as much detail about its history as you can such as miles and maintenance, plus miles since last maintenance. Without this it is hard to understand what we are testing. Oh, What is 1200 grains? I only know grams.

PC, Its like this. The air is actually a lot dirtier than you think. When I was in school studying Air Quality Management we had an atmospheric test unit that sucked plain air through a big air filter for 24 hours. At the end of the 24 the 2'x2' big piece of filter paper was black! We will be sucking 200cfm for 24 hours. This is 288,000 cubic feet of air. The post filter is 4 inches diameter. This should collect plenty of dirt. If it doesn't, we will run the tests longer.

Here is the thing. This needs to be as close to reality as possible. Throwing dirt at a filter is not how dirt is introduced to our filters. Greg at Lube Specialists has told me he can get test dirt, but frankly test dirt sent from AMSOIL, I'm not interested.

There is a lot of dirt in our air. The amount, however, varies quite a bit from season to season or even day to day. This is the reason for running each filter for many days to achieve a PATTERN of filtering ability. I also intend to run this test in atleast 2 seasons also. The FPZ blower is ours for atleast 6 months.

This test will not be perfect but it will be scientific. It could be improved upon but not with the budget(none). The results will not be as instantaneous as throwing dirt at a filter and being done in 10 minutes. It will resemble a more realistic introduction of the dirt to the filter.

Interestingly, If a filter passes a lot of dirt using a test stand in my back yard, imagine what it will pass on a dusty road! This is implied!

The only perfect/real-world test I have thought of is this....10 members of Diesel Place meet in California. Each with a STOCK truck, same model year, similar miles. Each installs a different air filter and a post filter, weighed to 1/100th of a gram. They drive to the other coast side-by-side, each logging identical miles, running the same speed, and passing through every variety of dust in the USA. At the end, each is re-weighed and we see which is the best.

This seems pretty impractical.

I did mention before that test dust may be tried for kicks, but I don't see the need or the real-world application. Our filters need to filter air for long intervals. Test dust thrown into a filter, then the machine turned of a minute later to see what went through? I can see dirty oil on a foam filter taking several hours to work its way through the media!

Anyway, if you can get test dirt from someone other than AMSOIL I probably could come up with a way to use it at some point. Otherwise I don't think it is needed. I do appreciate your questions though. They give me ideas and gives me an opportunity to explain to others the intentions and methodology of this study. SPICER



Edited by: SPICER

Spicer

I agree the air is dirty just look at the window screens in california (black). But that is low weight particulates that float along in the air.

The dirt I drive my 4x4 in is heavy sand dusty roads following another 4x4 into the desert etc.

I actually found grains of sand that you could see with your eye in my intake tube after the uni incident.

Your test, while better then nothing, is flawed. You would need to drive your box down a dirt road in the back of a pickup truck.

Have you ever been off roading down a dusty road?

Its a completely differnt kind of talc'ey dirt that gets everywhere.

At least one of your tests needs to introduce sand and dusty dirt into the intake tube.

Then you need to bang and bump and jar the filter to simulate an off road trip.

The next time I go to the desert (that got into my intake tube) I will let you know so I can collect a bucket of it.

JMOEdited by: problemchild

I understand where you are coming from. Unfortunately, my intentions with this study is not to see which filter works best while following a buddy on desert sand.

I have thought about doing a filter study for a long time. The problems with UNI got me kick started.

Sand, however, is dirt. It is the worst kind of dirt and is the only dirt "silicon" that is screened for in an oil sample because it is so damaging. If a UNI filter turns out to be 99% as effective as a paper filter, then we can draw some conclusions. Such as:

If we run our trucks in SPICER's back yard, that 1% difference in efficiency from the OE equals lets say .03 grams of dirt.

If we run in the desert behind Joe with sand flying like a tornado, that 1% differential equals a small sand box!

There are extreme circumstances that we may encounter. If by weighing the primary and post filter carefully before and after the test run, and do it several times, we will establish a filtering efficiency. That EFFICIENCY should hold true whether we are on a country road in Washington State or a sandy dune in CA. The VOLUME of dirt passing the filter, however, is a result of the efficiency TIMES the volume introduced. Hope this helps. SPICER

Lets just say you did a test like this?


Start the motor and let it run for 10 minutes. During the first minute you drop a preset amount of test dirt, like 1 coffe can full dropped from a distance of 3 feet above the inlet and approx. 1 foot in front.


You then measured the amount of dirt in the primary and secondary filter.


What would this tell us?

Sorry Spicer,


I did not see your reply.

Bronco, how did my reply answer your question? Or did it? SPICER

Well it did not directly. However I see what you are after. Effeciancy ratio should be enough.

Bronco, did you read my idea about increasing flow to 600cfm?

If our filters have a top surface that is 8 1/2x11, this is 93.5 square inches. At 600 cfm (near max) each square inch is theoretically dealing with 6.4 cfm. If we are flowing 200 cfm, but reduce the area of the filter with simple restrictors on the clean and dirty side by 2/3rds, we will now be flowing at the 6.4 cfm per square inch!

In other words, we will be able to see how these filters work at 200 cfm, 600 cfm, or any damn cfm we want!http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Big Smile.gif Cool. SPICER

Yeah, I saw that. It sounds good! You are gonna make me get out the physics book soon!

I think I ate one for breakfast by accident!http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Confused.gif

LOL!

You guys are doing a great service to we D/max owners, cant wait to see the results.

Spicer,

I got home and have the scale. It works fine and it will go up to 1200 grains. I will send it out tomorrow. If I can find the old K&N filter from my 97 Chevy 5.0 pick up I will send that also.
Mike

What is the grain to gram conversion? I don't have any books that have that. My calculator will do almost any conversion, but it doesn't have it either. I assume it is a reloading scale if it measures in grains so there is probably a conversion table in some of the reloading handbooks.

Spicer,

I got home and have the scale. It works fine and it will go up to 1200 grains. I will send it out tomorrow. If I can find the old K&amp;N filter from my 97 Chevy 5.0 pick up I will send that also.
Mike

What is the grain to gram conversion? I don't have any books that have that. My calculator will do almost any conversion, but it doesn't have it either. I assume it is a reloading scale if it measures in grains so there is probably a conversion table in some of the reloading handbooks.


I believe these scales measure grains and grams, I hope. Mike will let us know.


Bruce, Thank you for the compliment, got any filtershttp://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Stern Smile.gif? I am still looking for a couple of the newer AMSOIL, a new K&amp;N, and a FRAM and anything else that fits our airbox. SPICER

Arlen,


I've got the 10/4 cable in the back of my truck. I haven't found a breaker switch yet that'll hold 30 amps but I'm still looking.


This should be a pretty quick hookup so if all goes well by 4:30 tomorrow she'll be purring like a kitten.


I'm even half tempted to order a UMP to try out for this test. I want to see what those puppies look like in person. Problem is I'd hate to spend $400 and have it come back in these tests as no better than a stock paper.





Edited by: Victory Red

You guys have a pourous AFE yet ?? With sock ??





Mac http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Approve.gif

Arlen,


I've got the 10/4 cable in the back of my truck. I haven't found a breaker switch yet that'll hold 30 amps but I'm still looking.


This should be a pretty quick hookup so if all goes well by 4:30 tomorrow she'll be purring like a kitten.


I'm even half tempted to order a UMP to try out for this test. I want to see what those puppies look like in person. Problem is I'd hate to spend $400 and have it come back in these tests as no better than a stock paper.











Rick, I'll be ready. As far as the UMP goes, I am hopeful that BlueOx03 will set me up with one. He says he may be able to make arrangements to get me one.


The UMP will be simple to test, however the other test I want to run(using a restrictor to simulate max flow) may be tough.


Mackin, No, we do not have an AFE to test yet. I am looking for any and all filters used on the Duramax, stock airbox or otherwise. For every brand/type of filter to be tested I would like to test new AND used filters to ascertain how they filter over their lifetime. SPICER

Arlen, I just read this thread for the first time and really had no idea what was going on other then the bit we have talked via email. I am gonna gather up a few things that may be of interst to your test and put em in a box. Dunno what will and wont help, but it will give ya something to play with.


Eric

Lemme see what I can do ... I may have a source for a couple used ones .... If you can find a NEW at a reasonable price I'll send you the paper presidents ....http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Approve.gif


Also I have two used Amsoil filters one DRY (with oil)one semi-used oiled ...


I'll want these back (case my seat gets saggy ) along with the AFE's ...


Possible ??


Mac

Mike634, Oh, What is 1200 grains? I only know grams.





Grain is a reloading measurement for ammo. it is used to measure gun powder and projectile weights.


There are 7000 grains in a pound.


There are 437.5 grains to an ounce.Edited by: John R

First of all it's not you guys. This is all Spicers work I'm only offering up some electrical help and some ideas. This is his thunder, lighting and possible earthquake when results are done.


I've seen the work and effort he's put into this project and he should be proud. Even if it isn't completely scientific or exact, we all will get a very good estimation and what's doing it's job the best and what isn't.


As for concentrating airflow. As this project moves along with your first barrage of tests we can do some thinking about how to redirect the airflow to concentrate it more without taxing the motor.

Hey guys, I have only read the last page of this thread but here are a few of my observations. As far as the UMP filter all you realy need is the filter, just cover one end with a flat plate and cover the other end with a flat plate with an outlet hole in it that fits your suction device. As far as resticting the area of a filter to increace the CFM this will not increase the the CFM going thru the filter just the velocity (feet per minute) of the air thur the filter. A fan will put out a defined CFM at a defined static pressure. If you increase or decrease the area you suck thru you will change the restriction (static pressere drop) that you have and the fan will deliver either more cfm's (less restriction) or less cfm's (more restriction) as you load the fan. There are two typical types of fans overloading and non-overloading and this will also vary your results. By rights with all the different media types you are testing you would install a magnehelic gauge and vary the suction area so you have the same pressure drop across all the filters and there by you would be running the same CFM's thru each filter. Well this is just my .02 worth. Mike-

agree and disagree with varing the cfm to match all filters. Some filters will flow better then others and that should be taken into effect also. What would really really be nice is to use an old MAF sensor, hook up a jumper lead to your truck and plugin a tech-2 and watch the MAF reading with the fan on. at idle, a stock setup should pull about 45 grams per second of air, under WOT, should be 450-500 GPS.

Holly cow, I just went back and looked at the fan you are using and see it is a PD (positive displacement) pump. You should have no problems with pressure drop as I would estimate that pump will get you about 120 inches of vacuum. You may have to support the back side of the filters so if they become plugged you do not suck the filters into the pump or your box enclosure. If I remember the Duramax is about 404 cubic inches and that is about .2338 cubic feet times 2000 rpm equals 468 cubic feet per minute of air pumped. If the inlet pipe on the truck is 4" this is about .0782 ft/sq. 468 cfm divided by .0872 ft/sq equals an air velocity of about 5362 feet per minute. Well this is my thinking if I remember correctly. Mike-

Wow, I go install my Oilguard bypass and I'm missing all the fun!http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Big Smile.gif Let me try to catch up.....


dmaxalliTech, Any thing in a box is of interest. If you are sending used filters, any info would be useful about the history of that filter.


If the history/maintenance is COMPLETELY unknown I can say I probably will not use it. The results would be kind of insignificant. But send it anyway. I may need parts.


Mackin, All filters will be returned unless the sender says keep it. No damage should occur. PM me when you have a plan. And thank You.


Rick, when it comes to concentrating the airflow I am not worried about taxing the motor. The most restrictive portion of the unit will be the post filter. When I am looking to test at higher air flows it will be like this....Instead of 200cfm through the entire primary filter, I will run 200cfm through maybe 1/3 of the filter. The flow through that 1/3 will resemble the entire filter flowing 600cfm. The restriction in the primary filter will still be small. The post filter will still realize the same 200cfm. We should use your amp meter to be sure though.


Blue Max, Quite frankly in this test I'm not concerned with the so-called difference in restriction with paper vs. K&amp;N, etc... This unit is powerful enough to pull 200cfm through my nostril. The difference between our filters at 200cfm will be negligible. And now I just realized that you just realized what I just said, or something like that!http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Confused.gif SPICER

I have been reading this thread from the begining. I take no sides. I have been an avid fourwheeler in California for over 30 years. I don't care about dirty air that happens to fall into your neighborhood, don't care about airplain fuel dumping in the air. I want to know how a filter works when there is no clean air available. How much dirt gets through. I believe the test being done here is good for a government agency that will mean nothing. After your test, you still will not know how good any filter is when ther is no clean air for 20 miles. The airbox does. Sometimes engineers can't see the forest for the trees. You guys can't tell me that if you do a test inyour back yard that you can calculate what will happen on a dirt road. For Gods sake thats what happened with the tailgate straps and other screw ups. If it looks good on paper doesn't mean squat.


mike

Well than why test anything. Screw it.

Mike,


I am sure after Spicer starts testin and getting data he will adjust as required. It will all work out. It will just take some time. The test stand is a damn good start. He will get it figured out.

I want to know how a filter works when there is no clean air available. How much dirt gets through. I believe the test being done here is good for a government agency that will mean nothing. After your test, you still will not know how good any filter is when ther is no clean air for 20 miles.


Mike, Filtering efficiency is what we are testing. If you look back a page or two Problemchild had the same contention....That this will not tell him how well a filter will work in the desert with not a breath of fresh air. I say it will.


At first glance a filter which passes .03 grams of dirt and an efficiency of 99.8% vs. a filter which passes .05 grams of dirt and an efficiency of 99.25% may seem like virtually no difference. However in the case of you or problemchild in the desert, That .55% difference could mean a lot of dirt in the intake tube.


What got me interested in doing this was the overinflated, irresponsible, no data to back them up claims of UNI, AMSOIL, and others. My ultimate goal is to COMPARE filters. EVERY filter will be initially tested directly against the OEM, probably a few times. At the end of this first round of testing, clear patterns should emerge as to which filters do well. At this point the filters will be tested again, instead of vs. the OEM, it will be vs. each other.


By doing the above, the top performers should emerge as CONSISTENTLY outperforming the others. These top performers will probably be your best choice whether you drive the country or love to kick up the sand.


There are exceptions, however. In my opinion the reason foam is so popular off road is mostly water and mud, which can destroy and clog a paper filter, causing it to collapse. Unless we have a need for a specialty filter, they are unnecessary.


It is kind of like "racing oil". People may think"wow, racing oil. They use it in race cars, must work better than regular oil, I'll use it in my car". Well guess what. Race cars change oil after every race event. This oil has little additive and will NOT work as well as regular motor oil over the long haul. Better off with the cheap stuff.


I think air filters may be the same. If you don't have a NEED to use foam, don't. Sand is dry and will not stick like mud to a paper filter. Stick with the paper unless another filter has been PROVEN to filter more efficiently.


Paper filters are not red and sexy, and they are not available to aftermarket companies to sell as "snake oil". There is just nothing fancy or exciting about them. If you want sexy, buy a UNI, if you want the best FILTERING media, then I guess we'll just have to wait and see. SPICER

Spicer,

The scale will do both grains and grams. There is a button on it to go from one to the other. I put the owners manual in to save you any problems with it.

Spicer,

The scale will do both grains and grams. There is a button on it to go from one to the other. I put the owners manual in to save you any problems with it.


Mike634, Thank You. This was the last BIG piece to the puzzle. Everything is coming together nicely. Victory Red and I will fire it up for the first time tomorrow. I will run a post-filter by itself for a few hours just to give it a good warm up. Hopefully I won't suck the post-filter up and spit it out!


Then, unfortunately, I will be away from the machine for a few days. I will have some down time to review my plans and methodology. I WILL have access to a computer and will update the thread. Then when I return some preliminary test runs will be done to test the scales and other equipment. Then if all goes well testing will begin.


I just want to warn everyone that the final conclusions to this study will NOT be immediate. Simply running the first comparison test will take atleast 8 days, and that is assuming I am able to run the unit continuously. Then that same test will be repeated if the results have anomolies. Then there are all of the other filters, and then we will compare filters of varying age (miles). This will take some time and patience. SPICER

Spicer..


If I forgot to say so....


Thanks for doing all this. It will be nice to be proven right after all the crap I took from the Naysayers. I already know what your going to find out. Kennedy and Uni sure will have egg on their faces.

JMO

I would think the best way to do the test would be to put the air filter or air box into a large enclosed box maby 4'x4'x6' and dump in a set amount of dirt and dust into the large box as far away from the filter as possible so the dust billows around in the box. On the end where I poured the dust in I would cut in maby 20 round 4" diameter holes so the air would be pulled thru the dirt and dust and then measure the weights. Dump in the dirt and let the unit run for an hour or so untill all the dust settles then clean out the big box and start again. Just another idea, everyone seems to have one.

PC, thank you.


Blue Max, Test dust has not been ruled out completely but will not be used for the primary testing. The problem with the 4'x4'x6' bow is that there is no way to assure that every filter tested is loaded with the same amount of dust. If test dust ever is used I would probably turn the airbox upside down, drop the dust on the filter, and let it run for 24 hours.


I believe that a paper filter will let through some dirt initially, but the rest will be trapped. Foam, it seems that oily dirt would start on the intake side of the filter and possibly take several hours or longer for the oily dirt to migrate to the clean side. This is why I don't like the 5-10 minute, dust thrown at a filter and weigh it type of test. It seems it would favor the foam. Needs to be more real world. SPICER

I have been reading this and wondering.

If a filter blocks more dirt and dust which would seem to make it a better filter but it would also flow less air, right?

I think the UNI or K&N's are not as good at stopping dirt but they should flow more air. Thus making more power.

Your test will only prove which filter stops more particals.

Can you also test the resistance to air flow? Maybe looking at the current load on the air pump?

Or maybe the speed of the airflow on the output?

Just some thoughts.

Pyle

I have been reading this and wondering.

If a filter blocks more dirt and dust which would seem to make it a better filter but it would also flow less air, right?

I think the UNI or K&N's are not as good at stopping dirt but they should flow more air. Thus making more power.

Your test will only prove which filter stops more particals.

Can you also test the resistance to air flow? Maybe looking at the current load on the air pump?

Or maybe the speed of the airflow on the output?

Just some thoughts.

Pyle
Pyle, The airflow comparisons have already been done. In a nutshell, you are right. Other filters are CAPABLE of flowing more air. However, a stock truck will never REALIZE the benefits of a "high flow" filter because our engines don't pull enough air to max out a filter. Dyno tests have been run with the filter removed completely and no hp gains were seen.
Essentially a "better flow" filter simply means a worse filtering filter and this is based on some of the ONLY data I have seen. The aftermarket manufacturers won't share any of their independent data. SPICER

CAJUN86 is sending a used UNI. THANK YOU! I still could use one more new. Will still need all kinds of other filters also.
SPICER

SPICER,


Tell me what the plackard on the air pump states for current draw. Also tell me what your price for a Kilowatt of electricity is. I will tell you how much money an hour you are in for. We might have to start a collection?

Spicer UNI owes me 1 new filter.

Spicer, first of all allow me to thank you as well for your hard work on this project. I can't wait to start seeing numbers. One thing we all need to realize, though, is that virtually no single study is going to be absolute. No matter what you do, there will always be that guy in the back at your seminar that will find problems with your study (I doubt you will be giving any seminars, but I am equating this place to one big seminar). Anyway, that is the nature of the beast, research can be a cast-iron bitch.

One piece of advice I would recommend, though, is to record everything you do. This is the first and foremost rule of scientific research. Temperature, wind direction, hell any experimental variable you can think of needs to be recorded for each trial run. Buy a notebook and fill it up. Good luck and keep up the good fight.Edited by: habanero

Bronco, It is supposed to be 16-18 Amps at 230V. This is about as far as I go with electricity jargon. Victory Red might know more. Don't know pric per kilowat either, but an estimate from you would be nice!

PC, send it when it shows. Like I said, I will need 1 more!

habanero, thanks for the advice. I will record everything that could be pertinent including temp., humid.,wind, and pollin and dirt which I think I can get from a local weather station. I have a notebook already!

<font size="5">Now an Update</font> The power is flowing! Victory Red wired it up, braving very cold and windy conditions. Thanks to Victory Red we are flowing air!..........AND HOLY COW CAN THIS THING SUCK!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What is the first thing a fireman does after getting a 3hp, 200cfm blower running? Check it with his hand, of course! Nearly sucked my fingernails off!!!

Then what does his buddy (Victory Red) do after he sees fireman almost lose his right hand? Of course, see for himself how powerful it is!!! Took the TWO of us to pry his hand off the vacuum side!!!!http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/HiHi.gif

Oh well, gotta try everything once!

The unit is running now. I'm not joking, in a matter of a few minutes atmospheric dirt was seen on the post-filter. I am running JUST the post filter now to see how it holds up to the flow. So far so good!

The only catastrophe of the day was the UPS box from flhrciblueice. BOTH airboxes were cracked!!! Just got off the phone with him. He insured it so we should be good. Later. SPICER

I will attest to the fact that it does suck a lot of air.


Anyhow Spicer, find the plate on the side that says something 115/230 Vac 50/60 Hz and copy down all the data and post it. Somewhere there there will be an rating that states something like kMA or KaH or some weird coding that will state your current draw. Also for pricing you can find your last electric bill. On it, it will state KwH x .003 or something silly like that. That's the current cost of power per kilowat hour. You've got the info, just need to look a little harder for it.


I can get it, but I'm still sitting in front of our fireplace I still haven't quite warmed up yet. http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Confused.gif

18 AMPS is hpefully max draw at start up. hopefully it will be lower during normal operations. Lets just say it is 14amps. I will take 14 amps at 230 volts and calculate watts. W e can then convert this into kilowatts. I will multi ply by your conversion factor in your area. Like victory red stated it is probally .03. we need your area because it vcan fluctuate nation wide. you guys should have tapped into the hot side of the meter and concidered it a grant form the local utlities company.http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/HiHi.gif

I will attest to the fact that it does suck a lot of air.*


Anyhow Spicer, find the plate on the side that says something 115/230 Vac 50/60 Hz and copy down all the data and post it.* Somewhere there there will be an rating that states something like kMA or KaH or some weird coding that will state your current draw.* Also for pricing you can find your last electric bill.* On it, it will state KwH x .003 or something silly like that.* That's the current cost of power per kilowat hour.* You've got the info, just need to look a little harder for it.*
OK, Now I'm frozen


I can get it, but I'm still sitting in front of our fireplace I still haven't quite warmed up yet. http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Confused.gif

OK, Now I'm frozenhttp://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Dead.gif !!!

Here it is...
60Hz: 115/230V
2.2kw 3.0hp 31.5/16.0A
and a bunch of other un-type-ables.

My electric bill says .075/kWh

Does this mean I will burn 2.2 x .075 cents per hour?
This would be .165 cents per hour or almost $4 a day? OK, start the collection basket!!!!http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Cry.gif

I never intended to ask for donations! Maybe someone will do it for me, or I will need another collection for my divorce! Don't tell my wife!

I think the brands that perform the worst should pay my electric bill! I'm drinking now...........

Just run the extension cord over to the neighbours house. http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Big Smile.gif

Just run the extension cord over to the neighbours house. http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Big Smile.gif

Or catch the dough flying out of your wallet!

Spicer


I'm curious as to how do you think your test box compares to the RPMs our trucks would be turning out?


The reason I ask is while talking to my mechanic buddy today, he said you never use a foam air filter on anything with a turbo because of the increased air flow. According to him it can pull stuff through it when the turbo gets wound up.


Would this test box of yours simulate a truck doing say 2400-2500 RPM?

Spicer


I'm curious as to*how do you think your test box compares to the RPMs our trucks would be turning out?


The reason I ask is while talking to my mechanic buddy today, he said you never use a foam air filter on anything with a turbo because of the increased air flow. According to him it can pull stuff through it when the turbo gets wound up.


Would this test box of yours simulate a truck doing say 2400-2500 RPM?

The test unit as it is now flows 200 cfm. This is equivalent to about 1650rpm. However we will also run a restriction test. In fact, the restriction test may simply replace the regular test all together because high flow is the primary concern. It goes like this:

If the entire filter flows about 600 cfm at 2500rpm, then 1/3rd of the air filter flows 200cfm (the other 2/3rds of the filter flows 400cfm). So, by restricting the path the air can follow with restriction devices(plastic and tape) down to 1/3rd of its original filtering path, we will "simulate" 600cfm, atleast through the open 1/3rd portion of the filter.

We can go a step farther too. Full throttle at 3200 rpm is about 700 cfm. Therefore if we want to simulate this flow through a portion of the filter, simply cover the entire filter except for a path that is 28% of the filters area.

Keep in mind that both sides of the filter must be restricted in a "mirror-like" fashion to prevent air from dissipating around the restrictor. SPICER

Another thing to consider is the fact that your PD pump will pull much more vacuum than the engine so you may cave in the filter or at a minimun you will have the ability to pull the solids much deeper into the filters or maby even thru the filters. Are you intending to put a white cloth somewhere between the base filter and the PD pump to see if solids come thru and stain the white cloth? Edited by: Blue Max

Another thing to consider is the fact that your PD pump will pull much more vacuum than the engine so you may cave in the filter or at a minimun you will have the ability to pull the solids much deeper into the filters or maby even thru the filters.* Are you intending to put a white cloth somewhere between the base filter and the PD pump to see if solids come thru and stain the white cloth?*

I'm not sure if I fully understand what you are saying or if you fully understand the setup. The pump will pull 200cfm regardless of the restriction, true. The primary air filter (stock or otherwise) can handle this and a lot more no problem.

Between the air filter being tested and the pump WILL BE a post-filter to catch what the primary filter missed. This is the whole premise of the study. The post-filter is a MERV 10 paper. MERV means Minimum Efficiency Reporting Value. A MERV 10 is a minimum of 65% efficient at 1-3 micron and minimum 85% efficient from 3-10 micron. Anything more restrictive may get sucked into the pump.

The post-filter is backed by a screen. The screen was taken from my junked AMSOIL air filter. The post-filter and screen are sandwiched between 2 PVC flanges in an airtight configuration. Any dirt/air going through the primary air filter and to the pump MUST pass through this post-filter/screen sandwich.
There is a picture of the screen and post-filter on my latest pictures on this thread. There is a picture of the post-filter/PVC sandwich all assembled in my first pictures earlier in this thread (this picture also shows the first test stand which has been abandoned for the FPZ blower).

I ran JUST the post-filter/screen/PVC sandwich last night for 14 hours. CONCLUSION: worked perfectly. It is amazing how much fine dirt/dust is in the air even on a frozen night in Wisconsin. The post-filter was BLACK!

Obviously it won't get this dirty with a filter in front of it. But the filter paper which is pretty fragile held up perfectly. SPICER

As an update, testing will begin as soon as I get a couple of items in the mail. A lot is on the way: both scales, a new airbox fom flhrciblueice. Others like dmaxalliTech are sending stuff also.


Ups smashed the first box from flhrciblueice, breaking both airboxeshttp://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Ermm.gif. Flhrciblueice didn't realize these boxes cost $230 new and insured the package for $200. We are waiting to hear back from UPS on the claim. Meanwhile flhrciblueice is sending another.


Other than plans to add a 4" pvc elbow to the intake side of the test stand, The test unit has been run and works perfectly. Thanks to everyone who is working to get more filters and equipment on the way! SPICEREdited by: SPICER

14 amp x 120 Volts= 1680 watts/hr. x 24 =40320/day x 30 days= 1209600 watts/mo. divided by 1000 (kilowatt) =1209.6 x.075= $90 bucks a month running non stop. I bet you'll end up running a third of that if your lucky, unless your like problem child and stay up every night trying to prove there's a conspiracy by the filter makers to get us......

Topgas


I agree with the math but not the answer as the motor he has listed is being run at 230 volts.


14 x 230 = 3220 x 24 =77,280 x 30 = 2,318,400 / 1000 = 2318.4 x .075 = $173.88 per month running non stop.


I think we can all chip in alittle so Spicer doesn't have to foot the whole thing by himself. His wife might just put him out in the dog house to sleep when she see's the electric bill! If we could get everyone that's interested in the result's to chip in 5 bucks we should be able to cover his electric bill from the running of the stand. There's got to be at least 100 members that can afford to chip into this project. I'll put in a 20 spot to get it started.

Spicer, I only sent you one new filter as thats all I could get ahold off, I also sent you an air box, the bottom half has some damage, but it still seals. Inside you will find a UNI filter left untouched with about 15k on it. We can discuss off the record on more.

Diesel Tech, Thanks for the offer to help. I will stay neutral on the subject since I have already recieved a lot of help with filters and equipment sent. This is my expedition and I wouldn't feel right lobbying for money. Any further help would certainly be appreciated though.


dmaxalliTech, I will be looking for the box. Both of the filter boxes I have from flhrciblueice were cracked AT the sealing surface! Essentially useless. Even a swiss cheesed box would work as long as the sealing surface and the lid(which is the clean side up to the inlet tube) are intact. I will PM you on the rest. SPICEREdited by: SPICER

Here it is...
60Hz: 115/230V
2.2kw 3.0hp 31.5/16.0A
and a bunch of other un-type-ables


2.2KW X .075 = .17 per hour. .17 X 24 = 3.96 per day 3.96 X 30 = 118.00$ per month @ 24/7


So do you want some money or what? Open a paypal. We are talking like a dollar or two per person.

Amps drop in half with 230 Volts, thats why your double. That's the nice this about 230, less amps, less heat in cable. It's going to be chicken feed at the end of the month for what your using, trust me. I do this wiring crap on boats all the time, haven't burned one up yet!!

I grabbed Spicer some 10/4 portacord from work. He's good for 30 amps for a long period of running time.


Anyhow it was too cold to an amp draw test that day but I doubt he's even pulling the max load. When he gets back from his trip and the weather turns a little bit I'll do a line check.


I also agree we should all chip in a few dollars or two for your time and expense. You've done all the footwork and invested many hours of your time and are doing us all a decent service.





Edited by: Victory Red

topgas





60Hz: 115/230V
2.2kw 3.0hp 31.5/16.0A



I used the 16 amp at 230 numbers as the way to figure it out from the above data. In most cases the motor tag shows current and voltage as pairs so it looks to me that it's 31.5 amp @ 115 or 16 amp @230. In any case I just feel we all are benfiting from this endevor so let's not let him get in trouble at home for doing it.http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Approve.gif

Thats right 31 amps at 110 or 16 at 230. These are both max amp draw. Probally only that high right at start up of under heavy load.


The 2.2KW should be the most accurate number available. this is an average based on real measured usage. 120.00 bucks a moth for 24/7 operation in addition to yur existing electrical bill. Not cheap over a 4 month time frame. 4X120 =480.00 smackers.


Spicer in a past post you mentioned the pre filters being very dirty over night. I ahve forgot how you have the system built. Could you refresh my memory? Just tell me the order of the box/pump/prefilter ect. ect.


I ask because I have had a little experience with high performance vacum/blower pumps. They have replaceble carbon vanes that deterierate and leave a black residue. Not sure if this will be a factor in your setup.

Got ya....she likes electrons I take it.

Spicer in a past post you mentioned the pre filters being very dirty over night. I ahve forgot how you have the system built. Could you refresh my memory? Just tell me the order of the box/pump/prefilter ect. ect.


I ask because I have had a little experience with high performance vacum/blower pumps. They have replaceble carbon vanes that deterierate and leave a black residue. Not sure if this will be a factor in your setup.





bronco, It will be in this order....Regular Duramax airbox with a filter, then piping to a post-filter (MERV10 paper with a sreen mesh backing), then the FPZ pump. There is no "pre" filter, only a "post" filter to catch what the filter in the airbox missed.


The very dirty filter overnight was a test run of 14 hours. I did not have the airbox yet so I ran the "post" filter alone. I wanted to be sure it would hold up. This is a glass-fiber filter media that is very good at filtering fine particles but is a little fragile. However, after 14 hours at 200 cfm without the primary test filter in front of it, it functioned VERY well.


I am out of town and trying to contact the significant other to get our paypal account info. Then if someone wishes to help out they can. Without adding it all up exactly, I am about $300 into this project so far. Not bad considering the $1100 machine loaned for the duration of the study. A lot of the expense, about half, is in the first blower unit that has been abandoned for the FPZ unit.


I have been bouncing this study off another scientific mind (my dad) for the last 2 days. He has only 1 major beef with one of my plans. Here is his beef.....


I explained to him my plan to run the filters at 200 cfm. I then explained how I planned to use restrictors on both the clean AND dirty side of the airfilter in order to concentrate the entire 200cfm flow through 1/3rd of the filter, essentially simulating "full throttle" flow through the open 1/3rd of the tested filter. This way we can see how the filtering media behaves/filters when under maximum load/flow/particle velocity.


He said that in general my logic is sound, however....his concern is that by using restrictors to concentrate the flow to a small portion of the filter I could interfere with the flow characteristics of the air moving through the filter. He said that this may happen....


Let's say the filter is restricted on both sides of the filter so that air can only flow through the center 1/3rd of the filter. Because the filter has a depth (1-2") and because the restrictors on both sides are on the SURFACE of the filter(top and bottom), there is a possibility of some lateral flow of air around the edges of the restrictors and into the portion of the media that is supposed to be rendered inopperative.


I believe personally that the amount of air entering this space and then coming back out will be small. The possible effect of this lateral migration would be that the air/dirt involved would have a chance to experience some turbulence and be SLOWED or bogged down temporarily during its journey through the filter. Slower air and dirt migration will essentially help the filter to remove dirt.


This phenomina probably isn't worth getting our panties in a wad over. The only consideration is that I believe that foam filters would experience this turbulence a little more than paper, helping the foam to "look a little better" at filtering at high flows than is reality.


The only good solution we could come up with was this...We could find a vehicle whos airbox/filter is 1/3rd the size of ours. Use this airbox and appropriate filters to conduct the high flow portion of the test. The only problem is that now I would have to solicit for filters from aftermarket sources all over again that would fit this smaller air box. Maybe too much trouble to avoid a possibly insignificant issue with my "restrictor" idea......Any feedback? SPICER<edited><editID>SPICER</editID><editDate>38060.6115625</editDate></edite

Starting current will 2 1/2 -3 times the running amps listed on the name plate. Later! Frank

OK, here it is.....My paypal account for anyone interested in making a donation. If you would prefer to donate another way, PM me or E-mail. Here is the account name:


thespicerack@milwpc.com


Thank You for any help you offer, even if it is just moral support.http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Embarrased.gif SPICER.


Edited by: SPICER

Spicer, just use the stock airbox with no restriction. If the results make no since then we will have to redesign. If anything we will all know waht happens at 1650RPM no load. This is probally a common place for the engine to be anyways.

Spicer, just use the stock airbox with no restriction. If the results make no since then we will have to redesign. If anything we will all know waht happens at 1650RPM no load. This is probally a common place for the engine to be anyways.


Bronco, I will do the test with no restriction at 200cfm/1650rpm. And then we will know how our filters perform at this flow. HOWEVER, It is my hypothesis that filter efficiency changes adversely with increased flow. In fact, at lower flows I predict that efficiency may show little significant difference. It is at the higher, near max flows that the good filters will shine and the marginal filters will crash and burn.


I still have little concern about resticting airflow to simulate higher flows. I just wanted to bring it up for discussion to see what you guys think. As I said before, foam filters would likely benefit more than paper in this scenario. Probably a minimal, virtually insignificant effect.


However, if someone has an inside track to another forum like ours for vehicles that happen to use small air filters, it may be a way to educate 2 groups of enthusiasts and get a sense of whether this "restricting air flow = lateral flow problems" has any merit. Probably overthinking it, but high flow/max flow testing is a must now that I think of it more and more. SPICER

It must be my birthday!!http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Big Smile.gif Got home and all kinds of boxes to open!

Thanks to the following:

Mike634 for coming through with the 1/100th gram scale. Should be perfect!

habanero for the used old style AMSOIL. Will be tested, need some new style(new and old) for testing still.

Cajun86 for a perfect specimen used UNI w/ 6k miles. And BTW, I do see some light through it. Not as bad as the new ones unused.

FISHHOG for the used OE AC Delco w/ 25k. Will be used! Thanks everyone!

I have been refining my thoughts before finalizing my plan for the test. I will ALWAYS reserve the right to modify the plan in order to get the most meaningful results.

I am 90% sure I will stick with the baffle/restrictor idea for simulating increased flow/rpm. There is one new idea that will probably be done:

In order to see how these filters perform over a range of airflows/rpm's, three simulations will be done on each filter. With three data points it will be easier to plot a meaningful and revealing curve on a graph. More than likely all filters will perform a little less efficiently at higher flows. The graphs will help us visualize which ones function well/poorly at a range of flows. Much more meaningful and useful than a single flow rate. Obviously the first flow will be 200cfm/1650rpm. The others will probably be 450cfm/2445rpm and 700cfm/3100rpm.

Since this will take longer, I may reduce the number of times each test is run. I will maybe run each test 2x instead of 4x. At 2x Each filter will be compared to the benchmark filter 6x. If there are any inconsistencies at one of the runs, additional runs will have to be done. Just an update! SPICEREdited by: SPICER

flhrciblueice has contacted me. He got a hold of 10 paper air filters from 4 manufacturers that he is going to send me. Great Work!!! http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Thumbs Up.gif

The only thing keeping me from getting started immediately is a complete airbox. UPS cracked both from flhrciblueice. I should have another soon! SPICER

Looking forward to seeing some results.





Give me a holler if you need some more help with the setup/

Rick, come get the other fan if you want. I should be around tomorrow. SPICER

Since I don't have an airbox yet I am doing some other preliminary tests at this time. I played with the 1/100th gram precision reloading scale last night sent by MIKE634. It is in very good condition, has a calibration weight, and is the perfect size for the job.

A post-filter weighs about 2.25 grams. I am running JUST a post-filter now and will run it for 24 hours. I want to see in grams how much the unit will collect in 24 hours.

If the amount is less than 1 gram I may consider extending the length of each run. Otherwise the weight of the dirt getting past the primary filter will be too small to see significant differences from filter to filter.

Of course I may also try different post-filter media also, something tighter in terms of filtration. My concern there is too much restriction.

Lots of ideas......just taking my time playing in order to dial in the best recipe for good results. Any leads on test dirt? Regardless, I am sure I will toy with the idea and try it in order to see what kind of effect it has on the filtering efficiency data.

I am also still looking for more filters to test. I definitely want to test the new AMSOIL filter. I have an older style now and plan to test it, but the new design is really more relevant. SPICEREdited by: SPICER

I have been doing a lot of searching regarding test dirt. Here are some interesting findings......

The manufacturer for test dirt for both the SAE J726 and ISO 5011 air filter tests is a company called Powder Technology Inc. I called and spoke with Tom Francis who educated me a little on the dust and how it is used. This is a very high quality assured test dust with a very definite content. The website is www.powdertechnologyinc.com. It is a dream website for learning about test dust. The dust applicable to us is either ISO fine or ultrafine. The website info gives an exact breakdown of every micron size and the percentage of each micron size in the dust.

Ultrafine is all 10 micron or less. Fine is 80 micron or less with a 7 micron median, and 50% below 10 micron.

Interestingly Tom had never heard of the "#9 test dust" that AMSOIL sells and uses for their filter demonstrations.

Yes, apparently I am considering test dust. It may be needed if the post-filter cannot collect enough dirt to be significant at 1/100th gram sensitivity. We could do a color comparison but that has been done before.

Test dust is $70 plus shipping for a 3.5kg jug (about 1 gallon). Plenty for the study. The only thing I would need is an atomizer. The dust is supposed to be atomized under compressed air to disperse it evenly over the media. Doesn't seem too complex, but must be consistent.

If I did use the test dust and had a good/consistent way to atomize it we would probably introduce the test dust and run the filter for 24 hours. I would like to get the SAE and ISO test standards to view their methods, but I think I would have to buy it. Anyone ever viewed the standards before? SPICEREdited by: SPICER

Here I am talking with myself again.http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Cry.gif Oh well, call it thinking out loud and it doesn't seem so strange!

I ran the test stand without a primary filter for 25 hours. I still do not have a useable airbox yet so I will continue playing and learning. The 25 hour run was with a post-filter only ( a layer of blanket glass micro-fiber filter media) After the 25 hours it was black and looked horribly dirty, just atmospheric dust! Here is the problem......Initial weight of post filter media....2.27 grams. Final weight...2.43 grams. A whopping .16grams! Seems significant, however when the primary filter(ACDelco, UNI or other) is in front of the post-filter, only a fraction of this will get through. If one filter was 5% less efficient than another filter (5% is a huge difference) the weight difference in this scenario would be .008grams. Not measurable on a 1/100th gram scale.

If test dirt is used then the results would be more measureable. The test dirt is available. Just need a way to atomize it! An old artists airbrush and compressor would probably do the trick...Anyone?
SPICEREdited by: SPICER

Spicer,


Another airbox is on the way. Check your PM's.

Spicer,


Another airbox is on the way.* Check your PM's.*

Thank You! I can't wait!

OK, I had a really good day. To me a good day is when I learn a lot and get excited about what we can learn from this knowledge (particularly with regards to air filters).

I called Tom at a company called Powder Technology Corp. They produce test dust for every kind of SAE and ISO test there is, including fuel filter and air filter testing. He can sell me dust but said that I will need an atomizer to apply it to the filter media. He gave me another person to call....

I then called Ken at a company called Test Stand Corp. in Rhode Island. Ken's company MAKES the test stands for the SAE and ISO tests including SAE J726 and ISO5011. These 2 tests are identical.

He was actually very interested in our study and sounded very willing to help. He understands we are a group of enthusiasts searching for answers. His first step was to fax me the ISO5011 standard. However, the fax did not come across and the office was closed by the time I called back. I will call first thing in the A.M..

He told me he has older style nozzles for the application of the test dust that he is not using. (these nozzles ensure that the dust is evenly distribted at a rate of 5.6 grams per minute at 200cfm). He also has tons of test dust, post-filter media, and the desire to help us in our testing. A VERY cool guy and VERY helpful!

The nozzle for the test dust runs off a 5hp compressor. I know enough people with compressors.

I know you guys wish I would just "Get On With It And Get Us Some Results!!!", but I refuse to spend a lot of time conducting a test with flaws and holes, leaving as many questions as answers. I believe I am on the right track, patience!

One thing I may do in the mean time, while waiting for things to come together with the test dirt, is conduct some simple/preliminary tests:::

I mentioned that to use ATMOSPHERIC dust as planned will make it virtually impossible to determine differences in efficiency by weighing the post-filter. I ran the post-filter alone for 25 hours. It filtered 300,000 cubic feet of air. The post-filter was BLACK!!!! But the difference in weight was only .16grams!!! If I had the airbox and a filter in front of it as intended I would only have a fraction of this on the post-filter....not enough to weigh, <font size="5">but enough to see!!!!!!!!</font>

The point I am getting at is that although not measurable in grams or even hundredths of grams, a visual comparison of the post filters <font size="5">IS</font> an indication of how well a filter performs. What I am saying is that we can do some simple post-filter color comparisons in the mean time while the rest of this plan comes together. These tests can be repeated to average out daily dust level differences and the pictures can be posted. It is one way to see some results without waiting for the rest of this study to unfold. Anyway, Onward!!!! SPICER

Spicer


I donot know how well you know anyone at the local Home Depot paint depertment or a good paint supply store but most of them have a computer color match system. You could run the post filter then take them in for color match to see if the computer would pickup the differences. Don't know what it will see but maybe a good measure that can be repeated alot better than the naked eye test.

Spicer


I donot know how well you know anyone at the local Home Depot paint depertment or a good paint supply store but most of them have a computer color match system. You could run the post filter then take them in for color match to see if the computer would pickup the differences. Don't know what it will see but maybe a good measure that can be repeated alot better than the naked eye test.

Yes, a computerized color/darkness comparison would be nice. My hope would be that it would not be necessary. Take a look at "bobistheoilguy.com" under the Air Filter Test icon. A test of color/darkness of dirt comparison was done and the differences were pretty apparent, especially comparing foam filters and K&N to paper. Very interesting study. Not super scientific but interesting. Science is so cool!!!http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Clown.gif

I still do not buy into using visual comparisons for any kind of "scientific" data. What if foam filters are loosing minute amounts of oil, thus making the surface of the post filter stickier. Then, all the dirt is staying on the surface rather than becoming imbedded in the filter material. Just by looking, the oily filter would look dirtier, but the total amount of dirt could still be the same.

Another thing I got to thinking about this morning is the vacuum that is going to be applied to the filters in this process. Do you have a vacuum gauge behind the filter housing? (If you have said this earlier, I have forgotten so I apologize for making you repeat yourself) What I am thinking is that as vacuum is applied to a material, it actually increases the porosity. They say this is what happens when you find hay and paint chips driven into light poles after a tornado. The vacuum of the tornado actually causes the wood fibers to pull apart slightly, thus allowing things that would normally break off to slide into the pores. Then when the vacuum is released, the fibers close back together and the materials get stuck. In the case of our filters, I wonder if the lower flow capacity of the paper filters will cause a higher vacuum or not? Might be another interesting variable to track if you have a vacuum gauge handy...

Habanero, I completely agree that visual tests are not completely scientific. I would never do this study using ONLY visual comparison and expect anyone to live by the results. However, with your ability to extract and weigh any oil in the media, we would be able to determine whether any oil was present. If NO oil was present, the visual comparison would be reasonable. If there was oil, then the visual comparison would be meaningless. According to the manufacturers of the foam filters, oil stays put. We will see.

My only reason for doing any visual comparison-type runs would be to see how the filters compare using ATMOSPHERIC dust. As I mentioned, the amount of atmospheric dust I collected was VERY significant visually, but barely measureable using a 1/100th gram scale. The sensitivity of the scale is not enough to differentiate between a good filter and a bad one.

On vacuum gauges, I don't know a lot about them, but I am under the impression they are simple, inexpensive, and accurate. I will probably put one behind the airbox AND behind the post-filter. A gauge is important especially when measuring vacuum resulting from a clogged filter. As far as lower flow of paper causing more vacuum, here is some data from another air filter study comparison:

Pressure Differential Across Air Filters: 6500rpm at Wide Open Throttle(WOT). Vacuum Gauge just above air filter in the airbox.Vehicle; Mazda Miata:

LEAST RESTRICTIVE: K&N
PRESSURE DIFFERENTIAL: 0.231psi
MOST RESTRICTIVE: Napa Paper
PRESSURE DIFFERENTIAL: 0.249 psi
NO FILTER IN AIR BOX: 0.184 psi
DIFFERENCE IN PRESSURE LOSS BETWEEN NO AIR FILTER AND MOST RESTRICTIVE: .047 psi.
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN BEST AND WORST FLOWING AIR FILTER: 0.018 psi

From the above data it is apparent that even at WOT/maximum flow demand the gain from a "Good Flowing" air filter and a "Restrictive" paper air filter is minimal at best. You bring up a good point habanero, but from previous data it should be of little concern. Thanks for bringing it up though, it did need clarification.

I am going to pick up the SAE J726/ISO 5011 document on air filter testing now. I will keep you updated. SPICER

I have the SAE J726/ISO 5011 document in hand. I have read through it twice and all in all it is pretty simple and straight foreward. It isn't difficult reading. Essentially it outlines HOW air filters are to be tested. The purpose of the standard is to create a uniform and universal method of testing automotive air filters so that they may be fairly compared. The problem is that although most filter manufacturers have done the testing, they don't share it with us. The ONLY SAE/ISO test results that I have seen published on websites and marketing materials have been VERY selective in what they release. The SAE/ISO tests include: Air Flow Restriction or Pressure Drop, Dust Collection Efficiency, Dust Holding Capacity, and Oil Carry-over. Any filter company showing an SAE test that I have seen will use only one of these test results. For instance, FRAM shows on the box and on their website that FRAM is #1 in SAE TESTS!!!! The test they are referenceing is the Dust Holding Capacity. Not filtering EFFICIENCY, or ability to filter out a high percentage of fine dirt.

The Oil Carry-over is a test specifically designed for oiled foam filters and tests at what flow the filter begins to throw oil off it's surface.

Essentially my goal is to focus on the Dust Collection Efficiency test. That has been the plan all along. Hopefully I have demonstrated by my last post that so called "High Flow" filters really do little even at max rpm's to give your engine more air. Dyno tests with the air filter REMOVED have shown NO improvement over tests done WITH the filter in place. So what do we gain by a high flow filter? Probably nothing for the average enthusiast unless it can be proven to filter better. That is what I hope to accomplish. A data base demonstrating which filters do the best job at filtering dirt and keeping it from our engine is my goal.

Back to Testand Corporation. They MAKE the test stands used for air, oil and fuel filter testing. I spoke with Ken today for almost 45 minutes. He is a great resource and sounds very interested in helping us with our testing. He is headed out of town for a week, but got my address and said he was going to send a bunch of stuff to look at including a nozzle for applying dust, some fine test dust, some post-fiter media called "absolute" filter media, and whatever else he can fit in a box. He has been very helpful and is interested in our study. He does not know of any test in the past designed to "rank" filters based on their efficiencies. Their test stands are either sold to manufacturers or to firms who do the testing for smaller manufacturers.

If any filters have been stacked against each other in the past on one of their test stands, the data was not released. That is all I have for now....SPICER

Spicer,


I just checked UPS tracking. You should receive the airbox tomorrow.

Some recent donations:


Kent Tuttle has donated a new AMSOIL filter for testing.


I have also received the tripple beam balance from Greg Landuyt.


Flhrciblueice has sent another airbox and a bunch of paper filters.


THANK YOU TO ALL WHO ARE HELPING. This testing would never happen if it weren't for your generous offer to help!http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Clap.gif


At this time I am waiting to see what Testand Corp. sends me. I know that my approach to this testing has changed a number of times. I like to think of it as EVOLVING, since the changes have ALL come as a result of a learning process.


My original plan to do atmospheric dust tests will probably still happen while we wait for the test-dust equipment to arrive and be assembled. The problem is that although we can EASILY SEE the dirt and even discern which post-filter is dirtier with atmospheric dust, a 1/100th gram scale may not be sensitive enough to tell the difference. Though it may not be 100% scientific, I will probably run a few filters using 24 hour runs using atmospheric dust. AT THE VERY LEAST it would be interesting to compare these results to the more well known "test-dust" type of test.


Habanero has a way to separate oil from the surface of the post-filter media so we will know if oiled-foam filters are throwing oil and making the post-filter LOOK dirtier.


There are a couple of things I would like to ADD to the "SAE/ISO" method of testing air filters. Here is one example:


When testing any air filter (oiled-foam or paper) the filter is sucking air at 200cfm on a test stand (like the one in my back yard). Test dust is introduced at a rate of 5.6 grams per minute using an air compressor and a special nozzle (being sent by Testand Corp.) In the SAE/ISO test, this continues until a certain level of vacuum is reached. This level represents the point where the filter is considered "clogged". The amt. of dirt it took to "clog" the filter is its "DIRT HOLDING CAPACITY". By knowing how much dirt the tested filter is holding vs. the amount of dirt in the post-filter, simple math gives us the EFFICIENCY.


Here is what I want to do differently. Personally I am not too concerned about "dirt holding capacity". My concern is EFFICIENCY. How well do thes filters protect our engines from dirt! I would like to use a pre-determined volume of dirt and test these filters and NOT run them until completely clogged. NOT what I am after. If someone wants, we can do CAPACITY separately.


Now here is where I want to differ with the SAE/ISO: This test stops when the filter clogs. The test runs for an INCREDIBLY short time relative to how we run them on our trucks. Maybe it runs for half an hour during which a HUGE dirt load is introduced. This is obviously not real world, but still a valid test. HOWEVER!!!!


What if oiled-foam filters stop the dirt initially but over a period of time, if left on our trucks and allowed to suck TONS of air while dirty, this dirt slowly migrates and wiggles its way through to our engine?


To me it seems entirely possible that the SAE/ISO test may be overlooking an important characteristic of foam filters. What I want to do different is to load the filters with dirt, but not to clogging. Then run them under the vacuum of the industrial blower for 12 or 24 hours and see what gets past. In fact, one better is to run the test for 1/2 hour, put in a new post-filter and run it for another 24. Let's see what gets past the filter BEYOND the initial SAE/ISO test duration. SPICER

Spicer,


You keep putting so much thought and effort into this deal. Maybe I'll have to send you a pocket protector and some taped glasses with a lab coat while you run these tests. http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Clown.gif

Spicer
When I ran the air filter testing a year or so ago I atomized the dirt by putting a deflector plate in. This way the dirt never came in direct contact with the filter while put it into the tester. It made a big difference on how it all turned out and the best part I could then get the same results every time.

Greg

Spicer,


You keep putting so much thought and effort into this deal. Maybe I'll have to send you a pocket protector and some taped glasses with a lab coat while you run these tests. http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Clown.gif





http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Geek.gifAre you talking to me Victory Red?http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Geek.gif


Greg, I am curious about the deflector you are talking about. Tell me more.


The SAE/ISO requires the dust to be "atomized". This dust is 50% 10 micron and less. It must be atomized in order to ensure that it is not clumped together and that it is evenly distributed. It is atomized by being SLOWLY fed into the compressed air stream. The air "blasts" it into its tiny particles and directs it towards the air filter being tested. A shroud ensures that no dust is "lost" in the process and that all dust deposits itself on the filtering media. Greg, did your test dust get applied with compressed air or some other way? SPICER

Spicer
Has you can see in the first picture when the dirt was sucked into the tester it could go right in on top the filter. It was concentrated in one spot right in front of the opening.

I then put the deflector in front of the whole on the tester as you can see in the second picture. This made a world of difference, the dirt was no longer concentrated in on spot on the filter.

I tried to look up the thread where we did all this testing but it has been deleted from the server. Their was 500 and some post and we did the testing every way imaginable to try and satisfy everyone.
Greg


http://pics.tdiclub.com/data/500/6452testfixture.jpg
http://pics.tdiclub.com/data/500/6452deflector.jpg

Greg, It looks as though the filters are placed in the test stand upside down. Is that right?

I was wondering if you knew the CFM of your unit. Also, do you remember how LONG the unit ran and at what rate the dust was introduced. Was it introduced all at once? I think you told me you used 1 oz. of dust for each run.

Thanks for the pictures and the info. SPICER

The first test runs will begin in the morning. This test will be primarily a VISUAL COMPARISON TEST. In other words, "Let's see which filter lets the most dirt through as evidenced by how dirty the post-filter appears after the test run." The "test dirt" tests are still at least a couple weeks out. I want to run the "visual comparison test" first and compare the results to the future "test dirt" tests. The post-filters will be sent to habanero for analysis to verify any oil contamination on the post filters which may skew a visual comparison.

The first filter to be run will be a used OE. It has 4500 miles on it. I will run it for 24 hours. Both the filter and post-filter have been carefully weighed. All atmospheric variables will be recorded for the record.

Although weighed carefully, I do not expect any SIGNIFICANT change in weight by the OE or POST filter. But I am doing it in order to be completely thorough.

The following day an identical test will be run using a used UNI with 6000 miles. I didn't want to jump right in with these 2 filters given the controversy, but I wanted to save the NEW filters for later tests and these were the two closest USED filter in terms of miles I have.

When the wife shows me how, I will post pictures of the test stand and post-filters.

This first test will compare these 2 filters at 200cfm, equivalent to 1650rpm. Follow-up tests on these same 2 filters will include a 450cfm/2445rpm simulation and a 700cfm/3070rpm simulation.

Because of atmospheric variations the tests may need to be repeated. That will be a "wait and see" proposition as this will be the "Maiden Voyage" so to speak. Wish me luck!http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Approve.gif SPICER

Waiting to see this to the end.......

I already know how one of the filters will do (or not do).

The first 24 run is complete. I ran the OE and was quite honestly amazed at how MUCH staining there was on the post-filter. Now the UNI is in place.

It takes me about 10 minutes to swich out the primary and post-filter.

Regarding how dirty the post-filter was, this atmospheric dust must be SUPER FINE as in tiny micron size. Should be interesting, The next step is to restrict each filter to simulate higher flows. I will be working on that today. I will run each filter once more before I pause for the weekend, weather permitting. SPICER

Well I must say I am pleased as peaches at the results of my first run.http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Big Smile.gif The filters and the test stand gave me numbers that are VERY useable, even to my own surprise. I thought there would be too little dust collected to do any more than a visual comparison. In this first run, apparently I was wrong! I like being wrong!!!!http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Clap.gif

Here is what I got: Note, weather conditions have not yet been fully documented, but here is the raw data:

FILTER: OE with 4500 miles on it.

TEST DURATION: 24 hours, simulating 1650 rpm, 200cfm, or 1000 miles at 45 mph.

OE WEIGHTS: start, 651.4g
final, 658.5g
net, 7.1 g
POST-FILTER: start, 2.34g
final, 2.38g
net, .04g

EFFICIENCY= 7.1 divided by 7.14 = 99.44%

So there you go, not so hard! The UNI is on the stand now. Will be done at 0700 hours tomorrow. Probably will not have time to post data until Wednesday since I will be at work for 24 hours. Until then! SPICER

You think you know problem child, but there's always a chance you might be wrong. Keep an open mind when problem solving.

NEVER!

My guess is the uni will have a 40% filter rate or LESS. Any takers?

Remember I had to vacuum my intake out after using the UNI.

OH GOD I wont sleep well tonight.


FINALLY -------&gt; vindication!

TO all the naysayers.....Lets see how that shoe tastes huh???


PS and wait till he restricts the UNI, it will probably be more like 20% then.

PSS... Hey KENNEDY ---------&gt; OEM= 99.44% efficient.Edited by: problemchild

Vindication with an e.


Thats neat.http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Embarrased.gif

About as neat as those fancy red shortz......Edited by: problemchild

Ooh got me there! LOLhttp://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Big Smile.gif

Well, my enthusiasm has turned to disappointment. I have run into a situation that has thrown a stick into my spokes. It's humidity.


It goes like this: OE filter that was tested first.....Initial weight: 651.4g. Final weight: 658.5g. Weight as of 0630 this morning: 649.8g!!! Either a mouse ate a corner out of my filter or the damn thing lost weight over night. I'm sure it is losing weight because last night I left it on the scale after discovering it had lost almost 8 grams. This morning it had lost another gram. AAAARRRGGGHHHHH!!!!!http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Angry.gif


Then the UNI after 24 hours on the stand didn't gain weight as you would expect, it lost .2grams!!!!!!!! @#*&amp;$%@^*%$@#!!!!!!!


I suppose I should have known that moisture and humidity can't be overlooked. The only solution is a dryer/oven.


The only reliable piece of data from the last 2 days in my opinion is the post-filter weights. The OE passed .04g. of dirt and the UNI passed .05g. of dirt. The UNI's post filter was definitely darker in comparison to the OE. This comparison of weight and color is only valid once I look up the dust levels in the area on a DNR website.


So where are we.....My ability to assign an efficiency rating to a filter using atmospheric dust OR test dust is impossible without a reliable dryer/oven. We can do color comparisons and weight comparisons of the post-filter reliably. The post-filter is blanket glass micro-fiber and does not seem to hold any water as I have re-weighed post filters many times and the results are consistent. This would bring us back to running filters for 24 hours repeatedly in order to establish a PATTERN of dirt passed in a 24 hour period. This can still be done for 3 different flows, etc... and the humidity would not have an effect on the data gathering process, it would be evened out by the repeated nature of the study. Again, we would end up with a long series of comparison runs (all test filters vs. the benchmark filter) and a clear "best filter" or a ranking of filters could be accomplished.


Test dust could be used in the same manner, but without a dryer/oven the efficiency #'s will be meaningless.


I think someone in this thread said "throw on a good filter ,enjoy your truck and forget about it". Starting to sound like the voice of reason to me. Not sure what will happen at this point. SPICEREdited by: SPICER

PC: Never say never


Spicer, sorry about the problems. What is the humidity in your area?

Even if your post filter material itself does not hold water, any dust collected on it will. So, even those measurements are subject to the effects of humidity. One possible solution is to get a big sheet pan that will hold the filter and throw it in the oven for several hours at about 150 degrees (higher temp would be better, but I worry the filter construction materials may not take much more heat) and weigh it right after it comes from the oven. You really should allow it to cool before weighing so as to avoid convection currents throwing off your measurement, but that would require a big dessicator. In fact, you could make one of those pretty easily with an appropriately sized rubbermaid tub and a few cannisters of silica gel. Just do a google search for silica gel, you should get many hits. I think it is pretty cheap from a lot of gun shop suppliers since they usually put it in gun cases to keep moisture out. I know this is more complication, but may be a necessary evil.

This is my first post to this forum, but I've been lurking an watching this thread with interest for a while. I don't think it would be hard to determine oven dry weight. Just a regular oven on "warm" for an hour should do it. You might have to weigh the filter a couple times until the weight loss becomes zero. Once you have reached that threshold you are at oven dry weight. I would measure OD weight before as well as after. In my profession, we use OD weight all the time, you don't need anything really fancy to determine it. Just dry it and weigh is immediately. Good job on this by the way. http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Clap.gif

1/10 of a gram more than a oem filter for a 1000 miles. I believe I can live with that. Uni gonna stay for now.http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Clap.gifhttp://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Clap.gifhttp://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Clap.gif The UNI tested had more miles (1500) before the test started. Hey Kennedy put more on the shelf looks like there gonna continue to sellhttp://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Approve.gifhttp://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Big Smile.gifhttp://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Clap.gif


Geno

Now what was problem child saying about "foot in MOUTH"...........it still isn't over yet but this is the point I was trying to make, you don't always know what you think you know. In all fairness I think we need many Uni filters to test, they could have had a bad run or something.

I agree Topgas


And if it would of been handled proper all this B/S would not be here today.


Geno

SS396, the humidity is pretty low right now. It has been cold and dry.


habanero, I agree that the dust on the post-filter will hold moisture, but apparently it is not enough to measure at 1/100th gram sensitivity. At the same time the OE lost 8 grams the post-filter stayed the same. Oven drying is the way to go, though, and oven drying the post-filter is EASY compared to the full sized filters.


st_pinetree and others, is oven dry weight going to be the same in summer humidity and winter dryness? In other words, is something else used in labs to dry the media besides just heat?


geno, it was 1/100th of a gram, not 1/10th difference. This test was run in what I would consider IDEALLY LOW DUST LEVELS. In my back yard on a cold spring day with little wind and the ground is saturated keeping dust to an absolute minimum. .05 grams is 25% more dirt allowed by the UNI than the .04 grams allowed by the OE. If the OE truly did have an efficiency of 99.44%, then the UNI under the same conditions would have an efficiency of 99.28%.


To me 25% more dirt passing is significant, but that's just me.


The real difference should be seen in the restricted runs. Despite my disappointment I have the unit running now with the OE restricted down to simulate full throttle, 700cfm, 3000+ rpm.


The OE and UNI will both be restricted down to 26.7 sq. inches from their original size of 93.5 sq. inches. The dirt passed by the filters will be multiplied by 3.5 to give us the amount of dirt the filter would have passed had the ENTIRE filter been flowing at full throttle/ max rpm.


I will contact Ken from Testand Corp. to get ideas about drying filters. Habanero, tell me more about the Silica idea. Would it be consistent or is oven drying a faster, more reliable method? SPICER

Spicer


99% efficiant on any filter is great, I feel there is no filter out there that is 100% be it oil or what ever.


Geno

Spicer


99% efficiant on any filter is great, I feel there is no filter out there that is 100% be it oil or what ever.


Geno





Nothing is 100%, true. We are looking for a comparison of efficiencies. Which filters the best. The first test was a "cruising speed" rpm simulation. I suspect the higher flows will show a bigger separation in efficiency, but we will see.


Just curious though, if ANY filter proves to filter even a LITTLE less efficiently than the OE, What is the advantage of buying an aftermarket filter? You pay more for less in my calculations. I will, however, remain open minded, neutral, and objective in my approach. My goal is not to PROVE one over the other, but instead to come up with meaningful and truthful data. SPICER

Is there a way to make a box that could hold two filters side by side so they could both be seeing the same air ,dirt ,etc at the same time going thru them ?? One inlet ,two outlets?

Is there a way to make a box that could hold two filters side by side so they could both be seeing the same air ,dirt ,etc at the same time going thru them ?? One inlet ,two outlets?


Problem there would be different resistance in the two filters. If the foam flows 30% more air than the paper, it will pull more air and dirt (path of least resistance) and you couldn't make a one-to-one comparison. You'd need two separate flow systems running at the same rate side-by-side and the only advantage you'd get would be both of them drawing the same "source" contaminated air at the same time.

Is there a way to make a box that could hold two filters side by side so they could both be seeing the same air ,dirt ,etc at the same time going thru them ?? One inlet ,two outlets?


Problem there would be different resistance in the two filters. If the foam flows 30% more air than the paper, it will pull more air and dirt (path of least resistance) and you couldn't make a one-to-one comparison. You'd need two separate flow systems running at the same rate side-by-side and the only advantage you'd get would be both of them drawing the same "source" contaminated air at the same time.





The difference in flow from one filter to the next, even best flowing to worst flowing, is MINIMAL at best even at MAX RPM/MAX FLOW. The only way to do side-by-side runs would be to have 2 vacuum sources/2 test stands, as mentioned above. SPICER

Spicer,


What kind of scale are you using? If it is a triple beam are you zeroing it EVERYTIME before you measure?

So, where is problemchild now? Hmmmm http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Big Smile.gif

Spicer,


What kind of scale are you using? If it is a triple beam are you zeroing it EVERYTIME before you measure?





Actually I am using 2 scales. One accurate to 1/100th gram but a capacity of only 70 grams, used for the post-filter only. The other is the tripple beam accurate to 1/10th gram but a MUCH higher capacity, used exclusively for the primary filters. I zero and recalibrate EVERY TIME. They are kept in the same location at all times also.


The humidity thing is a simple fact of life that I wanted to ignore. I hoped it would not be necessary to bake each filter before and after every run and weighing, but that was an obvious oversight/wishful thinking. The thing is, I don't want to use my kitchen. It's gas and I would much rather use electric for this.


According to the SAE/ISO the filters are to be heated to 220 degrees F. until the weight "stabilizes". The test dirt, when used, is to be the same way.


My options as I see them are to continue running 24 hr runs and only weigh the post filters. We will not get filtering efficiencies this way but we will know which filters do a better job than others.


Or, we can do the same but find an oven. This would give us much more meaningful data.


Either of the above would work regardless of using test dirt or atmospheric dust.


The stand is running now with the OE at a restriction simulating full throttle. I will do the same the next day with the UNI. I have known all along that the first couple of runs would be a BIG learning process. I must have gotten a false sense of good fortune after the first run with some lucky numbers. I have also said all along if anyone is looking for answers tomorrow, I probably won't have them. This is a big project and growing pains are a part of that. SPICER

Would a small toaster oven work?

Would a small toaster oven work?


I actually have one but I am pretty sure it would be too small. Also the electric elements would be too close to the filters for my comfort level. The temp. control on those is a little unreliable too.


Minimum the inside would need to be about 15"x13". SPICER


Edited by: SPICER

Just move the whole test operation to Arizona, never more than about 5% humidity there. http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Big Smile.gif

Just keep plugging at it Spicer, you've gone too far to quit now. http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Clap.gif

Here is my take on the whole aftermarket air cleaner business. First, i don't believe any of the aftermarket companys build a filament equal to the OEM for clean air. Yes, aftermarket may(i use that loosley) suck more air but i dont think a diesel would notice it. What i have noticed with the aftermarket filters is that nobody cleans them when they should be washed and oiled.(me included). It is like we put the air cleaner out of our regular maintanence routine (i will wash it soon), ya, right. All the aftermarket air cleaners i see in my shop are plugged and filthy. I point this out to my cutomers, and they all say "ya, i gotta do that this weekend". Aside from the turbo whine, and show aspect, i think they are totaly worthless and detramental to your engines because many of you guys are lazy and don't clean and oil them. As far as horsepower gain, they may make more power on a dyno cause the hood is open and they can sucksome air. Problem is the hood is closed when you drive the truck and you loose that.


mike

Im here.........


I wondered how you were dealing with humidity. I figured you had that handled.

The paper would hold moisture better or more then foam.

Running air through the paper would condense the moisture into the paper. Overnight the paper would partially dry out there by losing weight.

Now you have to figure out how much moisture went into the primamry paper and secondary paper.

By the way how much did the secondary weigh after the uni run?

You could bake/heat the paper before and after runs to get a true zero or no humidity weight. (which is how I would have done it).



REGARDING the UNI losing weight. Heres the explaination for that. The uni filter lost weight because it did not capture ANY dirt. Not only that, what dirt was on the filter at the start of the test (used filter) got sucked off the filter and ended up in the engine ( or 2nd filter).


There you go.......Edited by: problemchild

Mike L., I mostly agree. I have nearly BEGGED certain aftermarket filter companies to show some data backing up their "best filters on the planet" claims with insulting response.


PC, the weights of the post-filters are reliable. I have repeated the measurements many times with the 1/100th g. scale and I get the same weight. The OE passed .04 grams, the UNI passed .05 grams. The UNI post-filter is noticibly darker. I am running the OE at restriction simulating full throttle. The UNI will do the same starting today. I will play with my stove/oven today and see if I can get filter weights to stabilize. This may be the key, but the wife will say, "so long as you are in the kitchen you better be cooking! Filter Boy!


One other thing, If I do find a way to stabilize the filter weight by drying them that will be a start. But this came to mind....EFFICIENCY= weight gain of filter divided by weight gain of filter + weight gain of post-filter x 100. Efficiencies of 99.5% range are common with quality paper filters. This number is determined using a VERY SPECIFIC TEST DUST as required by the SAE/ISO standard. In fact all the test dust in the world is currently made my PTI, Powder Technology Inc.


Test dust is 50% at 10 micron and less, with the rest being 11-80 micron. The dust in my back yard is ULTRA-FINE and I would bet ALL of it is in the under 10 micron range. My point is if I do an efficiency calculation using atmospheric dust, the % will likely sound low compared to advertised efficiencies. SPICER

Spicer
Instead of doing it the way you are just use the test dirt. Use a given amount that is ingested into the machine over a give period of time. If it is feed slowly you will get some consistent results. Also one thing to consider is when doing oiled filters that air rushing through them for long periods of time could result in some oil being taken out of the filter. Not sure if that is really relevant but its possible. You will get there but it will take time.

Greg

Greg, It looks as though the filters are placed in the test stand upside down. Is that right?

I was wondering if you knew the CFM of your unit. Also, do you remember how LONG the unit ran and at what rate the dust was introduced. Was it introduced all at once? I think you told me you used 1 oz. of dust for each run.

Thanks for the pictures and the info. SPICER


Greg, I posted this back when you posted pictures. Now that you are here.....SPICER

Talk about 2 extremes! Yesterday was dry and cold. I weighed the OE just before I put it on the stand.649.7 grams. Over those 24 hours it got warmer and it had rained over night. The filter is protected but of course the air is very damp. Just weighed, 679.0 grams! 29.3 grams of water in the filter! As I understand it paper swells when it gets wet and should filter better. I will let the post-filter dry and post its weight gain later.

Now I will try drying this OE and see how long it takes for the weight to stablize. SPICER

Spicer
The test setup I have it draws air through the filter. So the intake is on top and the motor is under the filter, just as it is on a motor. This method work very well and I was able to get very consistant results. If you can get a system to repeat the same results every time or at least close to it then you have got a good setup.

Greg

Greg, It looks as though the filters are placed in the test stand upside down. Is that right?

I was wondering if you knew the CFM of your unit. Also, do you remember how LONG the unit ran and at what rate the dust was introduced. Was it introduced all at once? I think you told me you used 1 oz. of dust for each run.

Thanks for the pictures and the info. SPICER


Greg, I posted this back when you posted pictures. Now that you are here.....SPICER

As I understand it paper swells when it gets wet and should filter better. SPICER

The "dust" molecules in the air will also be larger when damp, thus they will more easily be filtered out. Have any dirty looking post filters for me to extract yet?

Complicated I know. Could you dry the intake air?

habanero, I am running the UNI now. It will be done in the morning. I will weigh it and post the results. I will then send you 6 post-filters. Unlabeled, they will be 2 from the OE (1650rpm and 3040rpm simulation). The next 2 are UNI, same tests as the OE. One will be clean and unused as a test blank, and the other will have a pre-measured amount of AMSOIL filter oil added. I would use UNI oil but I have none. They will be sealed and labeled as we have discussed.You will probably get them Monday.

I did the "full throttle"/ 3040rpm simulation right away because it is most likely to throw oil off the filter.

Bronco, drying the intake air is way out of my ability. According to SAE/ISO air filter test standard, there is a VERY controlloed environment for testing. Humidity and temperature require very strict limits in order to comply with the standard. This is to ensure repeatability no matter where in the world the test is run. Testand Corp. makes these test stands that satisfy all of these variables. I would get one if I thought the members here could raise $250,000. The members have been very helpful with sending fiters, scales and airboxes, but my guess is "no" on the $250,000.http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Ermm.gif SPICER

LOL. I here you. Whatever happened to the concept of Habenero " washing the secondary filter" and then measuring the remains?

That is what I was talking about in my earlier post. I will extract the oil from the filters and weigh it to see how much, if any, oil came out of the primary filters. To explain Spicer's labeling comment, he will be sending them to me with just a number on each filter. That way, I won't know which one came from which filter, which helps to avoid bias.

<font size="4">We Have Humidity Stabilization</font>

I am waiting to talk to Ken at Testand Corp. about humidity and drying with an oven. The SAE/ISO requires oven heating at 220 degrees F. until weight stabiliztion occurs. I used my gas oven to see what would happen. I used a meat thermometer to work the oven to 220 F. Here is the weight data from my OE with 4500 miles on it:

Weight yesterday before beginning 24 hour test run: 649.7 grams.

Weight this morning after running 24 hours with rain overnight: 679.0 grams.

Filter put in oven at 220 F.

<font size="4">TIME: WEIGHT:</font>

0942 679.0
1034 636.6
1123 627.0
1153 624.9
1223 624.3
1253 624.0
1323 624.0

Total time to reach oven dry weight: 3 hrs. 40 mins.
Total weight loss from water evap.: 55.0 grams!!!!

You guys are wondering how I have SO much time on my hands. I am a lonely loser with nothing better to do, of course!http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Clown.gif I am a family man but they are out of town. I normally would not have this kind of time, and this summer will be REALLY hard with 2 jobs and 2 kids and a wife. Hopefully this can get dialed in so the testing can go smoothly. There will likely come a time when testing will be suspended until I can get to it again. I am not a quitter but family is #1. SPICER

Numbers look good, keep up the good work! Have you treated any post filters the same to see how they come out?

Numbers look good, keep up the good work! Have you treated any post filters the same to see how they come out?



As a matter of fact, I just tried that! A dirty post-filter just removed from the stand this morning.

Initial weight: 2.36 grams
Oven dry weight: 2.35 grams.

Not much, but it did make a difference.

Not counting the oven-dry weight, the post-filter for the OE at full throttle simulation went from 2.25 g to 2.36 g. That is .11 grams x 3.5 = .385g that would have passed the OE if the entire filter was used at 700cfm/3040rpm. I multiply by 3.5 because I was only using 28.57% of the filter by using restrictors (plastic bags and cardboard) to simulate full throttle. This is SIGNIFICANTLY more than at 200cfm/1650rpm. BUT, we don't know if today's air was dirtier or cleaner than the day before!

I want to make it clear at this point that the data I am posting is pretty close to worthless. If the UNI passes 10 grams or .01 grams by morning, it means very little. I don't want anyone to jump to any conclusions. I am learning HOW to test, that is what I meant by "preliminary tests" and "learning process" and "dialing it in". The amount of dirt I get on a post-filter is meaningless unless we know how much dirt was introduced and how much was captured by the primary filter. Weighing the primary filter has been a challenge due to humidity.

I still don't know if using a GAS oven is a reliable method of drying. Hopefully Ken at Testand can educate me. We will test and we will learn, but for now the answers are still a little way away.

<font size="4">IF</font> The oven drying method with gas works, then we could begin testing again using atmospheric dust and weighing the filters ACCURATELY this time. If I am careful in weighing we could get efficiency %. But remeber what I said earlier, a filter's efficiency % can IMPROVE if the dirt introduced is BIG as measured in microns. If the dirt is PRIMARILY TINY, as in 3 micron and less atmospheric dust, the efficiency% may seem very low. Remember SAE/ISO uses standardized test dust. The dust in my back yard is not standardized.

I will say that with all the tests so far, the post-filters look pretty dang dirty. Just because there is no dust on your intake tube DOES NOT mean it isn't getting past your filter. A plastic intake tube may or may not collect dust. I am sure the type of dust, humidity, static electricity, and cleanliness/oil on the intake tube(from oiled foam) can drastically effect dirt or no dirt on the inside of the tube. SPICER

I don't think using a gas oven is anything to worry about. Obviously the gas combustion is giving off moisture, but I don't see it being too much of a problem as long as there is some air flow through the oven to remove the water vapor. Could be wrong, though.

SPICER


Any chance in starting a new thread with the results of your preliminary tests and results; as well as the final tests and results. Hopefully with a stipulation that no reply posts be done so as not to have a plethera of unnecessary posts to FILTER through (pun intended).

At some point I will compile everything. As for now just find a machete and start swinging. Good exercise!http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Wink.gif SPICER

Spicer


You might want to try and oven dry an oiled filter before the wife gets home. I'm not sure at what temp the filter oil starts to change states, but it may smell alot if it does during the drying process. If this is the case about all you could do is oven dry a new unoiled unit to get the start weight then add a controlled amount of oil to each filter. By knowing the weight of the added oil you could make some assumtions as to whats happening during testing.

Refresh my memory ...


Are you sucking thru or blowing ?? My confusion came when the statement was made Gregg is the filter backwards .... Looks to me Gregg is drawing thru the media (sucking) natural ,as oppose to blowing thru unnatural ...


Just wanna be clear ...


Mac http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Confused.gif

Diesel Tech, Very good advice. I also want to talk to Testand Corp. and ask him if drying a foam filter is any different.

Mackin, My test stand sucks. I asked Greg if his filters were upside down because it appeared that the dust was introduced from the top. If the dust comes from above, the dirty side would be up and the filter upside down. Still not exactly sure of Greg's answer.

I am compiling a bunch of DNR air quality data. I have hourly data from 2 sites about 10 miles away each. The data is hourly measurements of 2.5 micron atmospheric dust. I can average the dust levels for the 2 - 24 hour test runs (OE and UNI simulating full throttle) If the 2 test durations show similar dust levels according to DNR data, then we can make rough generalizations about the filtering ability of these 2 filters at full throttle. SPICEREdited by: SPICER

Thanks .... I just wasn't totally clear I may have just over looked it ....


Mac

Spicer


You might want to try and oven dry an oiled filter before the wife gets home. I'm not sure at what temp the filter oil starts to change states,* but it may smell alot if it does during the drying process. If this is the case about all you could do is oven dry a new unoiled unit to get the start weight then add a controlled amount of oil to each filter. By knowing the weight of the added oil you could make some assumtions as to whats happening during testing.

I put an old AMSOIL in the oven. Those filters stink!!http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/HiHi.gif I left it in for about 50 minuted. It lost 2.6 grams. I would bet it would continue to lose oil and water for a VERY long time. I checked to ISO test guidelines and the oil-bath filters in this document are for "industrial filters". mNot sure what that means.

I just re-read the ISO document. I remember Ken from Testand Corp. mention oven drying filters. However, the document does not talk about oven-drying any filters, only the test dust. The filters are to be "acclimated to the test conditions" which must be controlled in both temp. and humidity as outlined in the document. Oven drying is just another option, but oiled foam and 220 F heat smells bad! I will get more from Ken...

If humidity was a constant this would be easy! SPICER

When I used to use an oven to dry beef jerky I would stick a wooden spoon in the door to keep it ajar by about 1/2 inch. It kept the air flowing and worked well.


Spicer I have an UN used uni air cleaner kit collecting dust (pun). If you want it let me know.Edited by: problemchild

Here are the results of the Restricted / 700cfm / Full Throttle Simulation for the OE and UNI.

First, in order to give some validity to 2 tests run on separate days, I used information found on this website: www.dnr.state.wi.us. This is the State of Wisconsin DNR website. There is more data than I dreamed possible here. If you ask I can tell you how to find it on the website, but there is hourly data kept all year round on many atmospheric variables, including Particulte Matter in the 2.5 micron range as measured in Micrograms per Cubic Meter. There are 2 monitoring locations near me, one is about 10 miles away and the other 15.

I took the hourly data from BOTH sites for the hours each test was run. I then averaged the concentrations of Particulate Matter to get an Average Exposure for each filter. Here is the data. Keep in mind the "x3.5" at the end is because I had to use restrictors to simulate full throttle. I restricted down to 28.57% of the original opening of the filter. Then by multipling by 3.5 we get the assumed dirt passing if the ENTIRE filter was used.

<font size="4">FILTER </font>
OE UNI

<font size="4">DURATION OF TEST</font>
25.5 HOURS 24 HOURS

<font size="4">AVG. PARTICULATE MATTER</font>
20.17 micg/cu.meter 18.68 micg/cu.meter

<font size="4">INITIAL WT OF POST FILTER</font>
2.25g 2.33g

<font size="4">FINAL WT OF POST FILTER</font>
2.36g 2.50g

<font size="4">TOTAL DIRT PASSED</font>
0.11g 0.17g

<font size="4">DIRT X 3.5 =</font>
0.385g 0.595g

Or, The UNI passed 1.5 times the dirt that the OE passed. The OE also ran 1.5 hours longer in slightly dirtier air. Not perfect science, but pretty good. SPICER

Or, The UNI passed 1.5 times the dirt that the OE passed. SPICER

Not to sound picky, but be careful with your wording. The post filter from the UNI test weighed 1.5 times more, but you can't say the UNI filter passed 1.5 times more dirt. I think most here will understand what you meant, but some will see that wording and jump all over it I am sure.

State of wisconsin website. You found my secret weapon. Boat loads of diesel studys/information/articles/research. There ae many other college websites that have done studys/test as well. Just type in a college and do a search for diesel. GOOD resources.

habanero, I think you mean some of the weight could be oil? If this is what you mean then I see where you are coming from. The post-filters are ready to go, will mail them to you today. SPICER

Here are the results of the Restricted / 700cfm / Full Throttle Simulation for the OE and UNI.

First, in order to give some validity to 2 tests run on separate days, I used information found on this website: www.dnr.state.wi.us. This is the State of Wisconsin DNR website. There is more data than I dreamed possible here. If you ask I can tell you how to find it on the website, but there is hourly data kept all year round on many atmospheric variables, including Particulte Matter in the 2.5 micron range as measured in Micrograms per Cubic Meter. There are 2 monitoring locations near me, one is about 10 miles away and the other 15.

I took the hourly data from BOTH sites for the hours each test was run. I then averaged the concentrations of Particulate Matter to get an Average Exposure for each filter. Here is the data. Keep in mind the "x3.5" at the end is because I had to use restrictors to simulate full throttle. I restricted down to 28.57% of the original opening of the filter. Then by multipling by 3.5 we get the assumed dirt passing if the ENTIRE filter was used.

<font size="4">FILTER </font>
OE UNI

<font size="4">DURATION OF TEST</font>
25.5 HOURS 24 HOURS

<font size="4">AVG. PARTICULATE MATTER</font>
20.17 micg/cu.meter 18.68 micg/cu.meter

<font size="4">INITIAL WT OF POST FILTER</font>
2.25g 2.33g

<font size="4">FINAL WT OF POST FILTER</font>
2.36g 2.50g

<font size="4">TOTAL DIRT PASSED</font>
0.11g 0.17g

<font size="4">DIRT X 3.5 =</font>
0.385g 0.595g

Or, The UNI passed 1.5 times the dirt that the OE passed. The OE also ran 1.5 hours longer in slightly dirtier air. Not perfect science, but pretty good. SPICER

Just to save people from flipping back a page. SPICER

Good enough for me.......

This is cool having a resident air quality geek to make uni look bad. http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Clown.gif

Thanks....

Oh and that 50.00 we talked about is on its way...

Been away for a couple days. Looks like you are right on track. As to your question about humidity and OD weight, once you quit losing weight you are at OD. I would think you would want to use the natural humidity in the air to make the testing more "real world". I would note it at a few times during each test. The filters may pick up some (tiny) amounts of weight in the short time from oven removal to weighing, but I would think that would be insignificant, esp if all the weighing is indoors and very near the oven. Using a gas oven should be just fine as well. The oil and heat question is interesting. Longer drying time at lower heat would probably be the answer. Air circulation by leaving the oven door open is a good idea as well and may help reduce your drying time. Good job, and good luck. Can't wait to see results.

That's about what one would expect, the "better flowing" filter is just that. I'm sure it wouldn't be an easy task but an average of multiple runs would be useful too.


Also, why did the OE run longer than the UNI? Anyway, you could assume it's a linear function across the final 1.5hrs and scale the OE down (24/25.5 =94%) to 24 hours for both filters...


Filter Dirt


OE 0.362g


UNI 0.595g


Normalizing the time shows UNI passes ~1.6 times, or 60%, more dirt in slightly cleaner air. And as the UNI is cleaned a few times and loses some structured fibers it only gets worse. No thanks!Edited by: Ray403Dmax

Anyway, you could assume it's a linear function across the final 1.5hrs and scale the*OE down (24/25.5 =94%) to 24 hours for both filters...


Why can you assume that? Some say filters become more efficient as they plug, some say the opposite. There could have been more PM that last 1.5 hours (daybreak, wind conditions, etc), the humidity may have changed. Anything could have happened that last 1.5 hours to make it nonlinear. It is difficult to compare the tests for that reason but impossible to adjust the numbers. Please don't think I am trying to be a smart-ass, I just am playing devil's advicate.

With regards to filtering and clean vs dirty and filter capability. I would think the fine holes would plug first and leave the big holes open. Then you would have fine and medium dust flowing right through the big holes. Kinda like what I saw with the sunlight holes and dust in my intake tract.

I also think that running multiple tests is a good idea.

I would bake the filters before and after and then have a cool down time of several hours outside. This would allow them to become one with their enviroment.

Why can you assume that? Some say filters become more efficient as they plug, some say the opposite. There could have been more PM that last 1.5 hours (daybreak, wind conditions, etc), the humidity may have changed. Anything could have happened that last 1.5 hours to make it nonlinear. It is difficult to compare the tests for that reason but impossible to adjust the numbers. Please don't think I am trying to be a smart-ass, I just am playing devil's advicate.


I agree it would be better to compare the two tests with equivalent 24 hour periods, but remember you have to work with the data that is available. I only provide a reasonable model to make it apples to apples. Linear is always a good first approximation when there is no additional information. Hand-waving about humidity and "anything could have happened" isn't additional information.

Within the limits Spicer has he is doing one hell of a job for all of us! I think that in a perfect world haveing all test the same helps but the truth be told is that if one hour makes that big of a difference we as consumers are in trouble. We hope to get what........................... 225 hours of use from a filter. That's about 7500 mile of service between changeing or cleaning, so in the greater picture I donot believe 1 hour is going to have a greater change than the conditions are changeing, which he has no control over! Let's give him a chance to finish running the setup testing and let that drive where changes are necessary.

Hand-waving about humidity and "anything could have happened" isn't additional information.

Additional information is also not making unreasonable assumptions. The whole point of Spicer going to this work is to have some real data to compare these filters by. I know most who read my posts are probably thinking I am making things too complicated. The fact is, I am a scientist. I am paid to do research. My aim is to help guide you guys in making not only the data, but the interpretation of the data as fair and scientific as possible. I know there are other agendas many would like to pursue with the results of this testing. That is fine, each person is open to their own opinion of the results. But, don't get upset when I point out facts that make the conclusions you are drawing less valid.