Filtration Rate of Grizzly Canister Dust Collector

>- Its filter is made from spun bonded polyester instead of paper
>(JET's is made from paper, right?) According to Bill's Cyclone web
>site, spun bonded polyester is preferred because it is more durable.

it the situation of these dc's I can see the paper wearing out. any find dust
and shavings can spin back up into the fitter. that will wear it out.

>Seem like it is a very good choice if someone cannot use a cyclone
>(may be "vertically challenged", not enough budget, ...etc). I have a
>couple questions though:

it's better then a bag for sure.

>- It can filter dusts down to 1-micron. This is good. But I am under
>the impression that we should filter the dust down to 0.5-micron. How
>big a difference between these two filtration rates in term of health
>and cleanliness anyway?

yes .5 is better. but if you don't make a lot of fine sawdust it may be ok.
I have not checked one of the new dc's out but if it has good airflow and you
keep the fitters clean it will filter the fine sawdust too. the better the
airflow the more sawdust the filter will filter.

>- JET came up with a 2-micron canister last year, and Grizzly came up
>with a 1-micron canister this year. Should I expect to see a canister
>that can handle 0.5-micron dusts next year (as in 2004)? Anyone knows
>any information about this trend?

who knows. lets hope grizzly is telling the truth.

>- What's that 1-micron filtration rate really mean anyway? Does this
>mean it can filter down to 1-micron but only at 75% efficiency? If
>this is the case, it may be able to filter down to 2-micron at 99%
>efficiency, and this may mean that it should have been rated as
>2-micron after all, instead of the "marketing friendly" 1-micron
>rating. This is just a guess. I would like to see if someone knows
>something about this rating.

with these filters I doubt we will ever know. my cyclone filters are rated.



--
Knight-Toolworks & Custom Planes
Custom made wooden planes at reasonable prices
See http://www.knight-toolworks.com For prices and ordering instructions.

Jay Chan <[email protected]> wrote:

> - What's that 1-micron filtration rate really mean anyway? Does this
> mean it can filter down to 1-micron but only at 75% efficiency? If
> this is the case, it may be able to filter down to 2-micron at 99%
> efficiency, and this may mean that it should have been rated as
> 2-micron after all, instead of the "marketing friendly" 1-micron
> rating. This is just a guess. I would like to see if someone knows
> something about this rating.

> - Is the filter "certified" as having that filtration rating? Or is
> it just something the vendor comes up with?

Ask Grizzly what percentage of 1 micron particles are filtered out and
post their answer. I asked Jet the same question about their "2 micron"
cannister filter and the answer was "it filters down to 2 microns". In
other words if they have real filter specs they aren't saying. Makes
me suspicious. Even 3M disposable furnace filters have more detailed
specs. Another question related to the design of these fiters is
whether the mechanical flexing of the filter pleats needed to remove
accumulated dust cake from the filter to keep its flow decent affects
the filtration specs? Do they change over time?

--
To email me use: sjusenet AT comcast DOT net

> >- Its filter is made from spun bonded polyester instead of paper
> >(JET's is made from paper, right?) According to Bill's Cyclone web
> >site, spun bonded polyester is preferred because it is more durable.
>
> it the situation of these dc's I can see the paper wearing out. any find
> dust and shavings can spin back up into the fitter. that will wear it
> out.

Would you please explain this again. Are you trying to explain why
paper is not as good as spun bonded polyester? If this is so, thanks
for the confirmation.

> >- What's that 1-micron filtration rate really mean anyway? Does this
> >mean it can filter down to 1-micron but only at 75% efficiency? If
> >this is the case, it may be able to filter down to 2-micron at 99%
> >efficiency, and this may mean that it should have been rated as
> >2-micron after all, instead of the "marketing friendly" 1-micron
> >rating. This is just a guess. I would like to see if someone knows
> >something about this rating.
>
> with these filters I doubt we will ever know. my cyclone filters are rated.

You are quite right to point this out. Without certification, who
knows what the real filtration rate is.

Thanks for sharing your thought.

Jay Chan

> Ask Grizzly what percentage of 1 micron particles are filtered out and
> post their answer. I asked Jet the same question about their "2 micron"
> cannister filter and the answer was "it filters down to 2 microns". In
> other words if they have real filter specs they aren't saying. Makes
> me suspicious. Even 3M disposable furnace filters have more detailed
> specs. Another question related to the design of these fiters is
> whether the mechanical flexing of the filter pleats needed to remove
> accumulated dust cake from the filter to keep its flow decent affects
> the filtration specs? Do they change over time?

I took your advice, and emailed Grizzly about the efficiency rating of
the filter in their cannister dust collector. I will post their answer
(if any) when I get something back from them.

I have a feeling that I may get the similar answer as what you got
from JET. I will not be surprised if that filter actually capture much
less than 99% of dusts that are 1-micron small. Oh well...

Jay Chan

> Ask Grizzly what percentage of 1 micron particles are filtered out and
> post their answer.

Their reply is that they don't have it in stock and cannot look at it
to find out the information that I need. Seem like a deadend to me.

Sorry for the discouraging news.

Jay Chan