UNIVERSITY SEES PROOF OF 24% LOWER ANNUAL ENERGY COSTS USING CAMFIL FILTER VS COMPETING FILTER

A FILTER TEST AT THE UNIVERSITY

A Viledon® filter representative approached the university stating they could supply a synthetic media final filter that would last two years and not require a prefilter. A university representative called in Camfil to validate the information and to request a side-by-side test with the proposed product. The Camfil distributor and regional sales manager conducted a lifetime efficiency presentation (fine fibre micro-glass vs. coarse fibre electrostatically charged synthetic media) that compared Camfil’s product to Viledon. Camfil also demo’d its filtration life cycle costing software for energy savings and total cost of ownership considerations. From there, the university asked Camfil to set up an in-situ test.

TEST SPECIFICATIONS

Forty filters from each manufacturer were installed in the east and west air handling units (AHUs) in their business building. Forty 24x24x12" Camfil Durafil® V-bank 65% fine fibre final filters were installed in one AHU. In a second AHU of equal airflow and outside air intake location, 40 Viledon T-60 24x24x26" 8-pocket bag filters were installed. Airflow per AHU was run at 56,000 cfm. While the units normally operate at 40-70% fresh air intake for particle counting stability, the dampers were set to 100% recirculation during the days of efficiency testing.

The test was run for 52 weeks with intermittent data collection and verification. Camfil in-situ test equipment was used, and all tests were observed by the university staff and competitor’s representatives. The tests were conducted in accordance with Eurovent 4/10 1996 (In-Situ Determination of Fractional Efficiency of General Ventilation Filters). The tests were done with no prefilters in place, at the request of Viledon.

After 52 weeks, the Camfil final filter was at 33% efficiency on 0.3 micron particles (delivering almost two and a half times the level of air quality) versus the Viledon efficiency of 15%. The Camfil filters maintained a higher efficiency than Viledon for every particle size range tested. The Camfil filters were operating at less than 1 inch in static pressure drop, and at 40% lower resistance than Viledon, leading to substantial energy savings.

A life cycle costing (LCC) analysis proved that the Camfil Durafil filter operated at a 24% lower energy cost per year than the Viledon T-60. The Camfil product would save the customer $14 per filter per year versus the Viledon alternative.