LumberJocks

Cyclone filters confusion

  • Advertise with us

« back to Power Tools, Hardware and Accessories forum

Forum topic by Matt Michaud posted 679 days ago 718 views 0 times favorited 8 replies Add to Favorites Watch
View Matt Michaud's profile

Matt Michaud

28 posts in 1669 days


679 days ago

So I am considering replacing the stock grizzly filter with a new PSI nano filter. The grizzly filter is 15.75” by 46.75” and the PSI filter is 14” by 36”....HOWEVER, the grizzly claims 96 sq.ft. and PSI claims 350 sq.ft. ? Is there really THAT much difference in the number of pleats? Or is there another detail I am missing? Or is PSI full of it?

-- "Strength in Composites" http://sandwichtechskis.com/ski-builders-shop.htm


8 replies so far

View Fred Hargis's profile

Fred Hargis

1655 posts in 1097 days


#1 posted 679 days ago

The pleats may be deeper on the PSI. I’m replacing my Oneida filter with a pair from Wynn, I’ll stack the 2 together to get the same height, but a huge increase in diameter and square footage of media. For less money as well.

-- I long for the days when Coke was a cola, and a joint was a bad place to be (Merle Haggard)

View jmos's profile

jmos

681 posts in 974 days


#2 posted 679 days ago

There certainly can be that much difference; factor in an increased number of pleats and deeper pleats and the available surface area can increase significantly. Hard to compare without seeing them side by side; easier still to see if you can cut both of them apart, but that’s not likely to happen.

What’s the price difference between them? I’d expect the PSI to be more expensive if it has that much additional area.

I agree with Fred, Wynn is another really good option. Great company to deal with.

-- John

View Matt Michaud's profile

Matt Michaud

28 posts in 1669 days


#3 posted 678 days ago

The pricing is the surprising part. Grizzly wants $225 for a 96sq.ft. replacement. Clearvue wants $150 for a 300sq.ft. MERV10 Wynn filter. Finally PSI wants $160 for a 350sq.ft. MERV15 filter. I am thinking of doing one of these (2 seems overkill) for a G0440 cyclone with 6” ducting…it seems like a steal. Both make Grizzly’s price look absurd (which seems strange).

-- "Strength in Composites" http://sandwichtechskis.com/ski-builders-shop.htm

View jmos's profile

jmos

681 posts in 974 days


#4 posted 678 days ago

ClearVue is reselling the Wynn filters. I just installed a ClearVue cyclone and the filters shipped directly from Wynn (I went with the NANO filters). Check them out directly http://www.wynnenv.com/cartridge_filters.htm I think you can get a MERV 15 filter directly from Wynn for around $150 plus shipping.

Don’t hesitate to call them directly, they are really easy to work with.

-- John

View crank49's profile

crank49

3343 posts in 1575 days


#5 posted 678 days ago

Be careful about getting excited over additional surface area created by more pleats.
More pleats and deeper pleats mean less space between pleats for air flow. And also more likely to clog up quickly. There comes a point of diminishing returns with denser pleatage.

A good cloth bag, one with 1 micron or less openings between fibers, can handle a 10:1 air to cloth ratio when dealing with wood dust. So a 80 sq. ft. bag should be adequate for an 800 CFM actual flow.

A pleated paper filter, although it can have much more “claimed” surface area, say 300 sq.ft., typicaly will handle 2 1/2:1 air to surface ratio. So that’s good for 750 CFM. The big difference is it will handle 5:1 for a while, which is 1500 CFM, but that will impinge fine particles deep in the pores of the filter and cause it to plug up. This is called blinding the filter.

So, in the real world, pleated fillters can be a little better for air flow and if not pushed to their limits will offer much less resistance and do a better job of filtering air, but don’t push your luck. Onc the filter is blinded it is garbage.

-- Michael :-{| “If you tell a big enough lie and tell it frequently enough, it will be believed.” ― A H

View Matt Michaud's profile

Matt Michaud

28 posts in 1669 days


#6 posted 678 days ago

So on pleated filters like we are discussing, what ratio should you stay below to prevent blinding?

-- "Strength in Composites" http://sandwichtechskis.com/ski-builders-shop.htm

View crank49's profile

crank49

3343 posts in 1575 days


#7 posted 678 days ago

2 1/2:1 or maybe up to 3:1.

But be aware I’m talking actual measured CFM at conditions.

Not the fairy dust imaginary numbers the collector manufacturers publish.

Like the 2 hp 1400 CFM collector that HF and half a dozen other folks sell really generates about 500 to 600 CFM real world when a normal duct system and machines are connected to it.

-- Michael :-{| “If you tell a big enough lie and tell it frequently enough, it will be believed.” ― A H

View jmos's profile

jmos

681 posts in 974 days


#8 posted 678 days ago

Since this is sitting after a cyclone, I have to humbly disagree with Crank. The cyclone should knock out most of the larger particles, leaving the fine particles to be stopped by the filter. The ratio of the particle size to the pleat spacing would be huge (or tiny depending on how you write it). Large chips, like planer shaving, could clog up a good size chunk of the filter getting jammed in a pleat, as Crank discusses, but the small stuff won’t.

With fine dust lower surface area will plug faster. The good news is that the filter cake will actually improve filtration, but at the expense of air flow. I would prefer a larger area pleated filter to a bag filter any day in this application.

-- John

Have your say...

You must be signed in to reply.

DISCLAIMER: Any posts on LJ are posted by individuals acting in their own right and do not necessarily reflect the views of LJ. LJ will not be held liable for the actions of any user.

Latest Projects | Latest Blog Entries | Latest Forum Topics

HomeRefurbers.com

Latest Projects | Latest Blog Entries | Latest Forum Topics

GardenTenders.com :: gardening showcase