Any Phoenix area creekers willing help me with an air particulate study

[Don Baer]

Which Phoenix area creekers would be willing to let me come into your shop and measure the level on Indoor Air Quality. I'll provide the instrumentation do the work, all you need to do is provide the shop and the sawdust. I will publish the results on this forum. I would prefer various different type of dust collection so that we can test how effective they are in a real shop environment. I'll be testing for fine dust as well as Total Suspended Particulate. This is your chance to help other creekers breath a little easier. I'll be taking pictures but don't clean up your shops..:D

[Don Baer]

Bumping this for the evening group, due to a lack of response during the day. Picture taking is optional. BTW, I will be sharing the information I gather with Bill Pentz. Measurements taken will not only include particle sizing concentration but will also include air velocity measurements at various points in the DC system, so some might be able to improve the performance of there DC system with the results. It's a free chance to tune up your DC system. :D

[Frank Chaffee]

Don,
While I don’t know what your timeframe is for this research project, and while I am (err, ah, will be within the year), outside the stated confines of your survey (but what the heck, man, is an hour and a half down the backroad compared to crossing PX on the 101 at an inconvenient hour?), I welcome you to visit, contribute to, and document my shop creation.

So far, after countless man-years of research on SMC, my plan is to ensconce a Wood Sucker cyclone and an air compressor in an outdoor concrete block (grouted cores to above grade, and sand filled above), cabinet that will also support one corner of an open-roofed space into which I can wheel machinery during fair weather (which I read on a website is abundant in Arizona), and then use a barn fan, similar to the one tod incorporates to dispel the nasty fine dusts woodworkers release into the atmosphere.

The sound attenuation provided by the block structure will be for the benefit of neighbors, the existence of whom I have not needed to consider for many a year!

I regret, Don, that I could not meet up with you during my recent stay in Arizona, but I remain optimistic that we will connect in the near future.

Regards,
Frank

[Don Baer]

Frank,
I welcome the chance to peruse your shop creation and made measurement, heck I migh just thow a sound level meter into the batch to check the noise level in you shop. Let me know when it will be convient. I realise that your out of state but with your globe trotting nature I figure it won't be that long before your back out in the real sunshine state and away from the froozen tundra..

[Allan Johanson]

Hi Don,

Will you go on a road trip to Vancouver, BC? I know of several shops you can test with a variety of DCs and tools. :D I plan on doing the same thing up here if I can get my hands on the testing gear. I have a lead....

Maybe a couple of pics of what's floating around their shops will get some SMCers to respond to you. These pics were posted on another forum and are of some sawdust that was gathered after a fellow cut up some walnut. The sawdust was stuck between pieces of tape then the samples were scanned on a very expensive digital imaging microscope and some particles were measured and pics taken. Dimensions are in microns.

Cheers,

Allan

[Don Baer]

Allen,
Excellent information. I'll be using a Metone Aeroset 531 analyser and be measure PM 2.5 and below as well as TSP. I intend on doing the OSHA 15 min test as well as a general survey of basic equipt and how effective the DC is working. With the instrument selected I can get real time reading. That is if I can get some more shops to volunteer.

[Steve Clardy]

Load that U-Haul and get a little closer to me Don.:D You can use my shop

[tod evans]

Load that U-Haul and get a little closer to me Don.:D You can use my shop

while you`re in the sticks stop on by here for a laugh or two.....tod

[Mike Spanbauer]

I've offered my shop to Bill also (live about 30 mins away). Would be excellent to have 10-20 shops and the various results in a location on his website to give some idea's. I've 2 collectors that are on both ends of the scale. A Delta 50-850 that I have both 30mic bags and 1 mic felt bags for. And on the other end an Oneida Pro 2000 5hp cyclone.

Hopefully he'll have the bandwidth to manage some results collection in addition to his many activities planned for this new testing.

Mike

[Don Baer]

Mike,
Bill and I have been talking and I have recommended the same instrument to him so that the data we get is consistant. I would love to get a few more Arizona Creekers to step up but so far I anly have a part time Arizona creeker. I'll keep this post on the front page for the weekend then I figure thats the best I'm gonna get. Come on AZ creekers I'll burn the gas to come to your shop, how about letting me help others and perhaps yourself breath a little easier. :( I'll expand the study area to anywhere in AZ.

[Bill Pentz]

Don,

I ordered up my meter, a Met One 531 as you suggested and already have a few who would like to borrow that meter to test shops in their local areas. I sent you an email on some thoughts I had on testing, but welcome your input and the input of anyone else who has thoughts on what they would like to see from this testing.

I am thinking about ensuring the shop sits unused for two days, then test the outdoor air, indoor shop air, and indoor home air if the home is shop attached. Then turn on the existing dust collection without doing any woodworking and do another test plus see if there are problems with the filters passing too much dust. In the tests I paid to have run on my shop, the biggest issue was previously made dust that had built up over time instead of just the dust I was making. Then cut say 50 board feet of 3/4" MDF with the dust collection system running and test again. If time permits do one final test that determines how long it takes until the air, if bad, comes down safe enough to work without wearing a mask.

Thoughts are welcome, plus will be looking for volunteer shops in the Sacramento, California area as well. I also hope to be traveling to the LA Santa Barbara area in a few weeks so could consider testing a few shops there as well.

bill

[Don Baer]

Bill,
I got your E mail and agree that we should come up with some sort of standards for testing so that any data we come up with will be relevant. The 531 is small enough that it can be worn by the person doing the testing and I would suggest that when you measure you do it in the breathing zone, that is around you chest area. I would also think that measuring TSP and PM 2.5 would be the data we are looking for or do you think PM 10 and PM 2.5 would be more relavant to health issues.

[Joe Jensen]

Which Phoenix area creekers would be willing to let me come into your shop and measure the level on Indoor Air Quality. I'll provide the instrumentation do the work, all you need to do is provide the shop and the sawdust. I will publish the results on this forum. I would prefer various different type of dust collection so that we can test how effective they are in a real shop environment. I'll be testing for fine dust as well as Total Suspended Particulate. This is your chance to help other creekers breath a little easier. I'll be taking pictures but don't clean up your shops..:D

I'm in tempe, what is your timeframe? I'm a busy dad in this is my hobby. I do have a recently installed central dust collection system.

[Don Baer]

Joe,
I can do this at your convience, there is no particular time frame as the study is ongoing. Thanks for offering. I'll sen you a PM so we can set something up at your convience.

[Bill Pentz]

Don,

Good points and questions. I know OSHA is most concerned with TSP and that is what almost all the studies and insurance data for woodworkers use. My doctor friend says we really should look at PM 10, PM 5, PM 2.5, and PM 1 counts/levels as well.

For those who don't know the PM designations mean particles of a particular size and smaller. For instance PM 10 would be those particles sized 10-microns and smaller. A 10-micron particle is just smaller than what we can see without magnification. Likewise, these same PM 10 are known as the bad guys because they get by most of our respiratory protections, triggering and inducing allergies, etc. then lodge in our tissues where our bodies have a difficult time getting rid of them. My doc said the PM 5 measurement is also important because these are well studied and the particles that tend to lodge in the nose, sinus and throat tissues. The PM 2.5 are the most heavily studied and lodge in our lung tissue. The PM 1 are small enough to go directly into our blood getting carried all over our bodies. In short he would like to see us measure PM 10, 5, 2.5 and 1 plus the TSP.

bill

[Ron Mexico]

Mr Pentz,

Could you post results of your 'Doc Friends' studies? Maybe you could supply his name so we can read his research on the web, if that would be more convenient.

Thanks,
Ron

[Bill Pentz]

Ron,

My doctor does allergy testing and finds enough home woodworkers and often their family members become sensitized that that is one of the areas he consistently checks with new patients. He is not the one who did the air quality studies I cite. Those are done by the State of California, Cal-OSHA inspection team that does mandatory inspections for OSHA. Unfortunately, thier data does not directly appy to hobbyists, but instead to small to large commercial woodworking facilities. Since small commercial shops use identical tools and dust collection, I suspect there is a very close relationship to our hobbyist shops in all ways except the amounts of woodworking we do.

How much woodworking will vary so widely, I was trying to work with Don and others to try and measure some common baseline data, then do a fairly consistent amount of woodworking and see its effect, plus how long the resulting dust will stay airborne. The Cal-OSHA senior inspector who tested my shop said the smaller the shop, generally the worse the build up of "fugitive dust" and higher the chance of poor air quality. I supsect there will be quite a bit more variation today than in 1999 when my shop was tested.

Still, the whole point of this testing is to try and set some baselines so we can see what is going on in our shops and measure the real dust levels. Once we have those risks the insurance data is available that will match dust levels to numbers who get ill. Typically at OSHA levels all eventually develop some dust related problems with about one in fourteen getting seriously ill. At normal pre OSHA chip collection levels typical of small shops all get ill sooner with about one in eight developing such serious problems they are forced into an early retirement. These high problem rates are why most firms voluntarily step up to ACGIH air quality and why the European community addopted even more strict airborne dust limits. If what my inspector said and the test results from my shop are any indication, most hobbyists have a fairly large problem with invisible residual dust, with our tools spewing dust all over, our dust collection not moving enough air to collect the dust, and filters that often pass the worst dust right through. If you are one of those who like me worked with a lot of the more reactive woods, then that residual dust can be a serious problem. In my case I was careful to wear a good 3M dual cartridge mask when making the fine dust, but did not realize that the same stuff built in my shop and got stirred back airborne to continue to expose me and contaminate my home.

bill

[Jim A. Smith]

I don't see that you have answered Ron's question.
Your doc does allergy testing. Does He have his research on the web for viewing?

[Bill Pentz]

Bill,
I got your E mail and agree that we should come up with some sort of standards for testing so that any data we come up with will be relevant. The 531 is small enough that it can be worn by the person doing the testing and I would suggest that when you measure you do it in the breathing zone, that is around you chest area. I would also think that measuring TSP and PM 2.5 would be the data we are looking for or do you think PM 10 and PM 2.5 would be more relavant to health issues.

I don't see that you have answered Ron's question.
Your doc does allergy testing. Does He have his research on the web for viewing?

Jim,

Sorry, although my doctor does do quite a bit of research and is fairly well published including many thousands of references on the Internet, but he does not have anything published on wood dust sensitivity. Cal-OSHA may have studies published on test results, but I don’t know how those are broken out. I have a call in to them to see what is available, and will share if they come up with anything interesting.

If you are interested in learning more try a Google search on “Wood Dust Sensitivity”. There are about 1.2 million hits.

If you are interested in how many hobbyists are affected, to my knowledge that data has not really been collected anywhere. We do know there are lots of medical and insurance studies that show statistics on health problems based on exposure levels. What we don’t have a good handle on is hobbyist exposure levels. My doctor and Cal-OSHA inspector strongly believe our exposures are far higher than most commercial shops in spite of our doing far less woodworking because unlike most commercial firms we tend to trap the finest dust inside where it builds to fairly unhealthy levels. I know my very clean looking shop with top rated cyclone and filters failed its air quality tests pretty badly. Regardless, this is why Don and the rest of us are looking at doing some measurement.

bill

[Don Baer]

Jim,
To expand on what Bill has already said, there arn't any studies done on the home shops. Several things are known about particulate and bill explained then when he talked about PM 10 etc. ACGIH (American Conference of Government and Industrial Hygienists) have set PEL's (permissable Exposure Limits) standards for fine dust. OSHA and CALOSHA use then reccomendation to set workplace safety standards. We as hobbiest should also try to follow these standards for our own safety and that of our families. We wear hearing protection and safety glasses because we are aware of the hazards involved. Too many folks out there think that the average woodworker cannot generate the fine dust and say that folks like Bill are chasing windmills. What Bill, myself and others is to get good data so that we can prove or disprove that indeed the fine dust is a problem in the home shop.

You all know Bill's background, let me tell you a little about mine. I am the instrumentation product manager for a large (multistate) safety house, my duties included evaluating enviromental instruments, training others on the proper use of these instruments and and insureing that the proper instruments are being used for a given hazard. I work with enviromental engineering firm, first responder and others involved in workers safety. Bill asked me what instrument I would reccomend and thats realy what perked my interest, that and being a wood butcher.

[Jay Albrandt]

Hey Don and Bill,

I have a garage shop with a Pentz design cyclone. My ducting is 6" pvc and all the transitions to my tools are modified according to Bill's web page. The shop is attached to a laundry room which in turn attaches to the house. I also have a hanging air filter if that is of any interest to you.

I live in San Diego and my schedule is very flexible. Bill has always been very helpful to me and I would love to return the favor any way possible.

Let me know if there is anything I can do.

Jay Albrandt

[Bill Pentz]

Jay,

I have family I planned on visiting in the Huntingbeach and San Bernardino areas in a few weeks. I'm alreaday scheduled to drop in on a couple of friends' shops in southern California, so maybe could come check your shop at the same time. Your shop description sounds pretty familiar, in fact near identical to my own. I've got to actually get my hands on the gauges which are due to be delivered in the next few days, then work up a schedule. Drop me an email at bpentz@cnets.net and let's see what we can work out. Thankd for your offer.

bill

[Jan Williamson]

Don and Bill,
You could use my shop, I am in the final stages of installing the Clearvue. I live in Yreka CA. It is about 4 hours north Sac. I am hoping to be done with ducting and wiring in the next few weeks. It would be nice to see how the various DC systems compare.
Thank you for your efforts.
Jan

[Bill Pentz]

Jan,

Drop me an email and we can talk about figuring out a time that will work for both of us.

bill

[Art Mulder]

Which Phoenix area creekers would be willing to let me come into your shop and measure the level on Indoor Air Quality. I'll provide the instrumentation do the work, all you need to do is provide the shop and the sawdust.


Will you go on a road trip to Vancouver, BC? I know of several shops you can test with a variety of DCs and tools. I plan on doing the same thing up here if I can get my hands on the testing gear. I have a lead...


... we should come up with some sort of standards for testing so that any data we come up with will be relevant. The 531 is small enough that it can be worn by the person doing the testing and I would suggest that when you measure you do it in the breathing zone, that is around you chest area.

So, Don, (or anyone else from the history of this thread) has this project made any progress that you can share with us?

In light of the recent kerfuffle about dust collecting, I thought it would be nice if we could get back to doing some actually studying, collecting, and publishing of dust collecting information in home shops.

Real tests. Real results. No BS.

I'd also volunteer my shop (basement, non-cyclone, single-bagger w/1 micron bag, hobbyist) for this. If Allan gets his hands on gear, let me know and I'll pay shipping to get it here and we can maybe coordinate some Canadian shops.

How much does the gear cost? I found the www.metone.com website and found the description of the test box Don mentioned, but they don't list prices. Which is usually an "if you have to ask you can't afford it" situation... :eek:

I wonder... does anyone have some contacts at the larger WW'ing magazines who they could ask to consider sponsoring a study like this?

I know enough about stats to know that I don't know enough about stats to properly design a study like this... :D I do know that with stats you need to have as many shops as possible participating to get believable numbes, and you need tests to be as consistent as possible. But I hope that we could keep it simple - test the air after using a ROS without a vac hookup (just the stock little dust bag). - test the air after using a TS without a DC hookup. Then with a standard single-bagger, and then with a Cyclone.

[tod evans]

i sent don a p/m offering my shop to study....i`m not a hobbiest and my d/c is homemade.....i`d be interested to see how my system compares to those costing much more money if there are similar shops running different set-ups.......tod

[Bill Pentz]

Art,

My gauges arrived Wednesday, and I did my first testing yesterday of a long time friend's shop. He has two big commercial 55 gallon can top type dust collectors placed outside that vent outside connected via a long length of flex hose to his different machines. He has two large squirrel cage blowers each with over 100 square feet of fine filter, plus a large industrial shop vacuum. He works with large front doors open at the front of his shop with a good industrial sized fan that pulls the air through his shop and vents out a back door. His shop tested cleaner inside than the outside air before woodworking, after cutting 54' of 3/4" MDF his tablesaw with overarm blade guard still allowed the dust level to rise from 0.018 mg/m^3 to 0.269 mg/m^3. This worst case is below OSHA 5 mg and ICGIH 1 mg standards but over medical 0.1 mg recommended standards per cubic meter of air. It took about 1 hour to reduce that dust level amply to comply with medical standards where he no longer needed to wear his NIOSH approved respirator mask.

Bill

[Earl Kelly]

Don,

This could prove to be very beneficial to all. I would suggest before testing the workshop, test the outside air and if possible the home interior air. I know the latter might be out of line for some. But this would give you an Accurate baseline, with which to compare the shop air quality with. And post test results, numbers of all, maybe explaining the significance of the data, and allow those that read the test to form their own conclusions.

I think this would give you Real World comparables of areas people use everyday.

[Don Baer]

Earl,
The proceedure for using this type of equiptment would call for getting background readings. Regarding testing, I have two volunteers, one who is a snowbird and isn't in Arizona at present and the other, who I will shortly be contacting to do testing.

[Bill Pentz]

Don,

This could prove to be very beneficial to all. I would suggest before testing the workshop, test the outside air and if possible the home interior air. I know the latter might be out of line for some. But this would give you an Accurate baseline, with which to compare the shop air quality with. And post test results, numbers of all, maybe explaining the significance of the data, and allow those that read the test to form their own conclusions.

I think this would give you Real World comparables of areas people use everyday.

Here are the spreadsheets I setup for my first test. I'm awaiting feedback from Don and anyone else who has constructive recommendations. Most of this testing will be done by others with a background in the sciences and engineering. We are trying to come to an agreement on what information needs to be collected as there is a wide variation in hobbyist shops, equipment, space, and dust collection.

bill



http://BillPentz.com/Woodworking/Cyclone/AirTesting/AbeL01.gif
http://BillPentz.com/Woodworking/Cyclone/AirTesting/AbeL02.gif
http://BillPentz.com/Woodworking/Cyclone/AirTesting/AbeL03.gif

Edit: For those who are thinking their eyes are playing tricks, I am continuing to refine these collection forms so the pictures above will reflect the latest version.

[Earl Kelly]

Bill,

Very good. Can you elaborate on the Particles and the relationship to mg/mg3. Also the descrepancy between Outside air with the Note1 which indicates inside shop air. I'm sure that's just a mixup.

The MDF cutting, I would think, would rate somewhere near the top as for release of dust when sawing. I would think routing or sanding, MDF would be worse.

Again very good test setup and I think with just a little explanation of the relationships, anyone could understand the results. It will be interesting to compare with other shop setups. Might be good to note the estimated hours per week the shop is used or commercial/hobby.

[J. Scott Chambers]

Bill,

Where is the data from the Test Pre-Cut, Note #3 on your friends shop?

[Bill Pentz]

Bill,

Where is the data from the Test Pre-Cut, Note #3 on your friends shop?

That test was not done because it is looking to see if there is a problem with the filters storing and putting back fine dust into the shop air. With his DC system both outside and with no filters, that test was not needed.

bill

[Bill Pentz]

Bill,

Very good. Can you elaborate on the Particles and the relationship to mg/mg3. Also the discrepancy between Outside air with the Note1 which indicates inside shop air. I'm sure that's just a mix up.

The MDF cutting, I would think, would rate somewhere near the top as for release of dust when sawing. I would think routing or sanding, MDF would be worse.

Again very good test setup and I think with just a little explanation of the relationships, anyone could understand the results. It will be interesting to compare with other shop setups. Might be good to note the estimated hours per week the shop is used or commercial/hobby.

Earl,

The issue with note 1 and outside air was a mental lapse on my part. I’ve already fixed the original. Sorry.

The relationship between particle counters and mass readers is not so easy and something you would have to get into the physics of testing to understand better. I really did not want to have to cough up the money for both a mass gauge and a particle counter, so did quite a bit of research.

What I found out is most of today's better particle counters use a laser system to do counting. These counts can be fairly reliably converted via formulas over to a mass reading meaning milligrams per cubic foot or cubic meter. Many testers do not want to use these fairly complex conversion formulas and would much rather directly show their customer a number they can understand with no translation. Those worried about OSHA or ICGIH compliance want to see milligrams per cubic meter (mg/m^3) mass readings, and those interested in medical air quality want both a mass reading and a particle count by particle size range.

The Met One AeroCet that Don Baer recommended and I bought to add more real measurement for hobbyist exposures is unusual and costly. It directly gives both a particle count and a mass reading. Early mass readings were done with weighed filters requiring an extended time frame, typically eight hours to ensure getting ample mass that the available weighing equipment could provide an accurate measure. This gauge does this same testing in two minutes, but that does not comply with the industry standards that require a long term measurement with tracking to ensure no fifteen minute period exceeds permitted maximums. I struggled for quite a while and finally decided that no matter how much I might prefer the longer term testing, my desire to instead set some accurate baselines would be far better served by being able to do lots of testing. In short, I went with the gauge Don recommended, plus bought a separate mass gauge. The latter is proving far less useful and accurate.

bill

[J. Scott Chambers]

That test was not done because it is looking to see if there is a problem with the filters storing and putting back fine dust into the shop air. With his DC system both outside and with no filters, that test was not needed.

bill

I would think that if the ambient air is dirtier than the air in his shop with no woodworking, and you turn on a "large" dust collector that exhausts to the outside, with no filters, that the makeup air is coming from the outside. If that outside air is dirtier than the inside, it would make sense that the dirtier makeup air would contribute to polluting the inside air, raising it's particle count?

Unless he has a well filtered make-up system. Perhaps I'm not understanding what you were trying to prove. I am curious how much the particle count would have been raised by just running the DC, and bringing in that makeup air.

[Bill Pentz]

J. Scott,

Since that test was to see if he had a problem with his filter bags passing the fine dust right through and he had no filters, it was not run. The last test did show that by replacing the air inside his shop that was contaminated with wood dust with outside air that we got levels that moved toward what we got when testing the outside air.

bill

[Art Mann]

I would like to Applaud Bill Pentz and Don Baer for your efforts. Such surveys will provide much interesting and useful information. I do think it is important, though, to point out what such an effort will and will not accomplish. What you are doing is not a scientific experiment but rather an uncontrolled survey. By surveying enough hobby shops, I think it will be possible to get a kind of ballpark figure for wood dust particle counts in shops with "good" and "bad" collection systems. I put those terms in quotes because they are not well defined. Even so, that will be very informative and useful information. This information will not allow you to predict the performance in a particular shop of a particular dust collection system with any level of accuracy because there are far too many uncontrolled variables. About the most you can hope for would be the development a set of "rule of thumb" type guidelines. Again, this information would be quite valuable. You will not be able to establish the effectiveness of one type or brand of dust collection system as compared to another because, once again, there are far too many uncontrolled variables from one installation to another.

If you really want to do a quantitative analysis or compare equipment types and brands in a "real world environment" as you call it, you are going to have to assemble a test shop with a given woodworking equipment set, a tightly controlled environmet, standard materials, and a highly repeatable test procedure. (Incidentally, I don't think MDF is a very typical or appropriate test material.) This may be more than you bargained for, but nothing less will yield any real quantitative results.

As valuable as your work is, it does not address the bigger question of what exposure level of what type of dust in what concentration is likely to produce health problems. Unfortunately, the answer to that question defines the relevance of your measurements. Let's take cigarette smoking as an analogy. Hardly anyone will deny that cigarette smoking causes lung cancer. Nobody in their right mind will assert that smoking one cigarette will cause lung cancer. Enough research has been done on cigarette smoking to actually predict the percentage of deaths due to a given level of consumption. I know of no such research that has been done in hobby workshops. The surveys of workers in wood product industries I have seen have been contradictory and inconclusive and are not really relevant to the hobbiest woodworker anyway. I suppose you could say it would be better to be safe than sorry -- but that would mean we would all have to stop woodworking.:confused:

[Bill Pentz]

I would like to Applaud Bill Pentz and Don Baer for your efforts. Such surveys will provide much interesting and useful information. I do think it is important, though, to point out what such an effort will and will not accomplish. What you are doing is not a scientific experiment but rather an uncontrolled survey. By surveying enough hobby shops, I think it will be possible to get a kind of ballpark figure for wood dust particle counts in shops with "good" and "bad" collection systems. I put those terms in quotes because they are not well defined. Even so, that will be very informative and useful information. This information will not allow you to predict the performance in a particular shop of a particular dust collection system with any level of accuracy because there are far too many uncontrolled variables. About the most you can hope for would be the development a set of "rule of thumb" type guidelines. Again, this information would be quite valuable. You will not be able to establish the effectiveness of one type or brand of dust collection system as compared to another because, once again, there are far too many uncontrolled variables from one installation to another.

If you really want to do a quantitative analysis or compare equipment types and brands in a "real world environment" as you call it, you are going to have to assemble a test shop with a given woodworking equipment set, a tightly controlled environmet, standard materials, and a highly repeatable test procedure. (Incidentally, I don't think MDF is a very typical or appropriate test material.) This may be more than you bargained for, but nothing less will yield any real quantitative results.

As valuable as your work is, it does not address the bigger question of what exposure level of what type of dust in what concentration is likely to produce health problems. Unfortunately, the answer to that question defines the relevance of your measurements. Let's take cigarette smoking as an analogy. Hardly anyone will deny that cigarette smoking causes lung cancer. Nobody in their right mind will assert that smoking one cigarette will cause lung cancer. Enough research has been done on cigarette smoking to actually predict the percentage of deaths due to a given level of consumption. I know of no such research that has been done in hobby workshops. The surveys of workers in wood product industries I have seen have been contradictory and inconclusive and are not really relevant to the hobbiest woodworker anyway. I suppose you could say it would be better to be safe than sorry -- but that would mean we would all have to stop woodworking.:confused:

Art,

I fully agree with you with respect to equipment testing, but the goal here is to determine if hobbyist shops have a serious problem with a build up of fugitive dust. By problem dust I mean particles smaller than about 10-microns. By fugitive dust I mean dust that either is missed during collection or that passes right through our filters. In 1999 when I started my dust collection research OSHA testing of small shops that apply for commercial license and get government air quality testing almost all fail the airborne particle tests if they exhaust their cyclones or dust collectors inside into bag filters. Because fine dust takes six months or more to dissipate, the certified inspector who tested my very clean looking shop said hobbyist shops will have a similar problem. It was his contention that it is not so much how much woodworking we do, but instead the build up of this residual dust that poses the most short and long term threat to our health. The purpose of the testing that Don and I are trying to organize is to assess if there is a real problem with this accumulation of fine dust in our shops.

I agree with you in terms of what it takes to evaluate the various small shop dust collection equipment options. Back in 2000 through 2002 I did exactly as you suggested and setup a lab at the university to do airflow and filter testing. I did this testing as a private individual who was very upset because the system I trusted to protect my health pushed the particle counts in my shop to dangerously unhealthy landing me in the hospital.


For the dust collectors I tested every major brand of dust collector sized 1.5 to 2 hp and did that testing using standard Dwyer and ACME testing protocols without filters and a simple test pipe. I posted on my web pages just like the various magazine tests the actual fan curves. I did that testing because I found some pretty ugly funny business with the vendor ads and some of the magazine tests. My testing showed Jet, Delta, Shop Smith and Felder advertised maximum airflows that could be duplicated in the testing, but all others exaggerated their airflows in some cases by well over 100%. Worse, other than these same brands, all of the maximum airflows resulted in the motors pulling far more than their rated amperage. In fact, both of the major magazine tests at that time burned up motors on test units.
For the cyclones only Delta and Powermatic provided the airflow they advertised. All other airflows were badly exaggerated and also resulted in the motors working at far over rated amperage at maximum airflow conditions.
The filter situation was dismal. I used certified test dust weighing new filters and collection bags before and after running that dust through. I tested new filter bags following the ASHRAE testing procedures for testing filters for indoor use. I posted those test results as well and they were pretty ugly as the typical filter passed 20 to 30 times larger dust particles than advertised. The vendor community complained loudly saying that dust collection has always tested with what are known as fully seasoned bags, meaning the bags have built up a thick internal cake of fine dust in the filter strands that does not come out with normal cleaning. I retested running the test dust through over and over until achieving the level of filtering claimed by each vendor. At that level of dust caking, most barely passed any air and all but killed the airflow needed for minimal dust collection.


What most upset me from my own testing is it was painfully obvious that the magazine testers were either gravely incompetent, or were not testing the same machines as I tested. Not thinking anyone was incompetent I contacted two of the magazine testing crews and started comparing notes. What we discovered is some of the vendors had slipped in ringers for the magazine tests using bigger motors, impellers, and blower housings than what they actually sell as these same models. After I published my test results, one vendor was so upset they immediately threatened to sue me. After talking with my attorney and seeing hobbyists all over the country duplicate my airflow testing, they instead decided to say it was all an oversight and they came out with a new model after the test that used the bigger blower motor, impeller, and blower housing actually run through the magazine testing.

Unfortunately, in early 2003 another round of respiratory problems put me into congestive heart failure and pulled the plug on my continued testing. I left my test results and fan curves posted with the detailed test data on my web pages. Meanwhile, based on my testing the dust collection and cyclone vendors began rapidly improving their equipment and started advertising real airflow numbers simply because so many hobbyists were following my lead and buying a set of test gauges to verify how well their equipment actually worked. By late 2004 a few of the vendors and my advisors who looked over my web pages for accuracy, convinced me that my test data was getting dated and I needed to either update or pull down those prior test results because they were just no longer applicable. My attorney who sadly was kept far too busy by helping me avoid the numerous threatened lawsuits agreed and I pulled down my test data.

Although my health is better and I am doing some testing again, I am still on pretty limited duty and frankly have zero interest in warring with the vendors that continue to push and take every advantage. Lacking the time, energy or resources to resume a full scale lab testing program, I have tried hard to share with the various magazine test groups to improve the quality of their testing. This interaction has helped some, but still needs some work. I really want the magazines to use a high quality digital amp meter and cut off any fan curve as soon as the motor’s rated amperage is exceeded. Likewise, I would like someone to cover the costs to run the hobbyist bag and cartridge filters through a filter testing lab and label each with an ASHRAE certification that says what sized particles 99.9% of the time will be filtered by each unit. Based on my prior testing most are going to get a certification of 5 to 10 times worse than claimed in the ads.

This is important to me because most claim 1 to 2-micron filtering and we know that it is the under 10-micron material we know is most unhealthy. The under 5-micron stuff tends to lodge in our airways and the under 2.5-micron stuff lodges deep in our lungs. The 1-micron and smaller can actually pass directly from our lungs into our blood stream.

Anyhow, thank you for your thoughts and pointing out these concerns. I agree that these tests are not going to tell us more than what situations tend to build up high airborne dust levels, but that is what we want to know, how big the risks are for hobbyists.

bill

[Alan Simpson]

Bill, I would love to see the full results of your test that you referenced. Quite frankly, I'm surprised not to see them on your site.

[Scott Hochuli]

Don,
If you're still looking for Phoenicians to participate in the air particulate study, you are more than welcome to come by my place. It could also turn out to be a nice before and after study, as I am currently running a delta 50-850 dust collector, and am hoping to have a cyclone on order by the end of the week.

[Doug Arndt]

Bumping an Oct 2006 thread .... I was wondering if any results are available ?

[Ken Fitzgerald]

Doug.....I don't know the particulars but Don is no longer a member here. I don't expect him to update this thread.