Here's some data I gathered on an AC Delco panel filter at work today.
I took apart the filter and was able to obtain ten samples (A-J) that were usable. I then ran CFM (Cubic Feet/Minute) tests and averaged a flow of about 65+. Not bad flow for a panel filter, but that is a
Flat sample, it would be folded back up in a pleat, so flow would be slightly reduced.
The Mean Flow Pore (MFP) tests on the samples and concluded that it had about a 31 micron MFP. That is the highest point on the bell curve for the filtration, so thats the average it will filter down to.
The base weight is just the Pounds per Ream (3000ft^2).
I also included a picture of the side of the box for reference, I'm not even sure of the application for this, just know that it's for a car or truck
.
Hope that helps a little, I know how frustrating it can be when a pompous wind-bag gets on a forum and just starts spewing data and not substantiating it
. I am not one of those.
Just so I don't that I don't have this one come back and bite me in the behind, I will not be able to get the exact figures for the K&N filter unless I was to run a flat sheet test for beta ratios. My boss told me today that comparing paper media to oil impregnated cotton is like comparing apples to oranges. The only way to compare the two would be to get betas. I'm not an engineer at this company, just a lowly tech
,so I can't request it myself. I'll ask my boss if it would be worthwhile pursuing a beta test on it for a reference point
.
Also, just a totally different thought on this filtration issue. We haven't discussed Face Velocity. In short, the lower the face velocity, the slower the particles are moving and as such, more particles are captured.
How do you lower the face velocity you ask?
Well the easiest (and only economical choice
) is to get a larger filter. Like a cylindrical or conical filter, over sized for the application.
Again, thanks for the interest in this thread, it's one of my passions.