ASHRAE Journal - April 2024 - 23

GUEST COLUMN
that the current ASHRAE Standard
52-76 (1976) was part of the problem
because the " test dust " (ambient
air) varied day to day and season
to season. American National
Standards Institute, ANSI, did not
require the average of several tests
to be reported.
Occasionally, a test reported
abnormally high effi ciencies. One
manufacturer took advantage of
outlier test effi ciency numbers to
compete unfairly by requiring that
reports' extremely high effi ciency
numbers be equaled as part of bid
documents. Distributors were angry
and losing business. We needed a
way to infl uence changes. In 1980,
I joined with 47 other air fi lter
distributors to incorporate National
Air Filter Association. NAFA asked me to lobby for them
at ASHRAE meetings. I held that position for 19 years. (I
was president of NAFA in 1996 - 1997.)
I joined ASHRAE in 1963 when I entered the air
FIGURE 1 I created this graphic in June 1992. It reflects terminology in use at that time.
fi ltration market as a manufacturers' representative
for HVAC products. I became a member of ASHRAE
Technical Committee TC 2.4, Particulate Air
Contaminant and Particulate Contaminant Removal
Equipment in 1983 and became chairman in 1986. In
2000, I resigned after asking Barney Burroughs to take
over my term-limited chairmanship. Then I retired
and started a 23-year period of inactivity with NAFA
and ASHRAE.
I am breaking that spell today by writing this case
study. Several current ASHRAE and NAFA members
were not yet born when my 1992-1993 articles were
published, A belated hello to all-glad you joined this
critical industry. This is what happened between 1983
and 2000.
In 1983, I learned ASHRAE had become aware of
shortcomings to Standard 52-76 back while Brian
Krafthefer was TC 2.4 Chairman. He formed Standards
Project Committee, SPC 52-76 R (to revise Standard
52-76). That revision took 16 years to complete. The
committee met in person only two times a year, for
only three hours. At that pace, prior to fax and email,
fast-tracking was impossible. That committee fi nally
wrote ASHRAE Standard 52.1-1992 to replace 52-76. The
committee altered the test dust loading method to make
test results more consistent to satisfy the NAFA extreme
bid effi ciency complaint.
Spurious air fi lter performance claims were widely
advertised around 1990. That embarrassed me. I did
not want to be in an industry that tolerated advertising
claims not supported by certifi ed testing. The industry
needed a certifi ed test method to restore respectability
to the industry.
TC 2.4 formed in 1993 a special project committee to
begin writing Standard 52.2 to replace 52.1. Our plan
was to interview research and development fi rms to
invent artifi cial, discrete sizes of particulate matter
needed for use as " test dust " for the proposed NAFA
Class rating system. Because I did not have a formal
technical education, I did not take part in discussions
for this issue. It involved chemistry and science. My role
as chairman was to establish agenda items and lead the
committee in an orderly fashion.
Research Triangle Institute (RTI) of North Carolina
was awarded the project. It was funded in 1981 by
ASHRAE grants of $125,128 (about $200,000 in today's
dollars). The fi nal RTI procedure to produce synthetic
dust revealed how their invention works. Laboratorygenerated
potassium chloride put particles dispersed
into the airstream in 12 size ranges as test aerosols for
A P R I L 2 0 2 4 ashrae.org ASHRAE JOURNAL
23

http://www.ashrae.org

ASHRAE Journal - April 2024

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of ASHRAE Journal - April 2024