Aerosol Science and Technology

ISSN: 0278-6826 (Print) 1521-7388 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/uast20

Methodology to Perform Clean Air Delivery Rate

Type Determinations with Microbiological Aerosols
Karin K. Foarde
To cite this article: Karin K. Foarde (1999) Methodology to Perform Clean Air Delivery Rate
Type Determinations with Microbiological Aerosols, Aerosol Science and Technology, 30:2,
235-245
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/713834074

Published online: 30 Nov 2010.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 372

View related articles

Citing articles: 5 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=uast20
Download by: [173.32.254.224]

Date: 14 December 2015, At: 07:48

Aerosol Science and Technology 30:235245 (1999)

c 1999 American Association for Aerosol Research
s
Published by Taylor and Francis
0278-6826/99 $12.00 + .00

Methodology to Perform Clean Air Delivery

Rate Type Determinations
with Microbiological Aerosols
Karin K. Foarde* , Eric A. Myers, James T. Hanley, David S. Ensor,
and Peter F. Roessler
Downloaded by [173.32.254.224] at 07:48 14 December 2015

CENTER FOR ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGY, RESEARCH

TRIANGLE INSTITUTE, P.O. BOX 12194, RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK, NC 27709,
USA (K.K.F., E.A.M., J.T.H., AND D.S.E.), AMWAY CORPORATION,
7575 FULTON ST. EAST, ADA, MI 49355, USA (P.F.R.)

ABSTRACT. The objective of this paper is to describe a test method to determine

a Clean Air Delivery Rate-(CADR) type measurement for an air cleaner when challenged with microbiological aerosols. The method is a modication of the Association
of Home Appliance Manufacturers (AHAM) Standard AC-1, Standard Method for
Measuring Performance of Portable Household Electric Cord-Connected Room Air
Cleaner, which determines the CADR for three different particulate matter challenges (smoke, dust, and pollen). The ability to extend the AHAM method to microbial
aerosols follows the tradition of the AHAM test of using realistic particle challenges
and allows a means to compare and evaluate different brands of room air cleaners
regarding characteristics signicant to product use. This is a useful approach for
evaluating a wide range of air cleaning devices.
The test procedure requires both a natural decay measurement and a particulate
decay measurement. The particulate decay measurement is dened as the decay while
the air cleaner is operating. The aerosol generation and collection optimized the
ability of three very different organisms to survive and remain culturable. The results
showed that the AHAM test method was successfully adapted to allow testing with
actual organisms.

INTRODUCTION
An increasing awareness in the public sector involving air quality concerns and health related
issues has resulted in the growth of the residential and commercial air treatment products
industries. A number of eld and chamber studies have been performed evaluating the removal
efciency of portable air cleaners for a variety
of contaminants (Foarde et al. 1999; Shaugnessy
*

Corresponding author.

et al. 1993; Li and Hopke 1991; van der Heide

et al. 1997; Rutala et al. 1995). With consumers
being offered new types of air treatment products that may have varied biological and nonbiological ltration performance, there exists a
need to develop methods to document that performance.
Many factors affect the ability of an air cleaner
to remove particles from the air. The size of a
particle, or in this case microorganism, is an extremely important factor, but not the only one

Downloaded by [173.32.254.224] at 07:48 14 December 2015

236

K. K. Foarde et al.

that needs to be considered. Additionally, the

shape and surface characteristics (roughness,
stickiness, wetness or dryness, and hygroscopicity) of an organism are especially important
because they impact the inertial collection and
retention efciency aspects of the lterparticle
interaction (Hanley et al. 1994).
The objective of this paper is to describe a test
method to determine a Clean Air Delivery Rate(CADR) type measurement for an air cleaner
when challenged with microbiological aerosols.
The method is a modication of the AHAM (Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers)
Standard AC-1, Standard Method for Measuring Performance of Portable Household Electric
Cord-Connected Room Air Cleaner (AHAM
1987). In the ideal case where the air cleaner
provides a well-mixed chamber, the CADR is
equivalent to the product of the air cleaners
ow rate and its ltration efciency for the challenge aerosol. In the AHAM test, however, the
test chamber is only well mixed to the extent
that the air cleaner itself provides this mixing
by the air motions generated by its fan. Thus,
the CADR combines the effects of ltration efciency and the effectiveness of the air cleaner
to draw the test chambers air through it. The
CADR is computed based on a comparison of
the decay rate of the aerosol challenge in the
test chamber when the air cleaner is operating to
when it is not operating. The AHAM method determines the CADR for three different particulate matter challenges (smoke, dust, and pollen).
For control of airborne allergens, bacteria,
viruses, mold spores, etc. (i.e., bioaerosols), it
is desirable to challenge the air cleaner directly
with actual microorganisms. By using actual
microorganisms, a direct measurement of the
air cleaners ability to remove organisms is obtained. Just as the standard AHAM test yields
different CADRs for the three particulate challenges tested due to their differing particle size
distributions and aerodynamic properties, microbiological aerosols, too, can differ in their
removal rate compared to each other as well as
to other particle challenges. The ability to ex-

Aerosol Science and Technology

30:2 February 1999

tend the AHAM method to microbial aerosols

follows the tradition of the AHAM test of using
realistic particle challenges and, as the current
AHAM test does for dust, smoke, and pollen, allows a means to compare and evaluate different
brands of room air cleaners regarding characteristics signicant to product use. This is a useful approach for evaluating a wide range of air
cleaning devices. The November 1987 version
of the AHAM test method was used as a starting point, although a newer version was under
revision within AHAM at the time of the testing.
The use of microorganisms as the challenge
aerosol required that a number of technical issues be addressed. These included the following:
1. maintaining the survivability of the organisms through the aerosol generation and collection process,
2. evaluating the culturablity of the organisms
through the aerosol generation and collection
process,
3. generating the bioaerosol challenge in sufcient concentration to maintain the sampling time within the sample limits of the
bioaerosol sampler,
4. selecting the appropriate test organisms for
the application, and
5. designing and constructing the bioaerosol
sampling system.
REVIEW OF EXISTING AHAM
STANDARD METHOD
The stated purpose of the AHAM standard is
to provide a means to compare and evaluate different brands of portable household electric cord-connected room air cleaners regarding characteristics signicant to product use. A
standard chamber is specied with dimensions
of 3.2 3.7 2.4 m (28.4 m 3 or 1008 ft3 ). The
method describes tests with three types of particulate matter: cigarette smoke, Arizona road
dust, and pollen. The cigarette smoke is produced by burning test cigarettes. The resultant
concentration of particles in the size range of

Downloaded by [173.32.254.224] at 07:48 14 December 2015

Aerosol Science and Technology

30:2 February 1999

0.091.0 m m diameter is measured. Arizona

road dust is commercially available and the particle sizes ranging from 0.5 m m to 3.0 m m are
monitored throughout the test. Paper Mulberry
pollen is used for the pollen tests with particle
sizes ranging from 0.5 m m to 11 m m.
The test procedure requires a natural decay measurement and a particulate matter removal measurement. Both measurements are
performed after lling the chamber with test
aerosol. The natural decay is dened as the decay of the test aerosols in the chamber with the
air cleaner off. The particulate matter removal
measurement is dened as the decay while the
air cleaner is running.
The difference between the procedure for the
natural decay measurement and the particulate
matter removal measurement is that after the fan
stops in step 4, the air cleaner is started. For each
of the three particles (smoke, dust, and pollen),
certain particle concentration monitoring instrumentation is specied.
The decay constants for the test particle with
and without the air cleaner operating are calculated. A comparison of the two decay rates
as a function of the volume of the test chamber
yields the CADR. Our goal was to generate data
to permit the calculation of a similar value for
room air cleaners using a variety of microorganisms as the test aerosols. This number will be
referred to in this paper as the CAR(Microbial)
or CARm.

CADR with Microbiological Aerosols

237

ing are 10-cm thick prefabricated panels with a

stainless steel interior layer. The oor of the
chamber was custom constructed of 12-gauge
stainless steel with welded seams and insulation underneath between the support members.
Floor seams were polished and the coved corners
were sealed. The double ceiling design satises the dual-design requirements of room-like
construction while maintaining microbiological
containment. The ceiling-mounted mixing fan
consists of a two-blade aluminum casting 61 cm
in diameter attached to a shaft extending from
above the containment ceiling through a sealed
bearing and through the drop ceiling. To reduce
the number of difcult-to-decontaminate interior features, no electrical outlets were installed
inside the chamber. A 5 cm penetration was cut
in one wall and nished to allow extension cord
access through rubber stoppers.
Temperature and humidity control are provided by a separate, external air handler, conventional ductwork, ceiling diffusers, and a steam
humidier. The humidier adds water to the
chamber air while the HVAC system removes
some water and controls the air temperature. Air
ow through the system is monitored by an air
ow station and controlled by a blower speed
controller. Air cleaning of the chamber is attained through the use of a HEPA (high Efciency Particulate Air) lter installed on the discharge side of the air handler. It contains both
an ASHRAE 30% prelter and a HEPA lter.
Description of Air Cleaner

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Test Chamber
The Dynamic Microbiological Test Chamber
(DMTC) was used for all decay measurements
(VanOsdell et al. 1996). Figure 1 shows an
artists rendition of the DMTC. The air cleaner
was positioned in the center of the chamber. The
DMTC is a room-sized environmental chamber
contained within a cleanroom (nominally Class
1,000). The chamber is a 2.44 2.44 2.44 m
(13.8 m3 ) cube. The walls and containment ceil-

The unit (Amway Air Treatment E2526J) was a

self-contained room air cleaner designed to reduce the levels of both airborne particulate matter and odors in a single room up to 32.5 m2
(350 ft2 ) in oor area. It is described in detail in
Foarde et al. 1999.
Selection of Test Organisms
The bioaerosol challenge consisted of three different microorganisms: the gram-positive bacterium, Bacillus subtilis (B. subtilis); the mold,

K. K. Foarde et al.

Aerosol Science and Technology

30:2 February 1999

Downloaded by [173.32.254.224] at 07:48 14 December 2015

238

FIGURE 1. Artists drawing of the Dynamic Microbial Test Chamber (DMTC) containing the test air cleaner. The
sampling ports are marked A, B, and C.

Penicillium chrysogenum (P. chrysogenum); and

the bacterial virus (bacteriophage), MS2. The
bacterium and the bacteriophage were purchased from the American Type Culture Collection (ATCC, Rockville, MD). B. subtilis (ATCC
6633) was selected as a representative sporeforming bacteria that is ubiquitous in nature,
found at very high levels in soil, and frequently
isolated from indoor dust samples. P. chrysogenum was selected because it has been reported
as one of the most frequently isolated molds

from the air, dusts, and other surfaces of indoor

environments. It has been proposed as a causative agent of hypersensitivity pneumonitis
and has been isolated from a number of airconditioning systems where patients were suffering from allergic disease. Of the many different kinds of microorganisms, the fungi/mold are
those most frequently associated with allergic
disease. The particular P. chrysogenum strain
selected for these studies was isolated from a
contaminated building material by RTI and cul-

Downloaded by [173.32.254.224] at 07:48 14 December 2015

Aerosol Science and Technology

30:2 February 1999

tivated for use in the laboratory. The culture

is being maintained in the University of Texas
Medical Branch Fungus Culture Collection as
UTMB3491.
The bacterial phage MS2 (ATCC 15597B-1)
was selected to serve as a surrogate for the human viruses of similar and larger size and shape
that are the causative agents of many of the diseases thought to be spread by airborne transmission. These include respiratory infections,
chicken pox, rubella, inuenza, measles, and
mumps.
The sizes and shapes of the test organisms
were as follows:
B. subtilis: 0.70.8 23 m m rods, ellipsoidal spore ~ 0.70.8 11.5 m m;
P. chrysogenum spores: 34 m m 2.83.8
m m spheres;
Bacteriophage (virus) MS2: 0.020.03 m m.
It is important to note that the particle size
generation planned for the virus experiments
was 2 m m mean diameter. The size of the bacterial virus is 0.020.03 m m, which is considerably smaller than the other two test organisms.
However, this test was not designed to study the
room reduction rate for single individual virus
particles; rather, it was designed to determine
the CARm for virus particles as they are commonly found indoors. It was decided that the
most meaningful challenge would be generating 2 m m mean diameter particles containing
the virus because
1. the aerosols created from sneezing and
coughing vary in size from < 1 to 20 m m
(Knight 1973),
2. for some viruses (i.e., Coxsackie virus), little virus has been found associated with
the smallest particles (Buckland and Tyrell
1962), and
3. nearly all 2 m m particles are deposited in the
respiratory tract.
Bioaerosol Preparation and Generation
Preparation of the challenge suspensions was
similar for the B. subtilis, P. chrysogenum, and

CADR with Microbiological Aerosols

239

MS2 phage and was as described in Foarde et

al. 1999.
The challenge organism suspensions were
aerosolized using a Collison modied MREtype six-jet nebulizer (BGI, Waltham, MA) at 15
psi. The Collison generates particles or droplets
with an approximate mean diameter of 2 m m.
The particle diameter after the water evaporates
is determined by the solids content of the solution. An Erlenmeyer ask, placed in line between the Collison nebulizer and the chamber,
was used as a mixing and drying chamber for the
test aerosol. The nozzle was positioned at the
upper left-hand corner of the dynamic chamber
sampling wall.
Bioaerosol Sampling System
Extractive sampling of aerosols was accomplished using ports placed in sampling panels
located in one wall of the chamber (see Figure
1). Each panel is 18 cm wide, 61 cm high, and
0.64 cm thick. Three sampling ports were used
to collect triplicate simultaneous samples. Port
A was positioned near the center of the chamber
wall, 1.52 m above the oor of the chamber and
0.9 m from the front wall. Port B was also 1.52 m
above the oor, but was 0.3 m from the front wall
of the chamber. The third port, C, was directly
below Port A, but was 0.45 m above the oor
of the chamber. The location of the ports was
selected based on the breathing zones of adults
and children. Ports A and B at 1.5 m are between
the breathing zone of the average standing adult
and the breathing zone of that same adult sitting in a room. The 0.45 m breathing zone is
approximately the height of a toddler sitting on
the oor. Simultaneous sampling from all three
ports was considered essential to generate the
necessary number of data points because of the
short time required for the air cleaner to clean
the air in the room below detectable levels.
Stainless steel 1.27 cm diameter piping extending 1.2 m into the middle of the chamber
was used for sample lines. The dimensions of
the sample lines were chosen to minimize par-

240

K. K. Foarde et al.

ticle losses during sampling. Full ow quick

connects were used to connect the bioaerosol
samplers to the sample lines.

Downloaded by [173.32.254.224] at 07:48 14 December 2015

Bioaerosol/Particle Sampling
Two different bioaerosol samplers were used.
The one-stage Andersen (Graseby Andersen,
Smyrna, GA) was used to collect the bacteria
and the mold samples. The AGI-30 (Ace Glass
Inc., Vineland, NJ), containing 40 ml collection
uid, was used for the phage sampling. The experimental conditions and sampling times were
adjusted so that these samplers were used within
upper and lower sampling limits.
The one-stage Andersen sampler is a 400
hole multiple-jet impactor operating at 28 l/min.
The Andersen one-stage is the sixth stage of
an Andersen six-stage. The d50 (cutoff diameter) is 0.65 m m. Originally, the one-stage Andersen was recommended as the sampler of
choice by the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists Committee on
Bioaerosols (1989); however, they no longer
specify any one particular sampler. During sampling, air is impinged on an agar-containing
petri dish. Only culturable, viable microorganisms are measured. CFUs are enumerated. A
positive-hole correction is applied to adjust
for the probability that more than one viable microorganism may be collected through a sampling hole and combined with other microorganisms to produce a single CFU (Macher 1989).
The AGI-30 is a high velocity liquid impinger
operating at a ow rate of 12.312.6 l/min. The
d50 is approximately 0.3 m m (Jensen et al. 1992).
The collection uid was nutrient broth with
0.5% NaCl and 0.5% antifoam A (Sigma, St.
Louis, MO). The AGI-30 is the sampler against
which the other commonly used bioaerosol samplers are compared.
A Climet CI-7300 (Redlands, CA) optical
particle counter (OPC) was used to monitor particle levels in real time to allow control of the
experiment within the chamber. The Climet is a
microprocessor based, 6-channel, airborne par-

Aerosol Science and Technology

30:2 February 1999

ticle counter OPC. The OPC uses a white light

illumination source and has a wide collection angle for the scattered light. The OPCs sampling
rate was 28 l/min; the same as the one-stage Andersen. The output was to an RS-232 serial port
and was recorded on a computer.

Test Protocol
The test protocol is described below. It is very
similar to the AHAM method in that the essential elements and steps are present. The primary
differences between the AHAM method and the
present microbial sampling protocol are 1) the
use of microorganisms as the challenge aerosol,
and 2) the microbiological aerosol sampling instrumentation.
Test Protocol:
1. Turn on the chamber HEPA lter, the circulating fan, and the temperature and humidity
control devices.
2. Allow the HEPA lter to clean the chamber air until the background OPC counts,
with 1 min sampling times, are below 100
particles/ft3 on the 15 m m channel.
3. Turn off the HEPA lter and temperature and
humidity control devices on the air handling
unit (AHU), and turn on the Collison nebulizer and run it for approximately 5 min.
4. Turn off the Collison nebulizer and the circulating fan. Wait until the fan stops (approximately 1 min), then start the air cleaner
(particulate matter removal test only) and
take triplicate time zero measurement for the
bioaerosol.
5. Collect OPC measurements every 1 min for
a minimum of 10 min.
6. Collect triplicate bioaerosol measurements at
3, 7, and 10 min (5 and 10 min for the MS2).
As with the AHAM standard method, the
procedural difference between the natural decay measurement and the particulate decay measurement is that after the fan stops in step 4, the
air cleaner is started.

Aerosol Science and Technology

30:2 February 1999

CADR with Microbiological Aerosols

Calculations
The performance of the air cleaner was evaluated by determining the CARm calculated as
the CADR in the AHAM method. To calculate
the CARm, the measured decay (k e ) and natural decay (k n ) rates are rst calculated using the
following formula:
n

Downloaded by [173.32.254.224] at 07:48 14 December 2015

lnC ti

ti lnC ti
k=

ti
1

n
n

isms were tested separately. All the tests were

performed with the air cleaner operating at nominally 6.3 m3 /min (225 cfm). Bioaerosol samples were collected simultaneously from Ports
A, B, and C. For statistical reasons, each of these
measurements was treated as a separate measurement in the calculations.
Both OPC and bioaerosol measurements were
taken. The OPC counts were used as a realtime monitor, except during the MS2 runs. To
maintain the high level of organism challenge required for the MS2 tests, the high particle counts
saturated the OPC and thus it could not be used.

ti
ti2

n
(1)

where C t is the concentration at time t, n is the

number of data points used in the regression, k is
the decay constant (time 1 ), and t is time (min).
Due to the characteristics of the chamber, low
(0.12 m 3 /min) leak rate and consequent low decay rate (VanOsdell et al. 1996), and the nature
of the challenge (i.e., viable microorganisms),
the natural decay constants calculated for each
organism using the preceding formula were averaged to produce a single natural decay constant for that organism, k n .
Then the CARm was calculated for each measured decay rate using the formula
CARm = V (k e

241

k n ),

(2)

where V is the volume of the test chamber (ft3 ),

k e is the measured decay rate (min 1 ), and k n
is the average natural decay rate (min 1 ) for an
organism.
Testing
The test series consisted of two natural decay
determinations for each organism and at least
three particulate matter removal rate determinations per organism. Furthermore, at least one of
each was run on separate days. The three organ-

RESULTS
Measurement of Decay Curves
Figures 2, 3, and 4 show the decay curves for
B. subtilis, P. chrysogenum, and MS2, respectively. The numbers of CFUs (B. subtilis, P.
chrysogenum) or PFUs (MS2) are plotted on the
x -axis, versus the time in minutes on the y -axis.
Each data point is the mean of three determinations, and the error bars equal to 1 standard
deviation are shown. The natural decay curves
are labeled k n . The particulate matter removal
decay curves (with the air cleaner running) are
labeled k e . Two natural decay determinations
were performed for each of the three organisms.
Three particulate matter removal decays were
determined for B. subtilis and P. chrysogenum
and ve for the surrogate virus, MS2.
As can be seen in all the gures, there is little
natural decay of any of the organisms in the 10
min that it took to perform the test. However,
when the air cleaner is on the particulate matter
removal, decay is very rapid. Because the MS2
titrations are fairly labor intensive, we were only
able to sample at three time intervals during each
MS2 run. Therefore, a total of ve runs (k e 1
5) were performed to ensure the validity of the
data.

Downloaded by [173.32.254.224] at 07:48 14 December 2015

242

K. K. Foarde et al.

Aerosol Science and Technology

30:2 February 1999

FIGURE 2. Two natural (kn1, kn2) are measured (ke1, ke2, ke3) decay curves for B. subtilis. Samples collected at 0,
3, 7, and 10 minutes.

FIGURE 3. Two natural (kn1, kn2) and three measured (ke1, ke2, ke3) decay curves for P. chrysogenum. Samples
collected at 0, 3, 7, and 10 minutes.

Determination of CARm
Table 1 presents the CARm results for the three
test organisms. The mean and standard devia-

tion of the mean of the CARm are shown for each

of the challenge organisms when measured with
the bioaerosol sampler and by particle count
with the OPC, respectively. One air cleaner was

Downloaded by [173.32.254.224] at 07:48 14 December 2015

Aerosol Science and Technology

30:2 February 1999

CADR with Microbiological Aerosols

243

FIGURE 4. Two natural (kn1, kn2) and ve measured (ke1, ke2, ke3, ke4, ke5) decay curves for MS2. Samples
collected at 0, 5, and 10 minutes.

TABLE 1. CARm results from testing with the three different microorganisms.
Challenge
Organism
B. subtilis
P. chrysogenum
MS2

Mean B SD
(Bioaerosol Sampler)

Mean B SD
(OPC)

3
3
5

202 6
231 9
267 24

205 4
210 11
ND

ND = Not Done
CADR/CARm units are standardized as CFM
CARm calculated using B. subtilis ke = 0.449; P. chrysogenum ke = 0.460; MS2 k e = 0.524)

used for all tests. As stated earlier, OPC measurements were not done for the MS2. The OPC
data from the 15 m m channel was used to match
the particle size range of the P. chrysogenum.
The OPC data from the 0.71 m m and the 15
m m channels were added together to cover the
B. subtilis size ranges.
The CARms calculated from the bioaerosol
measurements and the OPC measurements were

not signicantly different (p < .05) for either

the B. subtilis or the P. chrysogenum. And the
results are consistent with the design volumetric
ow rate and lter efciency of the air cleaner.
The CARm should not exceed the air cleaner
ow rate of 225 cfm or 6.3 m3 /min.
The CARm calculated for the MS2 appears
to be high based on the design volumetric ow
rate and the lter efciency of the air cleaner.

Downloaded by [173.32.254.224] at 07:48 14 December 2015

244

K. K. Foarde et al.

Aerosol Science and Technology

30:2 February 1999

Collection of the MS2 required using a liquid

impinger, the AGI-30, for the bioaerosol collection. One of the well-documented characteristics of a liquid impinger is that particles consisting of multiple organisms may break up into
individual organisms on impaction with the liquid. This characteristic can lead to higher counts
in the impinger when compared to the number
of particles collected. Furthermore, the number of viruses in each particle is believed to be
proportional to the volume of the particle. As
the air cleaner cleans the air in the chamber, the
concentration of larger diameter particles will
be reduced faster than the smaller particles because of the particle size dependent efciency of
the lter. Therefore, a possible explanation for a
higher CARm is that not only are the total number of particles reduced during the test, but also
the remaining particles are smaller and therefore
contain fewer viruses. This translates to less
viruses in the impinger uid for the later samples because of the accelerated reduction in PFU
relative to the reduction of droplets. It is probable that for human viruses suspended in mucus
droplets generated by a cough or a sneeze the
same principles would apply, and consequently
similar results would be anticipated.
In addition to this new method for microbiological aerosols, the CADRs for smoke, dust,
and pollen were determined using AHAM-AC 1.
Table 2 shows the results of these tests. The
mean and standard deviation are the result of
testing three different air cleaners. As with the
CARms, the CADRs are consistent with the lter efciency of the air cleaner and the design
volumetric ow rate.

TABLE 2. CADR results of AHAM-AC 1 testing.

Particulate Challenge

Smoke
Dust
Pollen

3
3
3

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

The AHAM test method was successfully
adapted to allow testing with actual microorganisms. Careful attention was given to the selection of the test organisms. The bacterium, B.
subtilis, the mold, P. chrysogenum, and the bacterial phage or virus, MS2, were selected as test
organisms. All three of these organisms represented one of the primary groups of microorganisms that a household air cleaner would be
expected to remove in a home.
The aerosol generation and collection protocols optimized the ability of three very different
organisms to survive and remain culturable. The
test protocol compensated for the limited time
of testing during each run. A limited number
of measurements were possible during each run
before the high efciency of the air cleaner reduced the concentration below the detection limits; therefore, to collect sufcient data multiple
simultaneous samples and multiple runs were
performed.
The CADR (AHAM-AC 1) and CARm determined for the air cleaner showed that the air
cleaner has efciencies consistent with the lter effectiveness and volumetric air ow. This
CARm result is consistent with that anticipated
using a modication of the AHAM method. The
use of actual microbiological aerosols is consistent with the current AHAM tests in using
aerosol challenges that an air cleaner would be
expected to handle in real use conditions. The
test described in this paper provides a method to
compare and evaluate a variety of air cleaners.

The authors greatly appreciate the technical assistance of

Tricia D. Webber from the Research Triangle Institute for
collecting the data. Additional thanks go to Dr. Richard
Roth and David Drake of Amway Corp. for performing the
AHAM-AC 1 testing for smoke, dust, and pollen.

CADR (Mean B SD)

226 4
229 6
220 16

CADR/CARm units are standardized as CFM

References

American Conference of Governmental Industrial

Hygienists. (1989). ACGIH Guidelines for the
Assessment of Bioaerosols in the Indoor Environment. Cincinnati, OH.

Downloaded by [173.32.254.224] at 07:48 14 December 2015

Aerosol Science and Technology

30:2 February 1999

Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers.

(November, 1987). AHAM Standard Method
for Measuring Performance of Portable Household Electric Cord-Connected Room Air
Cleaners AC-1.
Buckland, F. E., and Tyrell, D. A. J. (1962). Loss
of Infectivity in Drying Various Viruses, Nature
195:1063-1064.
Foarde, K. K., Hanley, J. T., Ensor, D. S., and
Roessler, P. (1999). Development of a Method for
Measuring Single-Pass Bioaerosol Removal Efciencies of a oom Air Cleaner, Journal of Aerosol
Science and Technology.
Hanley, J. T., Ensor, D. S., Smith, D. D., and Sparks,
L. E (1994). Fractional Aerosol Filtration Efciency of In-Duct Ventilation Air Cleaners, Indoor
Air 4:169178.
Knight, V. (1973). Airborne Transmission and Pulmonary Deposition of Respiratory Viruses, edited
by V. Knight. In Viral and Mycoplasmal Infections
of the Respiratory Tract, Lea & Febiger, Philadelphia, PA, pp. 19.
Li, C. S., and Hopke, P. K. (1991). Efcacy of Air
Cleaning Systems in Controlling Indoor Radon
Decay Products, Health Phys. 61:785797.
Macher, J. M. (1989). Positive-Hole Correction
of Multiple-Jet Impactors for Collecting Viable

CADR with Microbiological Aerosols

245

Microorganisms, Am. Ind. Hyg. Assoc. J. 50:

561568.
Rutala, W. A., Jones, S. M., Worthington, J. M.,
Reist, P.C., and Webber, D. J. (1995). Efcacy of
Portable Filtration Units in Reducing Aerosolized
Particles in the Size Range of Mycobacterium
Tuberculosis, Infect. Control Hosp. Epidemiol.
16:391398.
Shaugnessy, R. J., Levetin, E., and Sublette, K.
(1993). Effectiveness of Portable Indoor Air
Cleaners in Particulate and Gaseous Contaminant
Removal, Indoor Air 93 6:381386.
van der Heide, S., Kauffman, H. F., Dubois, A. E., and
de Monchy, J. G. (1997). Allergen Reduction Measures in Houses of Allergic Asthmatic Patients: Effects of Air-Cleaners and Allergen-Impermeable
Mattress Covers, Eur. Respir. J. 10:12171223.
VanOsdell, D., Foarde, K., and Chang, J. (1996). Design and Operation of a Dynamic Test Chamber for
Measurement of Biocontaminant Pollutant Emission and Control. In ASTM STP 1287 Characterizing Sources of Indoor Air Pollution and Related
Sink Effects. pp. 4457.

Received December 8, 1997; accepted September 23,

1998.