2005, American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc. (www.ashrae.org).

Reprinted by permission from

ASHRAE Journal, (Vol. 47, No. 11, November 2005). This article may not be copied nor distributed in either paper or digital form without
ASHRAEs permission.

Life-Cycle Costing
Of Air Filtration
By B. Dean Arnold, Member ASHRAE; David M. Matela; and Alan C. Veeck, Member ASHRAE

W
e have long known that providing good air ltration in a 18.5%
Investment 0.5%
building has many benets, from providing a healthier en- and Maintenance
Disposal

vironment to protecting equipment and xtures. In January 2003, 81%

Energy
ASHRAE released the Report of Presidential Ad Hoc Committee for
Building Health and Safety under Extraordinary Incidents. HVAC air
Figure 1: Filter life-cycle cost components.1
ltration moved to the forefront as a valuable way to help protect
a building against bioterrorism. generate equations for life-cycle costing
for this application.
In response to the current situation, (This will depend on your system capa- Notice that price is not one of the
many facility managers are increasing bilities.) four questions. This is because price
or have completely upgraded ltration. 3. How long will it last in the system? is a component of the total life-cycle
However, did you know there is a way 4. What are the properties (pressure cost. The objective is to def ine the
to increase levels of lter efciency and drop, dust-holding capacity, etc.) of vari-
also reduce or offset the expense of the ous lter options? About the Authors
upgrade? Once you answer Question 1 (using B. Dean Arnold is manager of Research and De-
There is, and it uses the same math- ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 52.2, Meth- velopment for Kimberly Clark in Roswell, Ga.
ematics of life-cycle costing as used with od of Testing General Ventilation Air- David M. Matela is a market manager for Kim-
berly-Clark Filtration Products in Roswell, Ga.
larger capital equipment. Cleaning Devices for Removal Efciency
Alan C. Veeck is a member of ASHRAE Techni-
First, answer these questions: by Particle Size), and know the answer to cal Committee 2.4. He is vice president of MVA,
1. What level of air cleanliness do you Question 2, a knowledgeable air ltration Virginia Beach, Va., an association management
need? representative can help with Questions company that manages the National Air Filtration
2. What style of lter can you choose? 3 and 4. With this information, you can Association (NAFA).

30 ASHRAE Journal ashrae.org November 2005

 Initial Cost Energy Cost Initial Cost Energy Cost Total
Filter Style Cost + Labor + Disposal =
% of Total % of Total Investment
MERV 6-11 Economy $3.25 $0.31 $0.02 $3.58
$3.25 $46 7% 93%
Pleated Filter x 40 lters
MERV 11-15 x 4 changes $130.00 $12.40 $0.80 $143.20
Rigid Box $50 $304 14% 86% $520.00 $49.60 $3.20 $572.80
Filter
High Cap.
Table 1: Typical energy costs for lters. $4.25 $0.31 $0.02 $4.58
x 40 lters
x 3 changes $170.00 $12.40 $0.80 $183.20
Total Cost $510.00 $37.20 $2.40 $549.60
Power
Table 2: Comparison of total cost of investment of economy pleats
versus high-capacity pleats.
Cost per hour

Total
Filter Style Cost + Labor + Disposal =
Investment
Rigid
$50.00 $4.17 $0.13 $54.30
Filter Life x 40 lters
$2,000.00 $166.80 $5.20 $2,172.00
Bag
$25.00 $2.08 $0.13 $27.21
x 40 lters
$1,000.00 $83.20 $5.20 $1,088.40
Time

Figure 2: Optimum nal pressure drop.2 Table 3: Comparison of total cost of investment of same efciency
rigid style lters versus bag/pocket-type lters.

lowest cost system, not the lowest price system. Price will
be factored into the equation as it relates to the initial ex-
pense of the lter. In addition, energy costs, as they relate
to lter pressure drop, will also be factored into the overall
cost equation.
The three major components to life-cycle costing formula
are initial investment and maintenance, energy consumption,
and disposal. Based on operating characteristics, we know the
cost breakdown is as shown in Figure 1.
Table 1 provides verication that assumptions in Figure 1
are correct. The energy costs in the chart were calculated using
the energy equation that is presented later. By examining the
initial cost and energy costs of a pleated and a rigid lter, we
can see that the initial costs are less than 15% in each case.
Investment and Maintenance
When you determine the style of lter for your system,
it predicates investment and maintenance costs that include
price, shipping costs, lter damage/loss in shipment, storage
November 2005
or installation and installation/removal costs. As an example,
lets use a ve-story ofce building with (40) 24 in. 24 in.
2 in. (610 mm 610 mm 51 mm) pleated prelters in
front of (40) 24 in. 24 in. 12 in. (60 mm 60 mm 305
mm) 85% nal lters.
With pleats, one has the option of economy capacity, stan-
dard capacity or high capacity. While many facility managers
use the economy capacity because of its lower initial cost, the
higher capacity pleat usually can be changed one fewer time
per year, making its overall cost lower. The investment and
maintenance equation for changing out 40 lters (at a rate of
four times per year with economy and three times per year
with high capacity) is shown in Table 2.
For simplicity in this example, we have disregarded ship-
ping and lter storage losses, but you can count on losing at
least two or three lters per change to damage. Note that, not
only do you obtain slightly lower costs from the high capacity
pleat, but you also have the additional time to spend in other
activities instead of changing lters.
ASHRAE Journal 31
 Standard Pleat Hi-Cap Pleat Filter Annual
Cost Labor Disposal Total
Initial Pressure Drop 0.32 in. w.g. 0.26 in. w.g. Style Elect. Cost
Final Pressure Drop 1.00 in. w.g. 1.00 in. w.g. Economy
$520.00 $49.60 $3.20 $7,509.00 $8,081.80
Pre-Filters
Annual Energy Cost $7,509 $7,168
High-Capacity
Bag Filter Rigid Box $510.00 $37.20 $2.40 $7,168.00 $7,717.60
Pre-Filters
Initial Pressure Drop 0.44 in. w.g. 0.54 in. w.g.
Rigid Final
Final Pressure Drop 1.50 in. w.g. 1.50 in. w.g. $2,000.00 $166.80 $5.20 $11,605.00 $13,777.00
Filters
Annual Energy Cost $11,036 $11,605 Bag Final
$1,000.00 $83.20 $5.20 $11,036.00 $12,124.40
= 0.58, Q = 1 m3/s, $0.08/kWh Filters

Table 4: Annual energy costs of comparable lters. Table 5: Total yearly costs for comparable lters.

Even if youre not impressed with $23.20 savings a year, the
point here is the lower-initial-cost lter actually becomes the
higher-priced lter when viewed in terms of life-cycle cost-
ing. Selecting a lower price investment based on initial costs
might lead to a higher overall cost in the long run.
Lets examine the nal lters in an equation based upon the
previous air system. Our nal lters are 24 in. 24 in. 12
(60 mm 60 mm 305 mm) rigid-style lters (box lters)
of 85% efciency (MERV 12).
These lters became popular in the 1970s when the energy
crisis promoted turning units on and off as opposed to run-
ning continuously. In those days, bag (pocket) lters were
replaced by rigid box-style lters because of the possibility
of bag lters fracturing and blowing downstream. With the
advent of newer materials, this problem has been corrected.
However, many systems still use the rigid style.
First, rigid lters come one to a box. Hence, there will be
40 trips up and 40 trips down using these lters. Bag lters,
on the other hand, come four to a box and require only 10
trips up and down to change. This is a substantial labor
savings. Second, box lters can be twice the cost of bag
lters. Our investment and maintenance equation is shown
in Table 3.
Assuming one change per year, our costs are now $2,172.00
and $1,088.40, or a difference of $1,083.60. In this example,
the lower cost lter actually contributes to the life-cycle cost
equation because of the initial cost and lower labor installa-
tion costs.
Electrical Use
Development of newer materials also has provided the lter
industry with a chance to produce lower pressure drop media
that reduce electricity cost while maintaining high particle
capture efciencies.
With a lower pressure drop lter, the HVAC system mo-
tor needs to overcome less resistance to deliver the required
airow, thus reducing the motors energy consumption. In
the previous lter examples, we assumed each lter type
uses the same media and that the pressure drop differences
can be attributed to the lter design (i.e., the pleated lters
each have the same media, and the rigid and bag lters use
the same media).
Here, we are using the standard formula for resistance to
ow and electrical consumption. Figure 2 provides an example
of the optimal change point of an air lter, that point where
the electrical consumption overtakes the cost of the lter.
The equation we use to determine the energy cost based on
nal pressure drop is shown in Equation 1.
(1)
where
Q = airow (m3/sec)
P = avg. pressure loss (Pa)
P
t = time in operation (hours)
= fan efciency
Placing standard pressure drop information into the formula,
the lter electrical costs are shown in Table 4.
Summary
In summary, how the nal costs of our ve-story ofce building
stack up are shown in Table 5.
Now the life-cycle cost of the various lter options have been
computed, the facility manager can make a knowledgeable deci-
sion as to which lter system will provide the lowest overall cost.
In this case, it is the combination of the high capacity pleated lter
and the nal bag lter. This system yields a total annual cost of
$19,842. Comparing it to the highest cost option, the standard
capacity pleated lter and the rigid nal lter, which cost $21,859,
this facility manager can claim savings of $2,017 annually.
These examples help to reinforce the fact that initial costs of air
lter products do not necessarily provide the facility manager with
the lowest cost of operation. While investment and maintenance
items are more easily computed, hidden costs such as energy,
disposal, and waste due to damage can vary signicantly and can
be complicated to analyze. The lowest cost air lter system is de-
pendent on many factors and the life-cycle costing format is useful
because it helps to determine the best lter for the best cost.
References
1. Carlsson, T. 2001. Indoor air ltration: why use polymer based
lter media. Filtration+Separation 38(3):3032.
2. Avery, R.H. Optimum Final Pressure Drop, NAFA Guide to Air
Filtration, 3rd ed., Chapter 13, Owning and Operating Costs.

32 ASHRAE Journal ashrae.org November 2005