The difference in size is so that it can be fit to different applications. I have use both name brands in short and long form, they all seem to last 14-18 months depending on how much I run the fan. Don't get caught up in the small details....it really does have to do with your application and space requirements....it's that simple.
Carbon Filters - Short or Tall
- Thread starter Track
- Start date
The difference in size is so that it can be fit to different applications. I have use both name brands in short and long form, they all seem to last 14-18 months depending on how much I run the fan. Don't get caught up in the small details....it really does have to do with your application and space requirements....it's that simple.
Hackerman
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2014
- Messages
- 3,030
- Reaction score
- 286
Hushpuppy
Dr MadBud
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2011
- Messages
- 6,441
- Reaction score
- 313
I may be totally off my rocker on this but this is my educated guess(S.W.W.G.) on how this works: The thickness of the carbon is offset by the volume of air in ratio to the volume of carbon. A given volume of air will pass through a deeper multilayer of carbon(in a smaller container) faster due to the pressure being exerted on it, versus the same volume of air will move slower, passing through a thinner layer of carbon that is spread over a larger area, The volume of air is the same but the speed off the air movement will be higher in the smaller filter.
In order to get the same amount of absorption of contaminants by contacting the carbon, the faster moving air needs to pass through a thicker layer so that it stays in contact longer. The air passing through the bigger filter has the same amount of carbon but it is spread over a larger area, therefore the air has more space to pass through for a given amount of pressure, and passes slower through the thinner layer of carbon where it is in contact with the carbon for the same length of time per unit of carbon. This allows for the same amount of "scrubbing" for either filter given that the same volume of air is passing through the same amount of carbon with either ffilter.
How is that for a "Scientific Wild A** Guess" :hubba:
In order to get the same amount of absorption of contaminants by contacting the carbon, the faster moving air needs to pass through a thicker layer so that it stays in contact longer. The air passing through the bigger filter has the same amount of carbon but it is spread over a larger area, therefore the air has more space to pass through for a given amount of pressure, and passes slower through the thinner layer of carbon where it is in contact with the carbon for the same length of time per unit of carbon. This allows for the same amount of "scrubbing" for either filter given that the same volume of air is passing through the same amount of carbon with either ffilter.
How is that for a "Scientific Wild A** Guess" :hubba:
I may be totally off my rocker on this but this is my educated guess(S.W.W.G.) on how this works: The thickness of the carbon is offset by the volume of air in ratio to the volume of carbon. A given volume of air will pass through a deeper multilayer of carbon(in a smaller container) faster due to the pressure being exerted on it, versus the same volume of air will move slower, passing through a thinner layer of carbon that is spread over a larger area, The volume of air is the same but the speed off the air movement will be higher in the smaller filter.
In order to get the same amount of absorption of contaminants by contacting the carbon, the faster moving air needs to pass through a thicker layer so that it stays in contact longer. The air passing through the bigger filter has the same amount of carbon but it is spread over a larger area, therefore the air has more space to pass through for a given amount of pressure, and passes slower through the thinner layer of carbon where it is in contact with the carbon for the same length of time per unit of carbon. This allows for the same amount of "scrubbing" for either filter given that the same volume of air is passing through the same amount of carbon with either ffilter.
How is that for a "Scientific Wild A** Guess" :hubba:
Best explanation I could have hoped for. Where were you?
Justanotherfarmer
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2014
- Messages
- 159
- Reaction score
- 1
dudes taking everything I say with a grain of salt but to me it wouldn't matter the shape of the filter, the only reason they have options is just to adapt to different growing applications. I would imagine if a short fat filter and a longer skinny filter had the same amount of carbon they both would perform the same. The air is being pulled through the exact same amount of carbon either way so the shape shouldnt matter. Thats just what I think. Same amount of carbon same amount of cfm just diffrent shape, wouldnt matter at all as far as air scrubbing power. Thats my two cents damn it.
zipflip
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2008
- Messages
- 2,606
- Reaction score
- 1,893
its a horse apiece IMO. cfm rating is same then its same functionality etc.. only some foks have different sized spaces where a shorter fatter one would fit better than a loner skinny one. which 2 filters are u tryin to compare anyway?
I thinkim undestandin u right, but not sure. lemme know what filters ur comparing and i'll let ay know
I thinkim undestandin u right, but not sure. lemme know what filters ur comparing and i'll let ay know
Justanotherfarmer
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2014
- Messages
- 159
- Reaction score
- 1
Just wanted to ask if you wouldn't mind popping over to my thread and check out update pics. .....are the flowers small or how far along.....I've seen others that claim to be at 25 days and there flowers are monsters......just wondering they are producing a lot of trichs right now though. ......anyways....thanks man
Similar threads
