Keyboard Shortcuts
ctrl + shift + ? :
Show all keyboard shortcuts
ctrl + g :
Navigate to a group
ctrl + shift + f :
Find
ctrl + / :
Quick actions
esc to dismiss
Likes
Search
Dylos User Manual
|
This is a rave review. After reading the recent thread about air quality monitors, I placed an order for a Dylos unit. I cannot remember the last time I purchased an electronic device that came with a printed user manual that I could actually read and understand. The Dylos User Manual is printed in font large enough to read without magnification, the grammar is correct, the sentences are concise and understandable. What a treat! Perhaps the folks at Felder/Hammer and Festool should confer with the writers at Dylos. Many thanks to Dylos.
|
|
A well-written manual seems to be more rare as time goes on.
Does the Dylos manual address the particulate labels that may be safe or not safe? Based on the Dylos web site, it seems the device does not measure particulates in the same way the US OSHA and other country safety standards express limits. I wrote to Dylos asking about correlation, but have not received a reply. -- John Hinman Boise ID K700S and A941 |
¿ªÔÆÌåÓýJohn,My limited research indicates that OSHA is more about pollutants and microbials than particulate matter. As you can imagine, there are many, many documents available for review, and I did not read all of them.?The following paragraph appears on the EPA website. National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for PM Over the last couple of years, I have noticed more eye irritation when exposed to sawdust, so my interest was in identifying which of my activities contributed to the most particulate matter in the shop, rather than what levels would contribute to lung disease after long exposure. The Dylos unit I purchased reads?mass concentration?as micrograms per cubic meter, for particles smaller than 2.5 microns and for particles smaller than 10 microns. Micrograms of particles smaller than 2.5 microns per cubic meter seems to be the measure used by the EPA. The manual includes a chart with ratings from good to hazadous, and states that ¡°the Air Quality Chart on the back of the unit duplicates the EPA rating scale for?outside?air¡±. Note the designation of?outside?air. This unit also reads particle concentration as particles per cubic foot, for particles greater than 0.5 microns and for particles greater than 2.5 microns. The manual states that they cannot tell what is healthy or unhealthy, but includes a chart with readings interpreted as excellent to very poor. The manual also states that particle concentration correlates to ISO standards for indoor air. I did not find those standards.? My interest is in particle concentration. So far, I have learned that when I enter the shop in the morning, the particle concentration in the shop is less than the concentration in our house. I have learned that when using the Festool sander with vacuum, the particle concentration does not?increase, not even a little. I create the most particulate matter with hand tools, saws, rasps, and with hand sanding. I have learned that the air filters that hang from the ceiling clear the air more rapidly than expected. Please let me know if the above does not make?sense, Steve
|
|
Steve, thank you for your thoughtful reply.
I did not realize that the Dylos monitors reported particulates as micrograms per cubic meter. I was under the impression they only tallied particulate counts by size category. In the USA, OSHA regulates wood dust as ¡°Particulates Not Otherwise Regulated (PNOR)¡±. Total particulates are limited to 15 milligrams per cubic meter, while the respirable fraction is limited to 5 milligrams per cubic meter. The Permissible Exposure Limit is a Time Weighted Average, which I do not completely understand but takes into account the amount of time a person is exposed to the dust. If Dylos reports mass of particulates per cubic meter, perhaps I can relate those readings to health and safety standards. Which Dylos model do you use? -- John Hinman Boise ID K700S and A941 |
|
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
|
|
Dealing with gas turbine emissions on the regular, that doesn¡¯t surprise me at all. It¡¯s actually quite awful how high ambient outdoor PM2.5/10 levels are in some locations. It makes it really difficult to meet some newer EPA emissions regulations since even if you aren¡¯t adding anything to the air, it can often be worse than the requirement. Then there is a political component to comparing against ambient levels since most people don¡¯t want to know¡anyways.? Very cool that your cyclone works so well! I¡¯m assuming you must have a 1 micron filter element on the exhaust?? Jim On Mon, May 6, 2024 at 10:30?AM rodsheridan via <riderofgallifrey=[email protected]> wrote: It¡¯s interesting that when my cyclone in the shop is running for about 10 minutes the air particle content is about half of the house indoor air and one quarter of the outside air contents. |
|
Agreed with Rod and Stephen ¨C the Dylos air quality monitor has been a big help.? I have a DC1100-Pro, & use an Oneida DC and a Jet ceiling-mount air cleaner.? For my garage shop, this setup works well. ? For those who haven¡¯t seen it, here is Bill Pentz¡¯ info regarding dust collection:
|
|
Thanks for the information, fellows!
The ability of the DC1700-PM to report results that are comparable to published safety standards is very helpful. I had missed that when looking at Dylos products. I will probably get one soon. The Dylos web site says the OSHA standards are based on particle mass per volume because of limitations on the testing equipment, and that particle counters are a better way of evaluating airborne particles. That may be true, but until we have acceptance standards for wood dust based on particle counts we have to fall back to the OSHA standards. It will be good to have both test methods available. -- John Hinman Boise ID K700S and A941 |
|
The Dylos (and other real time meters) use a diode laser and detector to measure particulate passing frequency and then estimate?the size of the particles from the efficiency of the scattering (ie: how strong the detector reads the signal vs. the known energy in the laser). They then estimate a count/volume by knowing the flow rate of their fan and the time duration. It's really pretty slick and robust. They have done a really good job lowering the cost of sensors to something the average?person can buy. Original PDPA-type systems were $100k+ and newer are in the $5-10k so Dylos really has done something great. The issue with equating that to mass/volume standards is there is no way of knowing the particulate mass because?you do not know the density (ie: Dylos has no idea what materials forming the airborne dust). This is actually a huge problem in industry as well-especially since various standards in the EU use particulate counts vs. mass densities. To accurately measure PM on a mass basis, the process involves using precision filters [and in some cases sized cyclones?with very particular flow rates] and then measuring?the captured particle weights after hours of exposure. Really quite complicated, and to be totally honest, fraught with error [though from a personal health standpoint the error always biases towards higher measured particle density than actual].? Hopefully that was at least somewhat interesting to someone-I've been dealing with laser?measurements like these for quite a while now and it's quite a fascinating subject, especially when moved out of the lab and into real applications. Jim On Mon, May 6, 2024 at 1:41?PM John Hinman via <jhinman1911=[email protected]> wrote: Thanks for the information, fellows! |
|
It is interesting, Jim. Thanks for chiming in!
I thought there must be an assumption about material density baked into the Dylos machine. Maybe Dylos shares that assumption. It does not have to be exact, as wood density varies widely. Fir and pine will run around 33 pounds per cubic foot, while the Jatoba flooring I¡¯m using is about 57 pcf. The OSHA standards do not take density into account either. Wood dust of all types is lumped together with all other not-otherwise-regulated material. -- John Hinman Boise ID K700S and A941 |
|
Seeing the dylos love here definitely makes it a recommended purchase BUT it doesn't seem like it is designed well for online monitoring without adding additional hackery to data collection, wifi, etc.? Any luck here from the list on something more along those lines? On Mon, May 6, 2024 at 2:47?PM John Hinman via <jhinman1911=[email protected]> wrote: It is interesting, Jim. Thanks for chiming in! |
Jonathan Smith
rodsheridan
to navigate to use esc to dismiss