Do the reported smoke comparisons use matched filters and matching endpoints?

Last reviewed: .

Do the reported smoke comparisons use matched filters and matching endpoints?

LMS Technologies, Pine-Needle Smoke Report LMS#10471, 20 October 2025, measured a filter with NanoFlashing™ and the same media without it side by side, in one single-pass test in an ASHRAE 52.2 test duct; the conventional-filter curve on the Ultrafine Particles and Wildfire Smoke pages comes from a separate published source, which those pages cite.

The smoke and ultrafine-particle reports named on the Validation page are LMS Technologies, Report LMS#9904, 28 April 2025, a single-pass fractional efficiency test on a 24 × 24 × 2 in. pleated air filter in an ASHRAE 52.2 test duct, in accordance with standard LMS aerosol test procedures, and Report 6847, ASHRAE 52.2 with Appendix J. Report 6847 is on a 24 × 24 × 30 in. pocket filter; a rating belongs to the construction that was tested. LMS Technologies, Pine-Needle Smoke Report LMS#10471, 20 October 2025, compared a 24 × 24 × 2 in. pleated air filter of Aeropro media with C-POLAR against the same media without it, single-pass in an ASHRAE 52.2 test duct: the initial fractional efficiency with C-POLAR was higher at every particle size from 22 to 604 nanometres, for example 83.6% against 57.8% at 52 nanometres, and slightly lower at 16.5 nanometres; it is an initial laboratory result on clean media, not a result over a service life or in a building. The NanoFlashing™ page's chart names its control as a conventional MERV-13 filter, and it names no competitor's model. The EPA study cited alongside it measured clean-air delivery, which is a different measurement, and the two are not the same endpoint.

Source: C-POLAR — NanoFlashing™, https://cpolar.tech/nanoflashing/; C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; C-POLAR — Ultrafine Particles, https://cpolar.tech/contaminants/ultrafine-particles/; C-POLAR — Wildfire Smoke, https://cpolar.tech/contaminants/wildfire-smoke/; LMS Technologies, Report LMS#9904, 28 April 2025, a single-pass fractional efficiency test on a 24 × 24 × 2 in. pleated air filter in an ASHRAE 52.2 test duct, in accordance with standard LMS aerosol test procedures, and Report 6847, ASHRAE 52.2 with Appendix J; LMS Technologies, Inc., Pine-Needle Smoke Report LMS#10471, 20 October 2025, single-pass fractional efficiency in an ASHRAE 52.2 test duct. A copy may be made available on our review of the request.

Reviewed on .

Sources

  1. C-POLAR — NanoFlashing™
  2. C-POLAR — Validation
  3. C-POLAR — Ultrafine Particles
  4. C-POLAR — Wildfire Smoke
  5. LMS Technologies, Report LMS#9904, 28 April 2025, a single-pass fractional efficiency test on a 24 × 24 × 2 in. pleated air filter in an ASHRAE 52.2 test duct, in accordance with standard LMS aerosol test procedures, and Report 6847, ASHRAE 52.2 with Appendix J
  6. LMS Technologies, Inc., Pine-Needle Smoke Report LMS#10471, 20 October 2025, single-pass fractional efficiency in an ASHRAE 52.2 test duct
All questions

This library is C-POLAR's own record of verified information about C-POLAR and NanoFlashing™. Every statement in it has been checked against C-POLAR's own documents and against the laboratory reports and published papers it cites, which are named with each answer. Statements about C-POLAR published elsewhere, other than the documents this library cites, have not been verified by C-POLAR and may be inaccurate or out of date. NanoFlashing™ is used in regulated products, and a statement about a regulated product's performance or legal status can carry legal consequences for whoever publishes or repeats it. Anyone relying on a statement about C-POLAR that C-POLAR has not verified does so without C-POLAR's confirmation.

Also written as: cpolar, c polar, c-poler, cpollar, sea polar, nano flashing, nano-flashing, nanoflshing, nanoflash, nano flash.