C-POLAR Library

Can a particle sensor verify the claimed biological effect of the filter?

Last reviewed: .

Can a particle sensor verify the claimed biological effect of the filter?

A particle count measures particles, and it does not show what happened to an organism the filter captured.

ASHRAE 52.2 and ISO 16890 measure what a filter takes out of the air, and they say nothing about what happens to what is captured. A measurement taken before a filter and a measurement taken after it describe what that filter removed from the air that passed through it. The company's position on destruction is stated in the Statement of Classification for the NanoFlashing™ Air Filter, section 2.6: The filter is intended to destroy the viruses, bacteria and fungal spores it captures. It destroys them on direct contact with the positive electric charge, by physical means, and only while the organism is captured by the positive electric charge. Textile Testing Institute – Brno (TZÚ), Test Report AZL 26/0757-02, 3 July 2026, a laboratory accredited to ISO/IEC 17025, tested a MERV 15A filter medium under ISO 20743 and ISO 18184. An activity value is a difference against an untreated control fabric. It is not a percentage destroyed and not an airborne result. The Viruses page shows airborne virus at 1.3 m/s airflow, NanoFlashing™ beside a control, and states: “NanoFlashing™ captures the virus, and destroys it.” The Mold page shows airborne mold spores at 1.6 m/s airflow, NanoFlashing™ beside a control, and states: “NanoFlashing™ captures the mold, and destroys it.” The Mold page also states that researchers at Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, in a study with funding from the U.S. National Institutes of Health, tested NanoFlashing™ with more than 100 million live, dry spores driven in by fast-moving air.

The field observations on the Validation page were measured with MicronView's 405 nm Bio-fluorescent Air Monitoring System, which distinguishes biological particles from inert dust in real time, and they are reported separately from laboratory testing. The Terms of Use state: “A reported result describes only what the identified test found.”

Source: C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; C-POLAR — Terms of Use, section 3, https://cpolar.tech/terms/; Statement of Classification for the NanoFlashing™ Air Filter, NF Technical Products Inc., section 2.6; Textile Testing Institute – Brno (TZÚ), Test Report AZL 26/0757-02, 3 July 2026, ISO 20743 and ISO 18184; C-POLAR — Viruses, https://cpolar.tech/contaminants/viruses/; C-POLAR — Mold, https://cpolar.tech/contaminants/mold/. A copy may be made available on our review of the request.

Reviewed on .

Sources

  1. C-POLAR — Validation
  2. C-POLAR — Terms of Use, section 3
  3. Statement of Classification for the NanoFlashing™ Air Filter, section 2.6, NF Technical Products Inc.
  4. Textile Testing Institute – Brno (TZÚ), Test Report AZL 26/0757-02, 3 July 2026, ISO 20743 and ISO 18184
  5. C-POLAR — Viruses
  6. C-POLAR — Mold
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.