Patent Grant
8382872
This application is a national stage filing under 35 U.S.C. 371 of PCT/US2009/043964, filed May 14, 2009, which claims the benefit of priority to PCT Application No. PCT/US2008/088093, entitled Dust Collection Device For Sanding Tool filed on Dec. 23, 2008, the disclosures of which are herein incorporated by reference in their entirety.
Sanding tools, such as random orbit sanders, are frequently powered by a pneumatic compressed air supply. Pneumatically powered sanders can be designed to create a self-generated vacuum to capture dust and debris by sending the exhaust air from the pneumatic motor through a venturi in the exhaust air stream to create a suction port. The suction is directed with shielding and porting to the surface of the work piece through utilization of a ventilated abrasive article and back-up pad having a plurality of dust transport holes. The dust laden air stream after the venturi can be directed to a dust capture bag that is attached to the exhaust port (dust exit port) of the sander.
Typically, a cloth or paper capture bag is attached to a vacuum hose connected to the dust exit port, or the bag is attached to the dust exit port directly to filter the exhaust air and to capture the sanding dust and debris. While the cloth dust bag functions to capture some of the dust, frequently very fine particles of dust are not retained inside the cloth dust bag. Additionally, depending on the type and size distribution of the sanding dust, the pores in the cloth bag can be quickly plugged greatly reducing the efficiency of the bag to collect further dust and debris. Once plugged up, the cloth dust bag must be removed, emptied, and cleaned of the residual dust before sanding can continue. Furthermore, once the dust is collected within the cloth bag, the dust can shift in the bag causing a reduction in the ability of the cloth bag to capture further dust. For example, when sanding on a vertical surface the captured dust within the cloth bag may partially block or obstruct the entry port into the cloth bag depending on the orientation of the cloth bag with respect to the force of gravity.
To enhance the dust collection for sanding tools, what is needed is an improved dust collection device that has improved operating life, improved dust collection ability, or improved dust collection when sanding vertical surfaces. The inventors have determined that by utilizing a dust collection device having at least a three-layer sidewall construction, the capture of fine dust particles is increased, the effective life of the dust collection device is also increased, and improved dust collection while sanding vertical surfaces results.
In one aspect, the disclosure resides in a dust collection device for a sanding tool comprises a bag having a sidewall and a coupler attached to the bag. The sidewall includes a first filter layer, a second filter layer, and an outer support layer. The first filter layer comprises a plurality of fibrillated electrostatically charged electret fibers forming a nonwoven web; the first filter layer having a total pressure drop between about 1.0 to about 4.0 mm H2O or between about 0.1 to about 4.0 mm H2O, and the first filter layer having a total basis weight between about 100 to about 300 gram/m2 or between about 50 to about 450 gram/m2. The second filter layer comprises a melt blown microfiber nonwoven web; the second filter layer having a total pressure drop between about 10 to about 18 mm H20 or between about 5.5 to about 20 mm H2O, and the second filter layer having a total basis weight between about 25 to about 75 grams/m2 or between about 15 to about 75 grams/m2
In another aspect, the disclosure resides in a kit comprising a dust collection device for a sanding tool comprising a bag having a sidewall and a coupler having a barbed first end attached to the bag. The sidewall includes a first filter layer, a second filter layer, and an outer support layer. The first filter layer comprises a plurality of fibrillated electrostatically charged electret fibers forming a nonwoven web; the first filter layer having a total pressure drop between about 1.0 to about 4.0 mm H2O or between about 0.1 to about 4.0 mm H2O, and the first filter layer having a total basis weight between about 100 to about 300 gram/m2 or between about 50 to about 450 gram/m2. The second filter layer comprises a melt blown microfiber nonwoven web; the second filter layer having a total pressure drop between about 10 to about 18 mm H2O or between about 5.5 to about 20 mm H20, and the second filter layer having a total basis weight between about 25 to about 75 grams/m2 or between about 15 to about 75 grams/m2 Included in the kit is an adapter having a first threaded end and a second internally tapered end. Included in the kit are instructions for attaching the first threaded end of the adapter to a dust exit port of the sanding tool and for inserting the barbed first end of the coupler into the second internally tapered end of the adapter.
In another embodiment, the disclosure resides in a method of collecting dust from a sanding tool comprising attaching the dust collection device to the dust exit port of the sanding tool.
The inventors have also discovered that by including a sleeve inside of the dust collection device, the dust collection efficiency is enhanced. The sleeve has a gap at one end or both ends that allows the incoming air to divert through the gap should the sleeve become plugged up. The gap can act as a flow control valve that apportions more airflow through the gap as the permeability of the sleeve is reduced by the collected debris.
In another aspect, the disclosure resides in a dust collection device for a sanding tool including a bag having a sidewall with an inner surface and a coupler attached to the bag. The sidewall comprises at least one filter layer and an outer support layer. A sleeve has an outer surface, a sleeve sidewall, a first end, a second end, and at least one gap at either the first end or the second end. The sleeve's first end is positioned adjacent the coupler to direct incoming air towards the sleeve and the sleeve is positioned within the bag such that a bypass volume is present between the outer surface and the inner surface.
The inventors have also discovered that an environmentally friendly version of the dust collection device can be made by using a paper bag and a paper sleeve. Inclusion of a paper sleeve surprisingly significantly improves the performance of a typical paper dust collection bag. Since the dust collection device comprises principally cellulosic fibers, the dust collection device is readily biodegradable.
In another aspect, the invention resides in, a dust collection device for a sanding tool comprising a paper bag having a sidewall with an inner surface and a coupler attached to the bag. The sidewall comprising at least one paper layer and a sleeve having an outer surface, a sleeve sidewall, a first end, a second end, and at least one gap at either the first end or the second end. The first end positioned adjacent the coupler to direct incoming air towards the sleeve and the sleeve positioned within the bag such that a bypass volume is present between the outer surface and the inner surface.
It is to be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art that the present discussion is a description of exemplary embodiments only, and is not intended as limiting the broader aspects of the present invention, which broader aspects are embodied in the exemplary construction.
Repeated use of reference characters in the specification and drawings is intended to represent the same or analogous features or elements of the invention.
As used herein, forms of the words “comprise”, “have”, and “include” are legally equivalent and open-ended. Therefore, additional non-recited elements, functions, steps or limitations may be present in addition to the recited elements, functions, steps, or limitations.
As used herein “layer” means that the material forming the layer has substantially the same mechanical structure and chemical composition.
As used herein “ply” means an individual separable sheet. For example, a layer of facial tissue often contains two plies of facial tissue material that form the sheet of tissue paper that is dispensed from the carton.
As used herein “paper” means a sheet material produced substantially from natural fibers including, but not limited, to those obtained from plants or trees. Natural fibers typically comprise cellulose such as natural fibers obtained from wood pulps. In some aspects, the paper can comprise lesser amounts of synthetic fibers to enhance various properties; however, the majority of the fibers forming the paper comprise natural fibers. In various embodiments of the invention, the paper can comprise greater than 80% natural fibers, greater than 90% natural fibers, greater than 95% natural fibers, or 100% natural fibers.
Referring to
To quantify the suction of several commercially available pneumatic sanders, the backup pad 12 with dust capture holes was placed into a closed container (one-gallon paint container with a 10.2 cm opening in the top). Vinyl adhesive tape was used to seal off any air leakage between the opening into the container and the bottom of the sander's shroud while ensuring that the backup pad 12 was able to rotate freely within the closed container. A small sealed inlet into the closed container was connected to an air flow meter to measure the volume of air drawn though the backup pad. Four different commercially available sanders were tested at an operating pressure of 90 psig (620 kPa). The maximum self-generated suction through the backup pad was measured to be between about 6.7 cfm (190 liters/min) to about 13.5 cfm (382 liters/min). The air flow meter was then attached to the dust exit port 20 of the pneumatic sander. The total air flow from the dust exit port 20 at 90 psig (620 kPa) was measured to be between about 21 cfm (595 liters/min) to about 29 cfm (821 liters/min) when the pneumatic sanders were operated at 90 psig (620 kPa).
From the above tests, it can be determined that the total airflow though the dust collection device 16 is quite large. Furthermore, the small size of the dust collection device 16 means that the airflow per unit area (e.g., cfm/ft2) through the sidewall 19 of the dust collection device 16 is also quite large. Thus, the dust collection device 16 should allow for high airflows, such as between about 15 to about 35 cfm (425 to 990 liters/min), at pressures of between about 50 to about 90 psig (345 to 620 kPa) without a significant pressure drop, while simultaneously trapping very small particles of dust from a heavily loaded contaminant stream of air picked up from adjacent the work surface during sanding.
Referring to
The first filter layer 24 can be comprised of a lofty nonwoven web of charged electret containing fibers, which can be any suitable open nonwoven web of charged fibers. The filter layer 24 could be formed of the split fibrillated charged fibers described in U.S. Pat. No. RE 30,782 to Van Turnhout. The electret fibers in U.S. Pat. No. RE 30,782 are formed from a corona charged film that is fibrillated to form the charged fibers. This charging method provides a particularly high density of injected charges in the finished fibers. The charged fibers can then be formed into a nonwoven filter web by common methods such as carding or air laying. For example, the electret fibers can be carded to form a nonwoven web and the nonwoven web then needle-punched to increase its integrity. Optionally, the nonwoven web of fibrillated electret fibers can be joined to a supporting scrim such as disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 5,230,800 to Nelson and in U.S. Pat. No. 5,792,242 to Haskett.
The nonwoven web of fibrillated electret fibers and optional support scrim, when joined together by a needle-punching operation, produces a filter medium which is extremely uniform in its physical and performance characteristics. Desirably, the optional scrim support should be an extremely open material having a large number of discrete open areas, which open areas pass through the scrim from one face to the opposite face. These discrete open areas should have an average cross-sectional area of at least 0.25 mm2, most preferably at least 1.0 mm2; however, the individual open areas can range in size from 0.1 mm2 up to 10 mm2 or larger. Preferably, the open areas have a non-tortuous path through the scrim, most preferably the open areas extend directly from one face to the opposite face (e.g., as a column).
Generally, the ratio of open area average path length through the scrim to the average scrim thickness is from 3 to 1, preferably from 2 to 1 and less. The scrim open area can also be described in terms of an Effective Circular Diameter (ECD) which is the diameter of the largest circle that can fit into an individual discrete open area. The average ECD is generally at least 300 μm, preferably at least 500 μm. Despite the extremely open nature of the scrim support material, it should be reasonably strong, generally having a tensile strength of at least 50 kg/m, preferably at least 100 kg/m. The overall pressure drop of the scrim material should be relatively small in comparison to the pressure drop across the electret-charged filter web material (e.g., less than 50 percent preferably less than 30 percent of the filter web pressure drop) and generally will have a pressure-drop of less than 1.5 mm H2O, preferably less than 1.0 mm H2O, and most preferably less than 0.5 mm H2O at 85 liters/minute air flow as tested by the Pressure Drop Measurement test method.
The optional scrim material can be formed of any suitable material such as a thermoplastic polymer, ductile metal or the like. Preferably, the scrim is formed of thermoplastic fibers such as a scrim or netting material such as the cross-laminated polyethylene fibers sold under the trade name CLAF by Amoco. Other cross laminated fibrous webs could also be used, with the lamination done by conventional techniques such as heat, ultrasonic or adhesive lamination.
The electret fibers can be charged by known methods, e.g., by use of corona discharge electrodes or high-intensity electric fields or by tribo-charging (as described in U.S. Pat. No. 4,798,850 to Brown). The fibers can be charged during fiber formation, prior to or while forming the fibers into the filter web or subsequent to forming the filter web. The fibers forming the filter web can even be charged subsequent to being joined to the scrim support layer.
Alternatively, the first filter layer 24 can comprise a lofty nonwoven web such as a carded polyester web, carded polypropylene web, or carded polyolefin web. The lofty nonwoven can be optionally charged to enhance its performance. One suitable first filter layer material is a carded polyester nonwoven web available from Precision Textiles, Totowa, N.J.
The first filter layer 24 can be made of a single ply or multiple plies placed in a face to face relationship. Depending on the uniformity of the manufacturing process, it may be desirable to stack multiple plies to create the first filter layer 24 rather than form one individual thicker layer. The first filter layer 24 can have a total basis weight ranging between about 100 to about 300 grams/m2, or between about 115 to 250 grams/m2, or between about 125 to 250 grams/m2, or between about 140 to about 200 grams/m2, or between about 50 to about 450 grams/m2, when used as a first filter in a dust collection device 16. Generally, the first filter layer 24 has a combined total pressure drop of between about 0.1 to about 4.0 mm H2O, or between about 0.15 to about 4.0 mm H2O, or between about 1.0 mm H2O to about 4.0 mm H2O, or between about 1.5 to about 3.0 mm H2O, or between about 1.7 to about 2.4 mm H2O, or between about 0.2 to about 2.4 mm H2O, or between about 0.25 to about 2.0 mm H2O at 85 liters/minute air flow as tested by the Pressure Drop Measurement test method.
The total thickness of the first filter layer 24 under a pressure of 0.05 psi with a 3.5 inch diameter platen (ASTM D5736-95 reapproved 2001) is desirably greater than about 2.5 mm, or between about 2.5 to about 4.5 mm, or between about 3.0 to about 4.0 mm, or between about 3.0 to about 8.0 mm, or between about 3.0 to about 10.0 mm, or between about 3.0 to about 12.0 mm, or between about 3.0 to about 20.0 mm. In general, sufficient thickness and basis weight should be provided to trap the dust and debris within the structure of the first filter layer 24 instead of on the layer's surface. Furthermore, the first filter layer 24 should have a total pressure drop within the specified ranges so as to not unduly impede the exhaust airflow from the sanding tool and to catch the majority of the dust and debris in the exhaust stream.
The second filter layer 26 can comprise a melt blown microfiber nonwoven web, and be optionally charged as disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 4,917,942 to Winters. It is believed that a charged second filter layer 26 in addition to a charged first filter layer 24 is more effective in capturing dust and debris. Melt blown nonwoven webs are typically formed by the process taught in Wente, Van A., “Superfine Thermoplastic Fibers” in Industrial Engineering Chemistry, volume 48, pages 1342 et seq., (1956), or Report No. 4364 of the Naval Research Laboratories, published May 25, 1954, entitled “Manufacture of Superfine Organic Fibers” by Wente, Van A., Boone, C. D. and Fluharty, E. L., which fibers are collected in a random fashion, such as on a perforated screen cylinder or directly onto a support web or in the manner described in PCT Application No. WO 95/05232 (between two co rotating drum collectors rotating at different speeds creating a flat surface and an undulating surface). The collected material can then be subsequently consolidated, if needed, and charged, such as in the manner described in U.S. Pat. No. 4,215,682 to Kubik. Alternative charging methods to form electrets include the methods described in U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,375,718 or 4,592,815, or PCT application number WO 95/05501.
A variety of polymeric fiber-forming materials may be used to form the melt blown microfiber nonwoven web. The polymer may be essentially any thermoplastic fiber-forming material capable of providing a charged nonwoven web which will maintain satisfactory electret properties or charge separation. Preferred polymeric fiber-forming materials are non-conductive resins having a volume resistivity of 1014 ohm-centimeters or greater at room temperature (22° C.). Preferably, the volume resistivity is about 1016 ohm-centimeters or greater. Resistivity of the polymeric fiber-forming material may be measured according to standardized test ASTM D 257-93. The polymeric fiber-forming material also preferably is substantially free from components such as antistatic agents that could significantly increase electrical conductivity or otherwise interfere with the fiber's ability to accept and hold electrostatic charges. Some examples of polymers which may be used in chargeable webs include thermoplastic polymers containing polyolefins such as polyethylene, polypropylene, polybutylene, poly(4-methyl-1-pentene) and cyclic olefin copolymers, and combinations of such polymers. Other polymers which may be used but which may be difficult to charge or which may lose charge rapidly include polycarbonates, block copolymers such as styrene-butadiene-styrene and styrene-isoprene-styrene block copolymers, polyesters such as polyethylene terephthalate, polyamides, polyurethanes, and other polymers that will be familiar to those skilled in the art. The fibers preferably are prepared from poly-4-methyl-1 pentene or polypropylene. Most preferably, the fibers are prepared from polypropylene homopolymer because of its ability to retain electric charge, particularly in moist environments.
The electric charge can be imparted to the melt blown microfiber nonwoven web in a variety of ways. This may be carried out, for example, by contacting the web with water as disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 5,496,507 to Angadjivand et al., corona-treating as disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 4,588,537 to Klasse et al., hydrocharging as disclosed, for example, in U.S. Pat. No. 5,908,598 to Rousseau et al., plasma treating as disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 6,562,112 B2 to Jones et al. and U.S. patent application number US2003/0134515 A1 to David et al., or combinations thereof.
Additives may be added to the polymer to enhance the melt blown microfiber nonwoven web's filtration performance, electret charging capability, mechanical properties, aging properties, coloration, surface properties or other characteristics of interest. Representative additives include fillers, nucleating agents (e.g., MILLAD™ 3988 dibenzylidene sorbitol, commercially available from Milliken Chemical), electret charging enhancement additives (e.g., tristearyl melamine, and various light stabilizers such as CHIMASSORB™ 119 and CHIMASSORB 944 from Ciba Specialty Chemicals), cure initiators, stiffening agents (e.g., poly(4-methyl-1-pentene)), surface active agents and surface treatments (e.g., fluorine atom treatments to improve filtration performance in an oily mist environment as described in U.S. Pat. Nos. 6,398,847 B1, 6,397,458 B1, and 6,409,806 B1 to Jones et al.). The types and amounts of such additives will be familiar to those skilled in the art. For example, electret charging enhancement additives are generally present in an amount less than about 5 wt. % and more typically less than about 2 wt. %.
The second filter layer 26 can be made of a single ply or multiple plies placed in a face to face relationship. Depending on the uniformity of the manufacturing process, it may be desirable to stack multiple plies to create the layer rather than form one individual thicker layer. The second filter layer 26 can have a total basis weight ranging between about 25 to about 75 grams/m2, or between about 40 to about 60 grams/m2, or between about 15 to about 75 grams/m2, or between about 20 to about 60 grams/m2 when used as a second filter layer in combination with the first filter layer 24. Generally, the second filter layer 26 has a total pressure drop of between about 5.5 to about 20.0 mm H2O, or between about 8 to about 18 mm H2O, or between about 12 to about 15 mm H2O, or between about 8.0 to about 13.0 mm H2O at 85 liters/minute air flow as tested by the Pressure Drop Measurement test. The total thickness of the second filter layer 26 under a pressure of 0.05 psi with a 3.5 inch diameter platen (ASTM D5736-95 reapproved 2001) is between about 0.2 to about 1.2 mm, or between about 0.3 to about 1.0 mm, or between about 0.5 to about 0.8 mm, or between about 0.7 to about 1.0 mm. In general, the pressure drop of the second filter layer should be as low as possible to capture particles having an average particle diameter of about 0.5 micrometer or greater. If the second filter layer is too restricted, it will quickly plug rendering the dust collection device inoperable. If the second filter layer is too open, it will pass too many fine particles through to the atmosphere rendering the dust collection device ineffective.
The composite material forming the dust collection device's sidewall 19 is further provided with the optional inner support layer 22 and the outer support layer 28. Desirably, all of the layers or plies of material forming the composite sidewall material 29 are substantially unbonded to each other except at the periphery of the dust collection device 16 along a seam 30 on three sides of the bag 17. Alternatively, the individual layers or plies can be bonded to adjacent layers or plies provided that the bonding method does not significantly reduce the air flow through the composite sidewall material 29 of the dust collection device 16.
Both the inner support layer 22 and the outer support layer 28 can be formed of a nonwoven or woven fibrous material. Desirably, for ease of manufacturing, cost, and performance the outer support layer 28 and the inner support layer 22 are nonwoven fibrous web materials formed at least in part from heat-sealable or weldable thermoplastic fibers. Examples of such materials include spunbond webs, spunlace webs and consolidated carded and air-laid webs. Alternatively, other methods can be used to form the seam 30 such as stitching or adhesive in which case, the inner support layer and outer support layer (22, 28) can be a non heat-sealable, porous fibrous material, such as paper, cloth or the like.
The inner support layer and outer support layer (22, 28) should have sufficient tensile strength to protect the first filter layer and second filter layer (24, 26) from tearing under the extremely high pressures (up to 90 psig (620 kPa)) that are present inside the dust collection device 16 when in use. Unlike conventional vacuum cleaner bags or furnace filters, the dust collection device 16 operates to filter air under a much higher pressure and under significantly greater flow rates.
The outer support layer 28 should generally have an air permeability of at least about 50 m3/min/m2, or at least about 100 m3/min/m2 or at least about 500 m3/min/m2 or greater as tested by ASTM D737. The basis weight of the outer support layer 28 is generally between about 10 to about 100 g/m2.
The outer support layer 28 can be either bonded or non-bonded to the second filter layer 26 with the exception of the seam 30 area. However, if the outer support layer 28 is bonded to the second filter layer 26, it is done so in a manner that will not significantly decrease the open area of the composite sidewall material 29. Acceptable bonding methods include adhesives, spot ultrasonic welding or heat bonding or the like. Generally, the bonded area should be no more than 20% of the composite sidewall material's area or generally less than 10% of the area.
The inner support layer 22 should generally have an air permeability of at least about 50 m3/min/m2, or at least about 100 m3/min/m2 or greater as tested by ASTM D737. The inner support layer 22 generally has a basis weight of between about 10 to 100 g/m2, or between about 15 to 40 g/m2. The inner support layer 22 generally has a tensile strength of at least about 0.10 kg/cm, or at least about 0.15 kg/cm. Suitable inner support layers include spun bond webs of thermoplastic fibers, consolidated carded webs such as point bonded carded webs of polyolefin (e.g., polypropylene) staple fibers, and scrim, netting or mesh materials. When the seam 30 is a welded seam it is desirable to include a thermoplastic inner support layer 22 to assist in heat sealing the seam 30; especially, if the first filter layer 24 is quite thick or not readily melted. Desirably, the inner support layer 22 is a net or mesh type of material having a high permeability that protects the first filter layer 24, improves reliability of the welded seam 30, and minimally restricts the airflow through the composite sidewall material 29.
While not wishing to be bound by theory, the inventors believe that the improved results, as demonstrated in the following examples when the dust collection device 16 is attached to the dust exit port 20 of a sanding tool 10, occur from the selection of the materials forming the first and second filter layers (24, 26). In particular, the first filter layer 24 is used as a collection device for the course and medium particulate and the second filter layer 26 is used as a screen to prevent extremely fine particulates from escaping. Therefore, in order to maximize the life of the dust collection device, the properties of the two layers should be carefully selected. If the first filter layer is too fine, it will quickly plug up rendering the second filter layer redundant. Conversely if the first filter layer is too course, most of the dust and debris will be retained only by the second filter layer, which will become quickly plugged up.
Secondly, it is desirable that the first filter layer has a relatively open, torturous air flow path through the material such that when dust or debris plugs one area, the air flow can divert sideways through the material to a new area. In this manner, the dust does not collect primarily on the surface of the material, but will instead be drawn in and through the material filling in the interstices between the fibers forming the material. In this manner, the first filter layer acts as a collection device storing the majority of the sanding debris and sending only the very fine particles to the second filter layer. Since a significant portion of the dust and debris is stored within the structure of the first filter material 24, when the dust collection device is used in a vertical orientation there is an improvement in the efficiency of the dust collection device to store additional sanding debris. As such, there is less shifting of the debris within the dust collection device as its orientation is changed from horizontal to vertical since much of the dust is physically entrapped within the structure of the first and second filter layers (24, 26).
In another embodiment of the invention, the sidewall 19 can comprise one or more layers of paper. When paper is used as the layer or layers forming the sidewall, the sidewall can have a total basis weight ranging between about 10 to about 200 grams/m2, or between about 10 to 150 grams/m2, or between about 15 to 100 grams/m2. Generally, the paper layer or layers have a combined total pressure drop of between about 0.1 to about 4.0 mm H2O, or between about 0.1 to about 3.0 mm H2O, or between about 0.1 mm H2O to about 1.0 mm H2O mm H2O at 85 liters/minute air flow as tested by the Pressure Drop Measurement test method.
Referring to
The second internally tapered end 36 of the adapter 32 can be sized for an interference fit with the coupler 38 illustrated in
In one embodiment, the second internally tapered end 36 had a circular cross section and the barbed first end 40 had an oval shape cross section with two opposing flat sides and two opposing curved ends similar to a speed skating rink. It is believed that having different cross sectional geometries for the second internally tapered end 36 and the barbed first end 40 provides for a tighter interference fit. To enhance the holding ability of the coupler 38 within the adapter 32 at high pressures, one of the items can be made from an elastomeric material. Desirably, the adapter 32 is made from an elastomeric material and the coupler 38 is made from a rigid plastic material. In one embodiment, the adapter 32 was made from SANTOPRENE 201-80 available from Advanced Elastomer Systems L.P., Akron, Ohio, and the coupler 38 was made from rigid polypropylene.
Referring again to
While a specific configuration for the adapter 32 and the coupler 38 have been illustrated, other mechanical connection elements known to those of skill in the art can be used to attach the bag 17 to the dust exit port 20. For example, a flange (coupler) that slips over the outer bore of the dust exit port 20 can be provided in the sidewall 19. A strap attached near one end of the bag 17 can be used to cinch the open end of the bag to the dust exhaust port. Typical connectors used for air hoses, garden hoses, vacuum hoses and the like can be used.
In some embodiments, depending on the weight of the material collected in the bag 17, the ribbed second end 44 or the coupler's second end can be lengthened to extend a significant distance into the bag to support the bag during use. The ratio of the length, L, of the ribbed second end 44 residing inside the bag 17 to the inside length of the bag 17 can be between about 0.25 to about 0.9, or between about 0.5 to about 0.75, or between about 0.4 to about 0.8. When the length of the ribbed second end 44 or coupler's second end is increased, holes, slots, or other apertures along the length of the ribbed second end can be provided to create a diffuser such that material entering the bag 17 is spread out along the length of the ribbed second end 44.
In one embodiment, the dust collection device 16 can be made by the following steps. The composite sidewall material 29 is assembled by overlying the individual layers or plies forming the composite sidewall material shown in
Another embodiment of the invention resides in a kit for sale to users of dust collection bags for sanding tools. The kit includes the dust collection device 16 with the coupler 38 attached to the bag 17, an adapter 32, and instructions for attaching the first threaded end 34 of the adapter 32 to the dust exit port 20 of a sanding tool 10. The kit can be placed into a package for sale with one or more dust collection devices included. Further steps included are instructions for inserting the barbed first end 40 of the coupler 38 into the second internally tapered end 36 of the adapter 32. The instructions provided with the kit can be written words, illustrations using pictures, drawings or photographs, or a combination of written words and illustrations that convey the working relationship of the various components in the kit and how the components are attached to a sanding tool. Alternatively, oral instructions can be provided by a sales representative who is demonstrating or selling the dust collection device 16 to a prospective customer.
Referring now to
Positioned within the bag 17 is a sleeve 52 having a sleeve sidewall 53, a first end 54, and a second end 56. The first end 54 is inserted over the ribbed second end 44 of the coupler 38. The second end 56 is positioned near an end seam 31 located at the distal end of the dust collection device 16 opposite the coupler 38. The function of the sleeve 52 is to diffuse the incoming dust laden air and to remove at least a portion of the dust from the incoming air. By diffusing it is meant that the velocity of the incoming air is changed; meaning either its speed or its direction is altered by the sleeve 52. It is believed that by diffusing the incoming air, the filter layers in the composite sidewall material 29 are more uniformly loaded with contaminants and more air can be filtered before the filter layers in the composite sidewall become plugged with debris. Also, it is believed that the efficiency of the dust collection device is increased by collecting at least some of the larger debris particles in the sleeve thereby allowing finer particles to be collected by the composite sidewall material 29.
The inventors have discovered that it is important to leave an opening or gap at one end of the sleeve, and desirably at both ends of the sleeve. In one embodiment, a first gap 58 and a second gap 60 is present at both ends of the sleeve. If the first end 54 is sealed to the coupler's ribbed second end 44 and the second end 56 is sealed to the end seam 31 eliminating any openings or gaps, then a filter bag within a filter bag construction is produced as tested in Example 39. This construction provides only a serial flow path for the incoming air that must first pass through the sleeve 52 and then pass through the composite sidewall material 29. Once the sleeve 52 is plugged up, the efficiency of the dust collection device 16 is greatly reduced. However, by leaving a gap at least on one end of the sleeve 52, the majority of the incoming air can first assume a serial flow path through the sleeve 52 and then through the composite sidewall material 29 until the sleeve becomes somewhat plugged with debris. Then the incoming air can assume a parallel flow path where a portion of the incoming air can pass directly through either the first or the second gap and out the composite sidewall material 29 while another portion of the incoming air passes through both the sleeve and the composite sidewall as best illustrated in
It has been discovered that the dust collection efficiency is improved if a gap is present at each end of the sleeve; however, a single gap at either the first or the second end of the sleeve is sufficient. It is believed that having gaps at both ends leads to more uniform loading of debris in the composite sidewall material 29. The first gap 58 can be created by sizing the sleeve 52 to have a larger internal circumference than the outer circumference of the ribbed second end 44 as best seen in
The first gap 58 has a first gap area equal to the area defined by the internal circumference of the first end 54 minus the area defined by the external circumference of the ribbed second end 44. The second gap 60 has a second gap area defined by the internal circumference of the second end 56. In various embodiments of the invention, the first gap area plus the second gap area can be between about 1 cm2 to about 1240 cm2, or between about 1 cm2 to about 180 cm2, or between about 5 cm2 to about 160 cm2, or between about 5 cm2 to about 100 cm2, or between about 30 cm2 to about 95 cm2, or between about 75 cm2 to about 90 cm2, or between about 5 cm2 to about 800 cm2, or between about 5 cm2 to about 600 cm2, or between about 75 cm2 to about 400 cm2.
The sleeve 52 is constructed from a porous or air permeable material. The porous material can have a relatively open fibrous construction suitable for diffusing the incoming airflow. In general, the porous material forming the sleeve 52 will have a more open construction than the second filter layer 26. Suitable porous materials include, for example, nonwovens such as spun bond, melt blown, carded, and extruded monofilament materials; paper; woven materials; sintered metals; scrim materials; foams such as open cell foams and closed cell foams; and screen or netting materials of metals or plastics. The materials can be electrostatically charged or employ additives such as an adhesive to enhance the collection of dust particles. Multiple sleeve materials can be combined to provide two or more layers for the sleeve sidewall 53. For example, a more porous material such as a screen material and a less porous material such as a spun bond material can be layered to create the sleeve sidewall 53.
The sleeve sidewall 53 can be made of a single ply or multiple plies placed in a face to face relationship. Depending on the uniformity of the manufacturing process, it may be desirable to stack multiple plies to create the sleeve sidewall 53 rather than form one individual thicker layer. The sleeve sidewall 53 can have a total basis weight ranging between about 10 to about 400 grams/m2, or between about 30 to 350 grams/m2, or between about 40 to about 250 grams/m2 or between about 10 to 150 grams/m2, or between about 15 to about 100 grams/m2 when used as a diffuser in the dust collection device 16. Generally, the sleeve sidewall has a combined total pressure drop of between about 0.05 mm H2O to about 5.0 mm H2O, or between about 0.10 to about 2.0 mm H2O, or between about 0.15 to about 0.8 mm H2O at 85 liters/minute air flow as tested by the Pressure Drop Measurement test method.
The total thickness of the sleeve sidewall 53 under a pressure of 0.05 psi with a 3.5 inch diameter platen (ASTM D5736-95 reapproved 2001) is desirably greater than about 1.0 mm, or between about 1.0 to about 10 mm, or between about 1.0 to about 15 mm. In general, sufficient thickness and basis weight should be provided to trap the larger dust and debris within the structure of the sleeve sidewall. If the material is pleated, the material prior to pleating is tested for the thickness.
The sleeve's cross section can have a shape that includes, for example, a round, an oval, a star, a triangle, or an oblong geometry forming a generally hollow tube shape. The sleeve can also taper either from the first end 54 to the second end 56 or from the second end 56 to the first end 54. The taper can be combined with any cross sectional shape to have a sleeve, for example, which is cone shaped. The sidewall 51 can be formed by one or more pieces that are seamed together. In one embodiment, the sleeve is formed from a single piece of nonwoven material that is folded approximately in half and then seamed longitudinally down a first edge 62 opposite a folded edge 64.
In addition to a gap at the first end 54 and/or the second end 56 of the sleeve 52, the inventors have discovered that an area ratio of the sleeve's surface area to the bag's surface area can affect the dust collection efficiency of the dust collection device 16. A bypass volume 66 should be present between an outer surface 68 of the sleeve 51 and an inner surface 70 of the composite sidewall material 29. The bypass volume 66 is the amount of volume present between the outer surface 68 of the sleeve and the inner surface 70 of the composite sidewall. The bypass volume 66 is believed to allow for airflow along the length of the bag 17 between the outer surface 68 and the inner surface 70 enhancing the dust collection efficiency. If the sleeve 51 is made the same size as the first filter layer 24, it essentially becomes another layer of the composite sidewall material 29 and does not function as a flow control valve or as a diffuser resulting in reduced dust collection efficiency. Conversely, if the sleeve 52 is sized too small, then the amount of dust captured by the sleeve is relatively small before the majority of the incoming air passes through the gap bypassing the sleeve such that the dust collection efficiency is not greatly enhanced.
For a pleated material, it is possible to have the bypass volume 66 even when the tips of the pleats touch the inner surface 70 of the composite sidewall material 29 since there is still a bypass volume 66 present between the valleys of the pleats and the inner surface 70 of the composite sidewall. If the pleats are orientated longitudinally, this allows for airflow down the length of the bag 17 between the outer surface 68 and the inner surface 70 in the valleys of the pleats. The area of the bag, AB, through which the dusty air is filtered is approximately 2*LB*WB. The area of the bag, near the coupler is slightly concave as a result of the sealing to the coupler; however, the bag 17 is constructed from a rectangular piece of material that is folded in half. The area of the sleeve, AS, through which the dusty air is filtered is approximately 2*LS*WS. The sleeve, in one embodiment, assumes an oval shape; however, the sleeve is constructed from a rectangular piece of material that is folded in half then expanded to fit over the coupler. If the sleeve material is pleated, the area of the sleeve, AS, is based on the outer dimensions or overall dimensions of the sleeve rather than the total surface area of the pleated material forming the sleeve. In various embodiments of the invention, the Area Ratio AS/AB can be between about 0.1 to about 0.9, or between about 0.2 to about 0.8, or between about 0.3 to about 0.7, or between about 0.4 to about 0.6.
Pressure Drop Measurement
The pressure drop across a layer of the composite sidewall material 29 of the dust capture device 16 is determined using a TSI™ Model 8130 high-speed automated filter tester (commercially available from TSI Incorporated, St. Paul, Minn.) at a flow rate of 85 liters/min, which is a face velocity of 13.8 centimeters per second. A salt aerosol spray is used during the testing and a 2% salt solution is placed in the salt aerosol generator. The TSI™ Model 8130 is configured, calibrated, and operated according to the Operation and Service Manual provided with the tester to test the layer of material.
The following material abbreviations are used for Examples 1-67.
Examples 1-6 and 8 were prepared in the following manner: Layers of material were placed in a face to face relationship in the order shown in Tables 1 and 2. The layers were then cut as a group, to 24″×4.5″ (61 cm×11.5 cm) sections. The sections were then folded over to form envelopes with the inner support layer 22 positioned in the middle. The envelopes for Examples 1-8 were 12″×4.5″ (30.5 cm×11.5 cm). The two long edges of each envelope were sealed using masking tape and staples to create an air-tight seam. The open end of the envelope was then taped to the dust exit port of the sanding tool and tested under Test Methods 1 and 2, with results shown in Tables 1 and 2.
Examples 7 and 9 were prepared similarly to Examples 1 and 8 respectively, except prior to folding over, the laminate was ultrasonically welded as described in Welding Process 1 at a location approximately in the center of the laminate. After Welding Process 1, a 1.25″ (3.8 cm) diameter hole was die cut in the center of the weld to give a 2″ (2 cm) ring of uniform sealed material with an 1.25″ (3.8 cm) opening. The resulting sealed ring and the coupler where jointed using hot melt adhesive trade designation “Jet Melt Adhesive 3764-PG” from 3M Company, St. Paul, Minn. The bond was made using 10 pounds of force (44.5 N) for 5 seconds and allowed to cool to 25 degrees C. Once the coupler was bonded to the laminate, the layers were folded over to form envelopes similar to those of Examples 1 and 11, except that the two long edges and the short edge of the envelope were ultrasonically welded as described in Ultrasonic Welding Process 2.
Ultrasonic Welding Process 1:
A circular ring was welded into the laminate using a model “DUKANE 3000 AUTO TRAC 20 KHZ ULTRASONIC WELDER”, obtained from Dukane Intelligent Assembly Solutions, St. Charles, Ill. Welding conditions were as follows:
Ultrasonic Welding Process 2
A series of edge seals were welded into the laminate using a Branson 2000d power supply 20 kHz, 4 k W with a Branson 2000aed actuator with a 3 inch (7.6 cm) diameter cylinder, available from Branson Ultrasonics Corp., Danbury Conn. The following conditions were used:
Making of Vacuum Bag 2
A Hoover vacuum cleaner bag, part number 4010801Y available from www.hoover.com, was cut down to the size of 4.6″ (11.7 cm)×12.2″ (31 cm). Three sides of bag were sealed with the help of Ultrasonic welding process. One 4.6″ (11.7 cm) side was left open to connect to the end of sander for dust collection evaluation.
Making of the Paper Vacuum Bag 1
A standard paper vacuum bag part number 49973 from an Ingersoll Rand sanding kit was cut down to the size of 4.6″ (11.7 cm)×12.2″ (31 cm). Three sides of bag were sealed with the help of staples. One 4.6″ (11.7 cm) side was left open to connect to the end of sander for dust collection evaluation.
Gel Coat Sanding Test Method 1
AD1 was attached to a 40-hole, 12.7-cm (5.0-inch) diameter by 0.95-cm (⅜-inch) thick foam back up pad, available under the trade designation “3M HOOKIT BACKUP PAD, #20206” from 3M Company. The backup pad and disc assembly was then mounted onto a 12.7-cm (5-inch) diameter, medium finishing, dual-action orbital sander, Model 050237, obtained from Air Vantage sander, El Monte, Calif. 91731. A pre-weighed dust collection device (11.43 cm×30.48 cm) was attached to the dust exit port of the sander. The abrasive face of the disc was manually brought into contact with a pre-weighed, 46 cm by 76 cm (18 inches by 30 inches) gel-coated fiberglass reinforced plastic panel, obtained from White Bear Boat Works, White Bear Lake, Minn. The sander was run at 620 kPa (90 psi) air line pressure and a down-force of 10 pounds force (44 N) for approximately 7 cycles of 150 seconds each. An angle of zero degrees to the surface of the workpiece was used. Each sanding cycle consisted of 48 overlapping transverse passes, for a combined 1008 inches (25.16 meters) total path length, at a tool speed of 17 cm per second (6.7 inches per second) across the panel surface resulting in an evenly sanded area of the test panel.
After the first sanding cycle, the test panel was cleaned by blowing compressed air across the top of the sanded panel to remove visible dust. The dust bag was removed from the sander and both the panel and the dust bag were weighed. The Dust Collection Efficiency was calculated by dividing the total weight of the sanded test panel and the dust bag by the combined initial weight of the test panel and the dust bag prior to sanding and multiplying by 100. The same dust bag was remounted on the dust exit port of the sander and the 150-second sanding cycle was repeated using the same test panel. The test panel was again cleaned by blowing compressed air across the top of the sanded panel to remove visible dust. The dust bag was removed from the sander a second time and both the test panel and the dust bag were weighed. The Dust Collection Efficiency after the second sanding was calculated by dividing the total weight of the sanded test panel and the dust bag by the combined initial weight of the test panel and the dust bag prior to sanding and multiplying by 100. Testing was continued as described above for each 150-second sanding cycle until the calculated dust collection efficiency fell below 70%.
The following measurements were made for each sample tested by this method and reported as an average of two test samples per Example in Table 1:
“Cut”: Weight, in grams, removed from the plastic panel;
“Retain”: weight, in grams, of particles collected in the sample bag; and
“Time-minutes at 70%”: Time needed to reach 70% dust collection efficiency.
“Dust Collection Efficiency” is the ratio of the Retain/Cut multiplied by 100.
Hard Maple Wood Sanding Test Method 2
AD3 was attached to a 40-hole, 12.7-cm (5.0-inch) diameter by 0.95-cm (⅜-inch) thick foam back up pad, available under the trade designation “3M HOOKIT BACKUP PAD, #20206” from 3M Company. The backup pad and disc assembly were then mounted onto a 12.7-cm (5-inch) diameter, medium finishing, dual-action orbital sander, Model 050237, obtained from Air Vantage sander, El Monte, Calif. 91731. A pre-weighed dust collection device (11.43 cm×15.24 cm) was attached to the dust exit port of the sander. The abrasive face of the disc was manually brought into contact with a pre-weighed, 40.6 cm by 40.6 cm (16 inches by 16 inches) hard maple wood, obtained from Woodcrafts Industrial, St. Cloud, Minn. The sander was run at 620 kPa (90 psi) air line pressure and a down-force of 10 pounds force (44 N) for 7 cycles of 150 seconds each. An angle of zero degrees to the surface of the workpiece was used. Each cycle consisted of 48 overlapping transverse passes, for a combined 1008 inches (25.16 meters) total path length, at a tool speed of 17 cm per second (6.7 inches per second) across the panel surface resulting in an evenly sanded area of test panel.
After the first sanding cycle, the test panel was cleaned by blowing compressed air across the top of the sanded panel to remove visible dust. The dust bag was removed from the sander and both the panel and the dust bag were weighed. The Dust Collection Efficiency was calculated by dividing the total weight of the sanded test panel and the dust bag by the combined initial weight of the test panel and the dust bag prior to sanding and multiplying by 100. The same dust bag was remounted on the dust exit port of the sander and the 150-second sanding cycle was repeated using the same test panel. The test panel was again cleaned by blowing compressed air across the top of the sanded panel to remove visible dust. The dust bag was removed from the sander a second time and both the test panel and the dust bag were weighed. The Dust Collection Efficiency after the second sanding was calculated by dividing the total weight of the sanded test panel and the dust bag by the combined initial weight of the test panel and the dust bag prior to sanding and multiplying by 100. Testing was continued as described above for each 150-second sanding cycle until the calculated dust collection efficiency fell below 70%.
The following measurements were made for each sample tested by this method and reported as an average of two test samples per Example in Table 1 as indicated:
“Cut”: Weight, in grams, removed from the plastic panel;
“Retain”: weight, in grams, of particles collected in the sample bag; and
“Time-minute at 70%”: Time needed to reach 70% dust collection efficiency.
“Dust Collection Efficiency” is the ratio of the Retain/Cut multiplied by 100.
Horizontal to Vertical Sanding Test Method 3
A 5.0-inch (12.7-cm) diameter P220 236L (AD4) multi-hole abrasive disc (Clean Sanding Disc) was attached to a 40-hole, 5.0-inch (12.7-cm) diameter by ⅜-inch (0.95-cm) thick foam back up pad, available under the trade designation “3M HOOKIT BACKUP PAD, #21033” from 3M Company. The backup pad and disc assembly was then mounted onto a 5-inch (12.7-cm) diameter, medium finishing, dual-action orbital sander, model 21038, obtained from Dynabrade Corporation., Clarence, N.Y. The sander was run horizontally at 90 psi (620 kPa) air line pressure for 3 cycles of 60 seconds each. The workpiece was an automotive panel with DuPont 1140S primer coating. An angle of zero degrees to the surface of the workpiece was used. After the first cycle, the test panel was cleaned by blowing compressed air across the top of the sanded panel to remove visible dust. The disc was removed from the back up pad and both the test panel and disc were weighed. Similarly, the bag was also removed from the sander and weighed. The abrasive disk was remounted on the back up pad and the bag was reattached to the sander. The 2nd horizontal sanding cycle was conducted using the same test panel. The test panel was again cleaned by blowing compressed air across the top of the sanded panel to remove visible dust. The abrasive disc was removed from the back up pad and both the test panel and abrasive disc were weighed. Once again, the bag was removed from sander and weighed. The abrasive disk was remounted on the back up pad and the bag was reattached to the sander. After the 2nd sanding cycle, the tested panel was placed vertically against the wall and the 3rd (now vertical) sanding application was applied to the same test panel with the dust bag aligned vertically and the dust inlet to the bag positioned beneath the body of the bag. The test panel was again cleaned by blowing compressed air across the top of the sanded panel to remove visible dust. The abrasive disc was removed from the back up pad and both the panel and abrasive disc were weighed. Once again, the bag was removed from sander and weighed.
The following measurements were made for each Example tested by this method and reported as an average of two test samples per Example in Table 3 as indicated:
“Cut”: weight, in grams, removed from the plastic panel;
“Retain”: weight, in grams, of particles collected in the sample bag
“DE %-bag”: ratio of the Retain/Cut multiplied by 100 in sample bag.
As seen in Table 3, Example 1 achieved 85% dust collection efficiency when sanding vertically, which was significantly greater than the comparative examples.
Life Testing of Pressure Fit Between the Adapter and the Coupler
The life of the adapter 32 was tested by cycling the coupler 38 to the adapter up to 500 times and measuring the Air Tightness and Pull Force in lbf of the friction fit. The pull force test method used was the TestWorks MTS Simplified Tensile Test and ASTM standards mechanical properties testing.
The results show that after 500 uses, the friction fit of the adapter to the coupler remains in tact and strong enough to make the product functional.
Examples 10-65 were prepared in a similar manner as done for Examples 7 and 9 except that Ultrasonic Weld Process 2 was not used and the seam 30 was made by stapling the edges together and sealing with tape similar to Example 1. For Examples 10, 18, 22, 47, 58, 59, and 64 where the sleeve 52 was not used, the size of the starting materials was adjusted as required to result in the bag 17 having the size specified in Tables 5, 6 and 7. For the remaining Examples, the sleeve 52 was inserted over the ribbed second end 44 of the coupler 38 prior to sealing the bag 17 forming the seam 30. The sleeve 52 was formed by cutting the specified material to the appropriate starting size, folding the material longitudinally to form the sleeve with the size specified in Tables 5, 6, and 7, and then stapling the longitudinal edges to seal the first edge 62 opposite the folded edge 64. A series of staples along the length of the sleeve was used to minimize any air leakage. In some of the Examples, either the first end 54 or the second end 56, or both ends of the sleeve were sealed to eliminate either the first gap 58, or the second gap 60, or both gaps. The first end 54 was sealed to the coupler 38 by tape to eliminate the first gap 58. The second end 56 was sealed by a series of staples along the second end to eliminate the second gap 60. Examples 10-21 and Examples 59-65 were tested according to Gel Coat Sanding Test Method 1 as previously described, except that AD5 was the abrasive article used for the test. Examples 22-58 were tested according to Hard Maple Wood Sanding Test Method 2 as previously described. The results of the testing are presented in Tables 5, 6, and 7.
Acrylic Sheet Sanding Test
The Acrylic Sheet Sanding Test was identical to the Gel Coat Sanding Test Method 1 with the exception that an acrylic sheet (“Acrylic Plastic” sheet from Seelye-Eiler Plastics, Bloomington, Minn.) was substituted for the fiberglass panel.
Examples 66 and 67 were evaluated to determine the efficacy of an all paper dust collection device construction with and without an internal paper sleeve.
Example 66 was a commercial paper dust bag (3M Vacuum Bag Insert “20338”, obtained from 3M, Saint Paul, Minn.) which comprised one outer paper layer (FM11) and one inner thin highly porous (tissue-like) paper layer (FM12) that was reduced in dimensions to make it comparably sized to the previous examples. A commercial bag was modified by reducing the bag width to 5 inches (12.7 cm) by securing the existing side pleats with staples to close off the bag's extra volume. The length of the bag was reduced to 12 inches (30.48 cm) by securing the bag with staples to close off the extra volume just above the cardboard mounting collar and at a 12-inch length below the top line of staples.
Example 67 was identical to Example 66 with the exception that the bag was modified to include a sleeve constructed from a 8 inch wide×8.5 inch long (20.3 cm×21.6 cm) piece of identical FM11 paper filter bag material that was folded in half and secured with staples to create a 4 in (10.2 cm) diameter×8.5 in (21.6 cm) long sleeve. One end of the sleeve was fitted to the end of the dust transport tube. The other end of the sleeve was left open. The relative dust capturing performance of Examples 66 and 67 were measured using the Acrylic Coat Sanding Test. The results are shown in Table 8.
The pressure drop of the sleeve materials for Examples 10-67 were tested in accordance with the Pressure Drop Measurement Test. The thickness of the sleeve materials were tested according to ASTM D5736-95. Pleated materials were tested prior to pleating as flat samples. Results of the testing are present in Table 9.
Referring now to
Referring now to
Referring to Table 8, the life of a paper bag dust collection device was significantly increased by including a paper sleeve inside the paper bag and leaving a gap on at least one end of the sleeve. Specifically, the amount of dust collected by the all paper dust collection device having a sleeve was 2.5 times the control bag and the life to a 70% dust collection efficiency level was increased 1.8 times the control bag.
Other modifications and variations to the present invention may be practiced by those of ordinary skill in the art, without departing from the spirit and scope of the present invention, which is more particularly set forth in the appended claims. It is understood that aspects of the various embodiments may be interchanged in whole or part or combined with other aspects of the various embodiments. All cited references, patents, or patent applications in the above application for letters patent are herein incorporated by reference in a consistent manner. In the event of inconsistencies or contradictions between the incorporated references and this application, the information in the preceding description shall control. The preceding description in order to enable one of ordinary skill in the art to practice the claimed invention is not to be construed as limiting the scope of the invention, which is defined by the claims and all equivalents thereto.
| Number | Date | Country | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| PCT/US2008/088093 | Dec 2008 | WO | international |
| Filing Document | Filing Date | Country | Kind | 371c Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PCT/US2009/043964 | 5/14/2009 | WO | 00 | 6/23/2010 |
| Publishing Document | Publishing Date | Country | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| WO2010/074774 | 7/1/2010 | WO | A |
| Number | Name | Date | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2804166 | Beede et al. | Aug 1957 | A |
| 3676986 | Reiling | Jul 1972 | A |
| 3938283 | Keith, Jr. | Feb 1976 | A |
| 4215682 | Kubik et al. | Aug 1980 | A |
| RE30782 | Van Turnhout | Oct 1981 | E |
| 4352684 | Amberkar | Oct 1982 | A |
| 4375718 | Wadsworth et al. | Mar 1983 | A |
| 4588537 | Klaase et al. | May 1986 | A |
| 4592815 | Nakao | Jun 1986 | A |
| 4675032 | Genovese et al. | Jun 1987 | A |
| 4798850 | Brown | Jan 1989 | A |
| 4844967 | Goralski et al. | Jul 1989 | A |
| 4917942 | Winters | Apr 1990 | A |
| 5035239 | Edwards | Jul 1991 | A |
| 5074997 | Riley et al. | Dec 1991 | A |
| 5230800 | Nelson | Jul 1993 | A |
| 5240484 | Genovese et al. | Aug 1993 | A |
| 5496507 | Angadjivand et al. | Mar 1996 | A |
| 5507847 | George | Apr 1996 | A |
| 5522908 | Frey | Jun 1996 | A |
| 5647881 | Zhang et al. | Jul 1997 | A |
| 5792242 | Haskett | Aug 1998 | A |
| 5908598 | Rousseau et al. | Jun 1999 | A |
| 6156086 | Zhang | Dec 2000 | A |
| 6171369 | Schultink et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
| 6183536 | Schultink et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
| 6251154 | van Rossen | Jun 2001 | B1 |
| 6279570 | Mittelstadt et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
| 6397458 | Jones et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
| 6398847 | Jones et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
| 6409806 | Jones et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
| 6471751 | Semanderes et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
| 6514131 | Reich et al. | Feb 2003 | B1 |
| 6514325 | Cox et al. | Feb 2003 | B2 |
| 6562112 | Jones et al. | May 2003 | B2 |
| 6669761 | Schultheiss et al. | Dec 2003 | B2 |
| 6673136 | Gillingham | Jan 2004 | B2 |
| 6923182 | Angadjivand et al. | Aug 2005 | B2 |
| 6966939 | Rammig | Nov 2005 | B2 |
| 6988293 | Ritter | Jan 2006 | B2 |
| 8070862 | Woo et al. | Dec 2011 | B2 |
| 20020031992 | Clowers | Mar 2002 | A1 |
| 20030134515 | David et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
| 20040187449 | Witter | Sep 2004 | A1 |
| 20040250518 | Kao | Dec 2004 | A1 |
| 20040255783 | Graham | Dec 2004 | A1 |
| 20050037699 | Park | Feb 2005 | A1 |
| 20060150590 | Kramer | Jul 2006 | A1 |
| 20070066197 | Woo et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
| 20070066198 | Rambosek et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
| 20070066199 | Woo et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
| 20070251198 | Witter | Nov 2007 | A1 |
| 20100285728 | Woo | Nov 2010 | A1 |
| Number | Date | Country |
|---|---|---|
| 46669 | Mar 1889 | DE |
| 102 51 564 | May 2004 | DE |
| 1 285 727 | Feb 2003 | EP |
| 1 462 179 | Oct 2004 | EP |
| 1 477 273 | Nov 2004 | EP |
| 1 506 840 | Feb 2005 | EP |
| 2 402 903 | Dec 2004 | GB |
| 59228920 | Dec 1984 | JP |
| 2001-179627 | Jul 2001 | JP |
| 2003-231058 | Aug 2003 | JP |
| WO 9505232 | Feb 1995 | WO |
| WO 9505501 | Feb 1995 | WO |
| WO 2008033972 | Mar 2008 | WO |
| Entry |
|---|
| ASTM D 257-93. |
| ASTM D 5736-95 (Reapproved 2001). |
| ASTM D 737-04 (Reapproved 2008). |
| Wente, V. A. et al., “Manufacture of Superfine Organic Fibers”, Report No. 4364 of the Naval Reserach Laboratories, published May 25, 1954. |
| Wente, V. A., “Superfine Thermoplastic Fibers”, Industrial Engineering Chemistry, vol. 48, pp. 1342 et seq. (1956). |
| Product Catalog Item, “3M™ High Efficiency Filter AS/140/25”, 3M Company, St. Paul, Minnesota, USA, [retrieved from the internet on Aug. 21, 2008] URL <http://solutions.3m.com/wps/portal/3M/en—US/Health/Safety/Products/Catalog/?PC—7—RJH9U5230GE3E>. |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20110239599 A1 | Oct 2011 | US |
