The present technology is directed to filters for use in electronic enclosures. In particular, the technology is directed to filters for removing contaminants circulating within the interior of an electronic enclosure.
Contaminants within an electronic enclosure, such as a hard disk drive enclosure, can reduce the efficiency and longevity of the components within the enclosure. Contaminants can include chemicals and particulates, and can enter the hard drive enclosure from external sources, or be generated within the enclosure during manufacture or use. The contaminants can gradually damage the drive, resulting in deterioration of drive performance and even complete failure of the drive. Consequently, data storage systems such as hard disk drives typically have one or more filters capable of removing or preventing entry of particulate and/or chemical contaminants in the air within the disk drive enclosure. One type of such filter is a recirculation filter, which is generally placed such that it can filter out contaminants from the path of airflow caused by rotation of one or more disks within the disk drive. Although existing recirculation filters can remove many contaminants, a need exists for improved performance at removing certain contaminants, in particular, chemical contaminants.
The current technology will be more fully explained with reference to the following drawings.
While principles of the current technology are amenable to various modifications and alternative forms, specifics thereof have been shown by way of example in the drawings and will be described in detail. It should be understood, however, that the intention is not to limit the currently-described technology to the particular embodiments described. On the contrary, the intention is to cover all modifications, equivalents, and alternatives falling within the spirit and scope of the disclosure and claims.
Various filtering systems are known that are used to reduce or remove contaminants from disk drive assemblies, as well as other electronic enclosures. In particular, recirculation filters are often used to reduce or remove particulate and/or chemical contaminants that have entered a disk drive enclosure or been generated during use of the disk drive. A typical recirculation filter has a filter element that is positioned in the path of air currents induced by disk rotation such that contaminants present in the air current are subject to filtration.
In an example embodiment, the filter assembly has a filter structure with first sheet of filter media and a second sheet of filter media bonded to each other about their respective perimeter regions, and an adsorbent material disposed between the layers of filter media.
Generally, a support layer such as a permeable scrim material can form at least a portion of the filter structure. A filter media is disposed within the internal recess of the filter assembly, the filter media at least partially covering the support layer. In an example embodiment the filter media will overlay all or most of the support layer. In another example embodiment the support layer is embedded within the filter media. In some embodiments the filter media and the support layer are combined together to form a layer of filter media before production of the filter assembly (such as, for example, by lamination, heat bonding, or light calendaring) and subsequently formed into a media structure that creates at least a portion of the filter assembly.
In some embodiments, the support layer is a permeable scrim material that comprises a woven or non-woven material, such as polypropylene fibers. The support layer can have, for example, a permeability of between about 100 ft./min. at 0.5 inches of water and about 800 ft./min. at 0.5 inches of water in some embodiments. In some embodiments the support layer has a permeability of about 250 ft./min. at 0.5 inches of water and about 600 ft./min. at 0.5 inches of water. In yet other implementations the support layer has a permeability of about 300 ft./min. at 0.5 inches of water and about 500 ft./min at 0.5 inches of water, It will be understood that suitable support layer material can have, for example, a permeability of more than 100 ft./min. at 0.5 inches of water; more than 250 ft./min. at 0.5 inches of water; or more than 300 ft./min. at 0.5 inches of water. Suitable support layer material can have, for example, a permeability of less than about 800 ft./min. at 0.5 inches of water in some embodiments; less than 600 ft./min. at 0.5 inches of water in some embodiments; or less than 500 ft./min. at 0.5 inches of water in some embodiments.
The filter media consistent with the technology disclosed herein can be electrostatic in nature. In a variety of embodiments the filter media has a Figure of Merit greater than about 60. The Figure of Merit can be calculated to evaluate the ability of a filter or filter medium to provide sufficient clarification of a stream in various filtration environments including, relevant to the present disclosure, electronics housings. The Figure of Merit is calculated based upon a fractional efficiency determined for particles having a size of 0.3 μm in an air flow having a velocity of 10.5 ft./min. and a Frazier permeability at 0.5 inches H2O.
The Figure of Merit, discussed more fully hereinafter, is similar to another property called Figure of Merit Prime (FOM′). FOM′ is defined as the fractional efficiency of a medium divided by its resistance. The equation describing the Figure of Merit Prime is:
The fractional efficiency is the fraction or percentage of particles of a specified size which are removed from air passing through the medium at a specified air flow velocity. Applicants have found it convenient to determine fractional efficiency based upon a particle size of 0.3 μm and an airflow velocity of 10.5 ft./min. It should be understood that the particle size of 0.3 μm actually reflects a distribution of particles of between 0.3 and 0.4 μm.
The resistance is the slope of the pressure drop of the filter as a function of the air flow velocity. For convenience, the units chosen are inches of water for pressure drop and feet per minute for air flow velocity. The units for resistance are then inches MO/ft./min.
Since the resistance for a given filter medium can be difficult to obtain, the Frazier permeability is used as a convenient substitute. The Frazier permeability is the linear air flow velocity through a medium at a half inch of water pressure (0.5″ H2O). The Figure of Merit (FOM) is:
FOM=fractional efficiency×2×Frazier permeability
The Frazier permeability is calculated from measurements of pressure drop (ΔP) in units of inches of water (″ H2O) at a specified airflow velocity or volumetric flow rate. The Frazier permeability is estimated by multiplying 0.5 times the airflow velocity and dividing by the pressure drop. It should be appreciated that the volumetric flow rate can be converted to an air flow velocity by dividing by the area of the medium, and that the air flow velocity should be converted to feet per minute (ft./min.).
For predicting the FOM of a combination of layers that have not yet been assembled as a filter media, the fractional efficiency can be calculated as the total penetration of the individual layers. The total Frazier permeability of the combination of layers is the reciprocal of the sum of the reciprocals of the Frazier permeabilities of each individual layer. The total FOM is then the total penetration multiplied by the total Frazier permeability multiplied by 2.
For recirculation filters, it can be desirable to provide a FOM that is as high as possible. A high FOM corresponds with high permeability, which is important for a filter placed in a stream of circulating air. Recirculation filters consistent with the technology disclosed herein have a FOM value of at least about 60, and in some embodiments at least about 150. Generally, the FOM can be between about 50 and about 250, or even between about 150 and about 200.
The filter media can contain various fibers, and is optionally a mixed fiber media comprising polypropylene and acrylic fibers. The filter media has, for example, a permeability of between about 250 ft./min. at 0.5 inches of water and about 750 ft./min. at 0.5 inches of water. The filter media can have a filtering efficiency of about 20% to about 99.99% for 0.1 to 0.3 micron particulate contaminants in some embodiments. Suitable filter media can, for example, have a filtering efficiency of greater than 20% for 0.1 to 0.3 micron particulate contaminants; greater than 40% for 0.1 to 0.3 micron particulate contaminants; or greater than 60% for 0.1 to 0.3 micron particulate contaminants. The filter media can have in some example implementations a filtering efficiency of less than 99.99% for 0.1 to 0.3 micron particulate contaminants; less than 80% for 0.1 to 0.3 micron particulate contaminants; or less than 60% for 0.1 to 0.3 micron particulate contaminants.
In a variety of embodiments, the filtration media consistent with the technology closed herein has electrostatic fibers. The term “electrostatic fibers,” as used herein, refers to fibers that contain an electric charge. One advantage of including electrostatic fibers in the filter assembly 200 is that the filter is not only able to mechanically trap contaminants, but is also able to exert an electrostatic force on contaminants that contain electric charges, thereby increasing the amount of contaminants that are removed from the airstream. The electrostatic media can be triboelectric media, electret media, or any other media that can be charged, or that depends on charging as the main mechanism for particle removal. In example embodiments, the electrostatic media has triboelectric fibers. Triboelectric fibers are known and can be formed, for example, using a mixture of (1) polyolefin fibers such as polyethylene, polypropylene or ethylene and propylene copolymers, with (2) fibers of another polymer, for example, fibers containing hydrocarbon functions substituted by halogen atoms, such as chlorine or polyacrylonitrile fibers. In general, the polyolefin fibers and the other polymer fibers are included in the electrostatic media at a weight ratio between about 60:40 or about 20:80 or about 30:70.
Now, in reference to the drawings,
A perimeter region of the first sheet 206 is welded with a perimeter region of the second sheet 204 around the carbon element 202, resulting in a clearance 208. The clearance 208 describes a portion of the filter between the weld 210 and the carbon element 202. In the design shown in
The filter assembly 300 is generally configured to filter particles and chemical contaminants from air. In a variety of embodiments the filter assembly 300 is configured to be positioned in an electronics enclosure to filter the air therein. In some embodiments the filter assembly 300 is configured to be positioned in a disk drive to filter the air within the disk drive. Other uses for the filter assembly will be appreciated.
In a variety of embodiments, the first sheet 304 and the second sheet 306 are generally layers of filter media that are consistent with the types of filter media already described herein. The first sheet 304 and the second sheet 306 can be configured to filter particulates from the air. In a variety of embodiments, the first sheet 304 can generally be constructed of a first layer of filter material having a first support layer coupled thereto. Similarly, the second sheet 306 can generally be constructed of a second layer of filter material having a second support layer coupled thereto. The first support layer and the second support layer can be consistent with support layers already described herein, and in at least one embodiment, the first support layer and the second support layer are constructed of the same material. It will generally be understood that any number of layers can be coupled to form the first sheet 304 and the second sheet 306 so long as the desired filter parameters are achieved based on the context of the filter, such as permeability, efficiency, FOM, pressure drop, etc.
In some embodiments, the first sheet 304, the second sheet 306, or both sheets 304, 306 are at least partially constructed of electrostatic fibers, previously discussed. In at least one embodiment, the second sheet 306 is the same material as the first sheet 304. In another embodiment, the first sheet 304 and the second sheet 306 are different materials. For example, in one embodiment, the second sheet 306 can be a screen layer that is welded, fused or otherwise bonded to the first sheet 304. In some such embodiments, the first sheet 304 can have an electrostatic filter media layer and a support layer that are welded together, and the screen layer can be welded to the layer of filter media in the rim region 310. The screen layer can generally allow air to pass through the screen layer and into the cavity 312 of the filter assembly 300. The screen layer can additionally provide support, such as to aid the filter assembly 300 in keeping a desired configuration.
In the current embodiment, the first sheet 304 at least partially defines the shape of the cavity 312. The cavity 312 can be substantially self-supporting in at least one example embodiment, but is not substantially self-supporting in another example embodiment. The term “substantially self-supporting” is used to mean that the first sheet 304 has the ability to retain the existence of the cavity 312 against atmospheric gravity. In the current embodiment, the second sheet 306 is substantially planar, meaning that the structure of the second sheet 306 itself does not define a cavity; rather, the structure of the second sheet 306 encloses the cavity defined by the first sheet of filter media 304.
The adsorbent 302 can be disposed between the first sheet 304 and the second sheet 306 within the cavity 312. The adsorbent 302 is generally configured to adsorb chemical contaminants from the air within the environment of the filter assembly 300. The adsorbent material can be a physisorbent or chemisorbent material, such as, for example, a desiccant (i.e., a material that adsorbs or absorbs water or water vapor) or a material that adsorbs or absorbs volatile organic compounds, acid gas, or both. Suitable adsorbent materials include, for example, activated carbon, activated alumina, molecular sieves, silica gels, potassium permanganate, calcium carbonate, potassium carbonate, sodium carbonate, calcium sulfate, or mixtures thereof. The adsorbent 302 is generally a plurality of adsorbent beads. In a variety of embodiments, the adsorbent 302 is a plurality of activated carbon beads. The adsorbent beads can range in size from about 0.2 mm to about 1.1 mm, 0.4 mm to about 1.0 mm, and about 0.3 mm to about 0.9 mm. In one embodiment the adsorbent beads will have an average size of about 0.3 mm to about 0.8 mm, or about 0.6 mm.
In some embodiments a substantial portion of the plurality of adsorbent beads are unbonded, meaning that a substantial portion of the adsorbent beads are unbonded to each other and are unbonded to any other element in the filter assembly. In at least one embodiment, each of the plurality of adsorbent beads are completely unbonded. By a “substantial portion” it is meant that at least 70%, 80%, 90%, 95% or even 98% of the adsorbent beads are unbonded. Unbonded beads have the relative advantages of increasing the available surface area for adsorption, increasing the permeability of the filter itself, and can having low dusting, for example. A clearance 308 defined by the filter assembly 300 as shown in
The filter constructions consistent with the technology disclosed herein allow for a relative increase in the amount of adsorbent material that can be contained in the filter (such as activated carbon) while preserving a relatively compact size, and while improving filter performance. In particular, in certain embodiments, the filters described herein can result in increases in activated carbon quantity while substantially preserving airflow through the filter, thereby allowing for lower contaminant levels within an enclosure and maintenance of those lower concentration levels for an extended time period.
Test Results
In an example filter construction consistent with the comparative example shown in
A second example recirculation filter was made in accordance with the embodiment depicted in
As described above, the adsorbent face area is used herein as a measurement of the area of the filter containing adsorbent measured from a flow face of the recirculation filter. The carbon face area of the second example recirculation filter was measured using a VHX-1000 digital microscope from Keyence Corporation based in Itasca, Ill., having a Keyence VH-Z20R lens. A 60 W soft white incandescent light bulb was used as a backlight.
In particular, the microscope lens was positioned 90 degrees to the microscope base, facing a stage. The bulb was positioned 4.5 inches away from the microscope lens and pointed directly into the microscope lens. The filter was secured along one perimeter edge to the stage to stand vertically between the microscope lens and the bulb, one inch from the microscope. One face of the filter was positioned towards the microscope lens. The microscope was set to 20× magnification. No lighting options from the microscope were used. The incandescent bulb was illuminated and the brightness adjustment dial on the VHX-1000 console was set to allow the appropriate amount of light into the lens such that the perimeter of the filter became indistinguishable from the backlight, which amounted to approximately 75% of the maximum brightness setting. A free-form shape tool in the software of the VHX-1000 was used to calculate the adsorbent face area. A free-form shape was used to outline the perimeter of the carbon area, and the individual measurement option within the software was selected from the measurement menu to automatically calculate the area within the outlined perimeter.
Table 1, below, compares aspects of the first recirculation filter with the second recirculation filter example, disclosed above:
The airflow restriction through the second recirculation filter is generally similar or less than the airflow restriction through the first recirculation filter. On one hand, the added mass of carbon in the second recirculation filter generally slightly increased the airflow restriction compared to the first recirculation filter; however, on the other hand, the increase of filtering area in the second recirculation filter can contribute to a reduction in the airflow restriction. Further, the elimination of the scrim adhered to the carbon beads (used in the first recirculation filter) can contribute to a relative decrease in airflow restriction in the second recirculation filter. The net airflow restriction through the second recirculation filter can be less than or approximately equal to the airflow restriction through first recirculation filter. The airflow restrictions through recirculation filters can be closely related to particle clean-up (PCU), therefore, in some implementations there is little to no reduction in particle cleanup for second recirculation filter with the increased amount of carbon, and no increase in airflow restriction.
The two example recirculation filters were subjected to PCU testing conducted to compare the average PCU time T90 for each filter. The PCU performance can be calculated by running a particle cleanup test using a continuous particle introduction test method. This method provides a continuous flow of air with a controlled concentration of particles into a disk drive through an injection port and running the disk drive. Air is sampled from the drive through a sample port to get a concentration difference between the unfiltered air particle content and the filtered air particle content. The sample port used to sample the filtered air is slightly upstream of the filter being tested and the injection port is positioned approximately on the opposite side of the spindle of the rotating disk from the sample port. In use, a typical disk drive is sealed off from the outside environment with the exception of a breather port that allows for pressure equalization between the disk drive and the environment. For the currently described PCU test, however, the disk drive breather port is sealed off so that the airflow drawn into the drive is substantially equal to the flow being drawn out of the drive through the sample port by a particle counter.
The PCU test used 0.1μ polystyrene latex spheres (PSL) provided by Thermo Fischer Scientific Inc., based in Minneapolis, Minn., which are suspended in water and then atomized using a TSI 3076 Aerosol Generator from TSI, Inc. based in Shoreview, Minn. The aerosol stream is then dried using a diffusion dryer and then passed through a TSI 3012A Aerosol Neutralizer (also from TSI, Inc.). Since the output from the atomizer is greater than that necessary for the sample flow of the test, a tee pipe is used to exhaust the bulk of the airflow. A small portion of the airflow, however, is drawn into a disk drive through the injection port at flow rate Q. The particle counter used for this test is an Ultra-High Sensitivity Aerosol Spectrometer (UHSAS) manufactured by Droplet Measurement Technologies based in Boulder, Colo.
Since particles inside the disk drive can also be captured by other surfaces besides the filter, the drive is first tested without a filter to get baseline PCU measurements. Then, when testing the filter of-interest, the baseline can be factored in so that the PCU contribution of the filter can be calculated by the following equation:
Where τf=Filter cleanup time constant (min),
V=Drive Volume (cm3),
Q=Sample Flow Rate (cm3/min),
Ca(w_filter)=Particle concentration into the drive with the filter (particles/cm3),
Css(w_filter)=Particle concentration steady state from the drive with the filter (particles/cm3),
Ca(w/o_filter)=Particle concentration into the drive without filter (particles/cm3), and
Css(w/o_filter)=Particle concentration steady state from the drive without filter (particles/cm3).
The above formula provides the filter cleanup time constant τf, which estimates the time to reach a 63.2% reduction from the initial particle concentration in the air. However, it has become standard practice to report the time to reach 90% reduction in particle concentration, which is equal to 2.3 time constants. It is also standard practice to report the time in seconds, so the T90 cleanup time is calculated by the following equation:
T90=τf×60×2.3
The T90 results in Table 1 were tested using a 2.5″ drive with a volume of 22 cm3. The disk drive operates three stacked disks at 10,000 RPM. The flow rate Q was 30 cm3/min and the target input concentration (Ca(w_filter) and Ca(w/o_filter)) was 83 particles/cm3. As reflected in Table 1, the second example recirculation filter had slightly improved filter cleanup time T90 than the first example recirculation filter by about 1%. Various embodiments of filters consistent with the technology disclosed herein will have a PCU time T90 that is no more than 15% greater than a similarly-sized filter element having an adsorbent element consistent with that of the first example recirculation filter, where the term “similarly-sized” is defined as a filter element having an equivalently-sized active filter area.
The two example recirculation filters were also subjected to a chemical clean-up test (CCU). In each CCU test, the tested recirculation filter was positioned in the same type of disk drive as that used in the PCU testing, described above. A flow of 30 cc/min of nitrogen with 140 ppm of trimethyl pentane (TMP) was injected into the drive through an injection port in the cover of the disk drive. Air samples were drawn from the drive through a 3 mm sampling port in the drive cover that was about 5 mm upstream of the recirculation filter and on the outer diameter of the disk. “Upstream” of the recirculation filter is considered to be opposite of the direction of disk rotation (since spinning the disk is the main driver of airflow within the drive). The injection port was positioned oppositely to the sampling port with respect to the disk drive housing.
A TMP mixed standard at 525 PPM is used that consists of TMP mixed with nitrogen in a high pressure gas tank and is available through specialty gas suppliers like Praxair. The TMP standard is run through a pressure regulator and then run into a Mass Flow Controller (MFC) by Sierra Instruments based in Monterey, Calif. to regulate the mass flow to the equivalent of 8 cc/min at standard conditions of 22.1 Celsius and 1 Atm. A second TMP free flow of nitrogen is run through a regulator and MFC to provide a mass flow equivalent to 22 cc/min at standard conditions and combined with the first flow to give a diluted flow of 30 cc/min at 140 PPM.
The TMP/nitrogen flow is first run through a switching valve to a Gas Chromatograph (GC) with the column removed, which is equipped with a Flame Ionization Detector (FID) supplied by Shimadzu Corporation based in Kyoto, Japan. The voltage output from the FID is recorded at the 140 PPM input concentration and this is used to generate a linear correlation of TMP concentration to voltage. The switching valve then directs the TMP/nitrogen flow into the injection port and the output flow from the sampling port is directed to the GC/FID. Preceding data collection, the TMP/nitrogen is run through the drive for 10 minutes before running the disk drive to allow for the gas flow to stabilize and to purge the drive and hose lines. The disk drive is then turned on to spin up the disks and the TMP concentration is measured at particular time intervals once the disks are spinning at full speed.
The CCU results of the two example filters tested are shown in
Some filters consistent with the technology disclosed herein have a relatively increased density of adsorbent over the adsorbent face area compared to previous technologies. For example, in some embodiments recirculation filters consistent with the technology disclosed herein have an adsorbent density of greater than 600 g/m2 over the adsorbent face area. In some other embodiments, recirculation filters consistent with the technology disclosed herein have an adsorbent density of greater than 650 g/m2 or even greater than 700 g/m2 over the adsorbent face area. In addition, some filters consistent with the technology disclosed herein have a relatively increased density of adsorbent over the active filter face area compared to previous technologies. For example, in some embodiments recirculation filters consistent with the technology disclosed herein have an adsorbent density of greater than 250 g/m2 over the active filter face area. In some other embodiments, recirculation filters consistent with the technology disclosed herein have an adsorbent density of greater than 300 g/m2, 350 g/m2, 400 g/m2, or even greater than 450 g/m2 over the active filter face area. For purposes of calculating the adsorbent density over the carbon face area or active filter area, the mass of scrims, binders, adhesives, and other substances are excluded from the mass of the adsorbent. As described above, in various embodiments the adsorbent is a plurality of activated carbon beads.
A first sheet of filter media 1502 can be placed between the first mating structure 1504 and a second mating structure 1507 (shown in
The second mating structure 1507 can be translated, such that it is at least partially disposed within the cavity 1506 and the first sheet of filter media 1502 is compressed between the first mating structure 1504 and the second mating structure 1507. Upon compression between the first mating structure 1504 and the second mating structure 1507, the filter media 1502 will generally define and retain, under atmospheric gravitational forces and absent opposing external forces, a cavity structure 1510 and a rim region 1511 about the perimeter of the cavity structure 1510 similar to the first and second mating structures 1504, 1507 (shown in
With the second mating structure 1507 removed from the cavity 1506, an adsorbent 1512 can be disposed within the cavity structure 1510 (shown in
The eventual perimeter region of a second sheet of filter media 1114 is coupled to the rim region 1511 of the first sheet of filter media 1502 to contain the adsorbent beads 1512, between the first sheet of filter media 1502 and second sheet of filter media 1114 (
In some embodiments it can be desirable to bond a portion of the perimeter region of the first sheet of filter media with a portion of the perimeter region of the second sheet of filter media and insert substantially unbonded adsorbent beads in the cavity defined among the first sheet of filter media, the second sheet of filter media, and the bonded portion of the perimeter regions of the first sheet and second sheet. Subsequent to insertion of the adsorbent beads, the remaining unbonded perimeter regions of each of the first sheet of filter media and the second sheet of filter media can be bonded to form a cohesive rim region about the filter.
In one alternate embodiment, the first sheet of filter media and the second sheet of filter media can be defined by a single sheet of filter media, and the method of forming a filter element can have a step of folding the second sheet of filter media relative to the first sheet of filter media to define a fold along one edge of the perimeter region of the resulting filter element. In such a method the unbonded portions of the perimeter regions of the first and second sheets of filter media can be bonded as described herein to form a rim region that extends around at least a portion of the perimeter of the resulting filter element. In some other embodiments it can be desirable to melt material of the first and/or second sheets of filter media together along the fold to increase rigidity. In such embodiments the rim region can extend about the entire perimeter of the resulting filter element. Other embodiments are also contemplated.
The above specification provides a complete description of the manufacture and use of the currently-described technology. Since many embodiments can be made without departing from the spirit and scope of the currently described technology, such technology resides in the claims hereinafter appended.
This application is a continuation application of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 15/118,410, filed Aug. 11, 2016, which is the § 371 U.S. National Stage of PCT International Patent Application No. PCT/US2015/015591, filed Feb. 12, 2015 in the name of DONALDSON COMPANY, INC., a U.S. national corporation, applicant for the designation of all countries and Stanley B. Miller, III, a U.S. Citizen; Allen N. Nicklay, a U.S. Citizen; Christopher J. Fischer, a U.S. Citizen; and Daniel L. Tuma, a U.S. Citizen, inventors only for all designated states, and claims priority to U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 61/939,683, filed Feb. 13, 2014, the contents of which are herein incorporated by reference in their entireties.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4418369 | Applequist et al. | Nov 1983 | A |
4488193 | Davis et al. | Dec 1984 | A |
4581668 | Campbell | Apr 1986 | A |
4594626 | Frangesh | Jun 1986 | A |
4725904 | Dalziel | Feb 1988 | A |
4809102 | Hatchett et al. | Feb 1989 | A |
4830643 | Sassa et al. | May 1989 | A |
4857087 | Bolton et al. | Aug 1989 | A |
5025337 | Brooks | Jun 1991 | A |
5030260 | Beck et al. | Jul 1991 | A |
5269824 | Takita et al. | Dec 1993 | A |
5302354 | Watvedt et al. | Apr 1994 | A |
5406431 | Beecroft | Apr 1995 | A |
5417743 | Dauber | May 1995 | A |
5538545 | Dauber et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
5539595 | Beck et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
5593482 | Dauber et al. | Jan 1997 | A |
5594600 | Bruner et al. | Jan 1997 | A |
5615070 | Bordes | Mar 1997 | A |
5696649 | Boutaghou | Dec 1997 | A |
5739980 | Brooks | Apr 1998 | A |
5754365 | Beck et al. | May 1998 | A |
5772883 | Rothman | Jun 1998 | A |
5869009 | Bellefeuille et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
5872678 | Boigenzahn et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
5872679 | Boigenzahn et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
5876487 | Dahlgren et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
5977618 | Mathiew et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5997618 | Schneider et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6077335 | Schneider et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
6143058 | Dalhgren et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
6200368 | Guerin | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6208484 | Voights | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6217637 | Toney et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6238467 | Azarian et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6285524 | Boigenzahn et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6296691 | Gidumal | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6395073 | Dauber | May 2002 | B1 |
6475269 | Turner | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6475270 | Graeve | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6557240 | Voights | May 2003 | B1 |
6831830 | Bruner et al. | Dec 2004 | B2 |
6876514 | Little | Apr 2005 | B1 |
6926761 | Johnson et al. | Aug 2005 | B2 |
6936093 | Isogawa et al. | Aug 2005 | B2 |
7012782 | Albrecht et al. | Mar 2006 | B2 |
7019941 | Yoo | Mar 2006 | B2 |
7095584 | Logan | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7113402 | Rutledge et al. | Sep 2006 | B2 |
7166142 | Tuma et al. | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7291208 | Dauber et al. | Nov 2007 | B2 |
7295398 | McMaster et al. | Nov 2007 | B2 |
7306659 | Gorton et al. | Dec 2007 | B2 |
7312950 | Voights et al. | Dec 2007 | B2 |
7318859 | Ball et al. | Jan 2008 | B2 |
7382572 | Turner et al. | Jun 2008 | B1 |
7388731 | Little et al. | Jun 2008 | B1 |
7404836 | Garikipati et al. | Jul 2008 | B2 |
7463454 | Mastromatteo et al. | Dec 2008 | B2 |
7525802 | Yu et al. | Apr 2009 | B2 |
7569089 | Avina | Aug 2009 | B2 |
7573672 | Han et al. | Aug 2009 | B2 |
7591868 | Johnson | Sep 2009 | B2 |
7601192 | Boulay et al. | Oct 2009 | B2 |
7652843 | Albrecht et al. | Jan 2010 | B2 |
7667924 | Han et al. | Feb 2010 | B2 |
7686871 | Oh et al. | Mar 2010 | B2 |
7727297 | Dauber et al. | Jun 2010 | B2 |
8016917 | Avina | Sep 2011 | B2 |
8033304 | Tuma | Oct 2011 | B2 |
8102619 | Chan et al. | Jan 2012 | B2 |
8111486 | Suh et al. | Feb 2012 | B2 |
8116029 | Miller, III | Feb 2012 | B2 |
8263214 | Kalayci et al. | Sep 2012 | B2 |
8303806 | Mohseni et al. | Nov 2012 | B2 |
8585793 | Bishop et al. | Nov 2013 | B2 |
8638524 | Brown | Jan 2014 | B2 |
8864884 | Tuma | Oct 2014 | B2 |
8885291 | Miller et al. | Nov 2014 | B2 |
9153291 | Miller et al. | Oct 2015 | B2 |
20030218828 | Hong et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20040159603 | Boulnois et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040168575 | Isogawa et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040231518 | Johnson et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
20040255783 | Graham et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20040255785 | Koslow | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20050047001 | Logan | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050139078 | Tuma et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050185327 | Voights et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20060081128 | Ball | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060191249 | Gogins et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060272507 | Johnson | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20070103811 | Olszewski | May 2007 | A1 |
20070157588 | Dauber | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070261557 | Gadkaree | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070283809 | Boulay et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
20080226534 | Gidumal et al. | Sep 2008 | A1 |
20080262213 | Wu et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080314005 | Sauer | Dec 2008 | A1 |
20090090245 | Olszewski | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090183475 | Dauber et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20120060693 | Sasaki | Mar 2012 | A1 |
20120118158 | Tuma et al. | May 2012 | A1 |
20120172216 | Böhringer et al. | Jul 2012 | A1 |
20130088795 | Brown | Apr 2013 | A1 |
20140043711 | Miller et al. | Feb 2014 | A1 |
20150033824 | Hammarlund et al. | Feb 2015 | A1 |
20150082985 | Miller et al. | Mar 2015 | A1 |
20150196924 | Miller et al. | Jul 2015 | A1 |
20160251106 | Kuziw | Sep 2016 | A1 |
20170333820 | Tuma | Nov 2017 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
101421014 | Apr 2009 | CN |
101460252 | Jun 2009 | CN |
101668587 | Mar 2010 | CN |
101952008 | Jan 2011 | CN |
104769676 | Jul 2015 | CN |
0123130 | Oct 1984 | EP |
0263932 | Apr 1988 | EP |
0391555 | Oct 1990 | EP |
0692788 | Jan 1996 | EP |
0744747 | Nov 1996 | EP |
1218090 | Jul 2002 | EP |
1222661 | Jul 2002 | EP |
2024495 | Jan 1980 | GB |
2202076 | Sep 1988 | GB |
2275811 | Sep 1994 | GB |
2006341193 | Dec 2006 | JP |
2015531141 | Oct 2008 | JP |
1020080083884 | Sep 2008 | KR |
WO 9114496 | Oct 1991 | WO |
WO 9519831 | Jul 1995 | WO |
WO 9614136 | May 1996 | WO |
WO 9841989 | Sep 1998 | WO |
WO 9904884 | Feb 1999 | WO |
WO 0122421 | Mar 2001 | WO |
WO 0122422 | Mar 2001 | WO |
WO 0114041 | Sep 2001 | WO |
WO 2004077895 | Sep 2004 | WO |
WO 2004105038 | Dec 2004 | WO |
WO 2006020932 | Feb 2006 | WO |
WO 2006046996 | May 2006 | WO |
WO 2006050562 | May 2006 | WO |
WO 2006053046 | May 2006 | WO |
WO 2006084106 | Aug 2006 | WO |
WO 2006044521 | Dec 2006 | WO |
WO 2007005084 | Jan 2007 | WO |
WO 2007081828 | Jul 2007 | WO |
WO 2007095335 | Aug 2007 | WO |
WO 2007145774 | Apr 2008 | WO |
WO 2008112250 | Sep 2008 | WO |
WO 2008113021 | Sep 2008 | WO |
WO 2009094138 | Oct 2009 | WO |
WO 2010036351 | Apr 2010 | WO |
WO 2010091388 | Aug 2010 | WO |
WO 2014026175 | Feb 2014 | WO |
WO 2015123406 | Aug 2015 | WO |
WO 2016069838 | May 2016 | WO |
Entry |
---|
“Adsorbent Breather Assembly (ABA) Product Guidelines & Specifications,” Donaldson Company 2003, 1 page. |
“Adsorbent Breather Filter (ABF) Product Guidelines & Specifications,” Donaldson Company 2003, 1 page. |
“Adsorbent Label Filter (ALF) Product Guidelines & Specifications,” Donaldson Company 2003, 1 page. |
“Adsorbent Pouch Filter (APF) Product Guidelines & Specifications,” Donaldson Company 2003, 1 page. |
“Adsorbent Recirculation Filter (ARF) Product Guidelines & Specifications,” Donaldson Company 2003, 1 page. |
File History for Related U.S. Appl. No. 13/831,458 downloaded Sep. 1, 2016 (1230 pages). |
File History for Related U.S. Appl. No. 14/537,212 downloaded Sep. 1, 2016 (536 pages). |
“Final Office Action,” for U.S. Appl. No. 14/420,829 dated Oct. 18, 2016 (12 pages). |
“Response to Final Office Action,” for U.S. Appl. No. 14/420,829, filed Dec. 6, 2016 (9 pages). |
“Non-Final Office Action,” for U.S. Appl. No. 14/420,829 dated Jan. 5, 2017 (14 pages). |
“Final Office Action,” for U.S. Appl. No. 14/420,829 dated Jun. 27, 2017 (15 pages). |
“Response to Final Office Action,” for U.S. Appl. No. 14/420,829, filed Aug. 25, 2017 (7 pages). |
“First Office Action,” for Chinese Patent Application No. 201380050143.7 dated July 26, 2016 (12 pages) with English translation. |
“Second Office Action,” for Chinese Patent Application No. 201380050143.7 dated Mar. 30, 2017 (22 pages) with English translation. |
“Third Office Action,” for Chinese Patent Application No. 201380050143.7 dated Sep. 5, 2017 (19 pages) with English translation. |
“Final Office Action,” for Chinese Patent Application No. 201380050143.7 dated Feb. 27, 2018 (10 pages) with English translation. |
“First Office Action,” for Chinese Patent Application No. 201580008343.5 dated Feb. 23, 2018 (28 pages) with English translation. |
“International Preliminary Report on Patentability,” For PCT Application No. PCT/US2013/054446 dated Feb. 19, 2015 (13 pages). |
“International Preliminary Report on Patentability,” for PCT/US2015/015991 dated Aug. 25, 2016 (16 pages). |
“International Preliminary Report on Patentability,” for PCT Application No. PCT/US2015/057950 dated May 11, 2017 (10 pages). |
“International Search Report and Written Opinion,” for PCT/US2013/054446 dated Dec. 11, 2013 (17 pages). |
“International Search Report and Written Opinion,” for PCT/US2015/015591 dated Apr. 28, 2015 (19 pages). |
“International Search Report and Written Opinion,” for PCT Application No. PCT/US2015/057950 dated Feb. 3, 2016 (14 pages). |
“Non-Final Office Action” for U.S. Appl. No. 14/420,829 dated May 3, 2016 (19 pages). |
“Search Report,” for Singapore Patent Application No. 11201500951X, prepared Sep. 1, 2015 (3 pages). |
“Written Opinion” for Singapore Patent Application No. 11201500951X, prepared Dec. 18, 2015 (6 pages). |
“Second Written Opinion,” for Singapore Patent Application No. 11201500951X prepared Aug. 4, 2016 (6 pages). |
“Third Written Opinion,” for Singapore Patent Application No. 11201500951X prepared Feb. 8, 2017 (6 pages). |
China Light Industry Press, “Beverage production technology Q&A”, Sep. 1995. No translation available, translation of Notification for Patent Reexamination dated Sep. 1, 2020, in Chinese Application No. 201580057883.2, filed Oct. 29, 2015, included as explanation of relevance. 24 pages. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20200066307 A1 | Feb 2020 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
61939683 | Feb 2014 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 15118410 | US | |
Child | 16667148 | US |