Thread: Cleanspace2

Works ok but find the silicon gets warm around the face on a warm day.

It is a weird system where you exert your self it increases the air into the unit.


My preferance is the positive pressure masks where the air is getting pushed over your face and keeping you cool

These masks are supposed to be effective at keeping dust out of your airways but I have not been able to test one, yet. Testing masks is very difficult as human faces are not static devices, there are many different shapes and move around etc.

if you are worried about wood dust then you should also consider your eyes and your skin which are more likely to be affected by wood dust than your lungs. Once you trigger an allergic reaction to a wood type there are limited opportunities to reverse this and every likelihood of becoming allergic to others. A full face type air mask will help the eyes but no mask will protect all skin.

I know that some folks have financial constraints but even though some folks I know could afford a decent DC I still see some buying an expensive mask first. I think this is the wrong way around. Masks should be used as a final "top up" to woodwork dust problems, after as much attention as possible has been done to grab the dust at source. Once this has been done there is every likelihood that there will be no need for an expensive mask as a lightweight simple elastic strap P2 mask will be sufficient to adequately cover the last base.

Well from what i have read here on the forum the proper way to design a good collection source from machinery is with the Clearvue system along with correctly sized piping that quite a few forumites speak quite highly from. Since im not building such a robust DC system yet i thought i would look for a highly rated breathing apparatus (combined with my dewalt goggles) to "do the job" until the clearvue system is in stock in Aus properly.

From reading various stories from here i have become quite paranoid regarding inhalation of dust specifically invisible dust and would like to protect myself so im looking at different methods to get me by until i can get the Clearvue DC

Originally Posted by delbs

Well from what i have read here on the forum the proper way to design a good collection source from machinery is with the Clearvue system along with correctly sized piping that quite a few forumites speak quite highly from. Since im not building such a robust DC system yet i thought i would look for a highly rated breathing apparatus (combined with my dewalt goggles) to "do the job" until the clearvue system is in stock in Aus properly.From reading various stories from here i have become quite paranoid regarding inhalation of dust specifically invisible dust and would like to protect myself so im looking at different methods to get me by until i can get the Clearvue DC

I am in the process of upgrading my dust system and also reading the great information on this forum. I am going to throw out an idea for you, but I am also looking for Bob's feedback on it. The concept is to give someone a less expensive step into dust collection while providing good health protection. This is not for everyone, but it might help some. Start with a used basic 2hp collector. The unit needs to be placed out side or in a sealed area open to outside -see Bob's unit: https://www.woodworkforums.com/f245/b...70/index9.html . Remove the top filter bag to improve the collection flow since this will help improve the flow and reduce the fall off from the bags clogging. To keep the costs down check out used equipment and piping. It is surprising to see how much can be saved with used. I have a line on a 2hp unit in my area that has never been used and is selling for half price. I picked up some surplus 6" PVC pipe last week for half the price of new. This process will get you up and running, but will dump dust outside and will upset any neighbours that are close by (this is the limiting factor for many of us). This idea can later be upgraded with canisters, the 2hp dusty upgrades that Bob posted on this forum: https://www.woodworkforums.com/f200/g...2hp-dc-171247/ and can also be upgraded with an in-line cyclone later. Bill Pentz has plans to make your own cyclone for much cheaper than the clear-view units out there: Bill's Cyclone Dust Collection Research - Home - Looking for feedback on this idea. Using local Canadian prices, I think this idea would initially cost similar to a good, new, ventilated mask system. The upgrades could be added later when they can be afforded. Some cost can be saved by making some of your own parts: hoods, adapters, pipes, gates,....- see the many ideas posted in this forum.

Originally Posted by HardingPens

. . . . . . Remove the top filter bag to improve the collection flow . . . . .

Yep I agree, it will make a real mess if there is no bag. I certainly could not do that where I live and I doubt I would do this anywhere.

This idea can later be upgraded with canisters, the 2hp dusty upgrades that Bob posted on this forum: https://www.woodworkforums.com/f200/g...2hp-dc-171247/ and can also be upgraded with an in-line cyclone later. Bill Pentz has plans to make your own cyclone for much cheaper than the clear-view units out there: Bill's Cyclone Dust Collection Research - Home - Looking for feedback on this idea. Using local Canadian prices, I think this idea would initially cost similar to a good, new, ventilated mask system. The upgrades could be added later when they can be afforded. Some cost can be saved by making some of your own parts: hoods, adapters, pipes, gates,....- see the many ideas posted in this forum.

Even though BP says we need about 1000 cfm to dust capture at source, a DC itself needs to generate more than 1000 CFM to be able to generate the 1000 CFM at the source of dust generation. So even though the modified 2HP unit without bags can generate 1100 cfm adding filters, bags, ducting, cyclones, chip collectors and even modified machine outlets will reduce the flow on this machine as the 2HP/impeller size does not generate generates enough pressure differential to cope with too many of these. Compare this to a twin bag 3HP DC with a decent impeller which should be able to pull 1250 cfm through a 6" pipe (NB this is already with the bags fitted) so it can afford to lose 250 cfm due to ducting and machine port complications.

Of course if 1000 cfm works that does not mean that 999 cfm does not. BP himself says that even 800 cfm may be adequate in some case. I assume that refers to machines that do not scatter dust too far. But remember that is 800 cfm at the point of collection - not at the DC.

A modified 2HP with a clean needle felt bag will draw 840 CFM and have a static pressure of 4.6" of WC. BP says that just connecting it to a machine will lose 1.5" of WC this translates to a flow loss of around 120 cfm. The machine has to be connected with something so let's use 2m (6ft) of 6" flexy, this loses 0.77" of WC or another 60 cfm so now we are down to 660 CFM which is definitely too low. If 6 m of 6" ducting are used to move the DC outside that loses another 60 cfm. Then add some junctions and things drop off even further.

For 2HP DC users the trade off still remains;
Locating the DC outside, requires more ducting and junctions so less flow and less capture at source.
Locating it inside alongside the machine with therefore greater capture at source, and then managing the leaks and any fine dust that gets through the filter.
Without measuring each individual setup we'll never know which is better.

Things would improve considerably if the needlefelt is replaced with the lowest pressure drop off filter ie a pleated filter, yes it is less restrictive than a cyclone as long as it is kept clean. I wish I had access to one to test out on the modified 2HP DC as that would be very useful for a lot of users.