What is the current best cyclone dust collector available? Size and price no big concern.
Discussion Forum
Get It All!
UNLIMITED Membership is like taking a master class in woodworking for less than $10 a month.
Start Your Free TrialCategories
Discussion Forum
Digital Plans Library
Member exclusive! – Plans for everyone – from beginners to experts – right at your fingertips.
Highlights
-
Shape Your Skills
when you sign up for our emails
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. -
Shop Talk Live Podcast -
Our favorite articles and videos -
E-Learning Courses from Fine Woodworking
-
-
Replies
"Best" is a truly subjective term depending on many variables. Look at Oneida for one. The tech help in setting up a proper system is half the price. Seen too many bad set ups due to some kind intuitive thinking with no background in the subject. You might consider reading Sandor N? (spelling) book on dust control in the shop. Believe its a taunton book but should be available at http://www.cambiumbooks.com
I 've seen him and heard of him and I will check the book out, thanks.
John
Best is a Bill Pentz design. There are lots of changes occurring right now with the cyclones, and they are coinciding with the growing popularity/notoriety of Bill's web sight.
http://billpentz.com/woodworking/cyclone/Index.cfm
I don't think it is a coincidence. Although grizzly, and others, have consulted with Bill, only CearVue currently makes them to his standards. Given the history of the major manufacturers, I wouldn't trust them. I wouldn't buy their products unless there were independently reviewed (not by a magazine), or endorsed by Bill.
Good luck,
Todd
Mr. Pentz has done woodworkers a great service by creating this site... Every time I see this page brought up I get a sense of haplessness about dust collection in my own shop. However, I wonder how many of us actually follow his advice to the letter.
I do have some random thoughts:
Mr. Pentz seems to have drawn up plans for the ideal cyclone, but does not seem to provide any test information as a comparison between commercial units and his. In his particulate test he compares it to his prior system with 1 micron bags. I assume this is a bag over bag system. This test seems to be the most important, after all this is what he's trying to do: clean the air.
In my opinion it is the Particulate Tests is most important test. Without it all the calculations in the word are meaningless. Honestly if the Onieda, or Grizzly meets the basic standards then they are good enough. If there is not enough uplift between his ideal system and a commercial unit, then what's the point? Of course realistically Mr. Pentz can not be expected to tests all the popular systems, he does not do this for a living, rather a service. That would make a very good article for Fine Woodworking, and would be a review I'd like to see. Maybe it's something we should all ask for.
On my visit today I see that following notice on the 'Cyclone Review' Page: "Following a heated and serious vendor complaint that has merit, this page is down for repairs." To me this indicates a bias in some of his prior reviews. Without knowing the details we can only wait until this page returns.
Finally I have one concern about the Clear-Vue system. Being made of plastic the cyclone would build up a static charge (correct me if I'm wrong), the dust would also carry a charge. The question being how does this additional force affect the efficiency of the system (if at all)? That's my scientific mind at work...
Anyway, just a few thoughts. Maybe someone else has some ideas.
Buster
Buster,"Mr. Pentz has done woodworkers a great service by creating this site..."Agreed"Every time I see this page brought up I get a sense of haplessness about dust collection in my own shop."So did he, and so did I, so we can agree that it is very important to not just buy the latest-and-greatest from the DC companies that have been making outrageous claims about CMF and particle size efficiency, and in general selling crap for years."However, I wonder how many of us actually follow his advice to the letter."Changing an entire industry of hobbyist woodworkers that have been mislead for years takes time. If you are truly curious, you should ask him. "Mr. Pentz seems to have drawn up plans for the ideal cyclone, but does not seem to provide any test information as a comparison between commercial units and his. In his particulate test he compares it to his prior system with 1 micron bags. I assume this is a bag over bag system. This test seems to be the most important, after all this is what he's trying to do: clean the air.In my opinion it is the Particulate Tests is most important test. Without it all the calculations in the word are meaningless. Honestly if the Onieda, or Grizzly meets the basic standards then they are good enough. If there is not enough uplift between his ideal system and a commercial unit, then what's the point? Of course realistically Mr. Pentz can not be expected to tests all the popular systems, he does not do this for a living, rather a service. That would make a very good article for Fine Woodworking, and would be a review I'd like to see. Maybe it's something we should all ask for."I think you need to reread Pentz's sight, as you seem to have glossed over most of his important findings. The key issues are CMF, particle separation efficiency, and filter ratings. If you trust Onieda, or Grizzly, or Fine Woodworking to do an objective and comprehensive test of current machines, then that is fine for you. I certainly don't."On my visit today I see that following notice on the 'Cyclone Review' Page: "Following a heated and serious vendor complaint that has merit, this page is down for repairs." To me this indicates a bias in some of his prior reviews. Without knowing the details we can only wait until this page returns."Without knowing the details, you assume it indicates "bias"? You sound like a shill for the DC companies. The change to the site is new to me, so I suspect it is due to the new models currently available. There had been reviews of various DC systems on his site, and his conclusion in a nut shell was that Onieda and Woodsucker would provide the necessary CMF; however due to inefficient dust separation, the filters would clog and need cleaning often. He had plenty of test data to back that up."Finally I have one concern about the Clear-Vue system. Being made of plastic the cyclone would build up a static charge (correct me if I'm wrong), the dust would also carry a charge. The question being how does this additional force affect the efficiency of the system (if at all)? That's my scientific mind at work..."Clear-Vue systems are endorsed by Pentz, are in use by man woodworkers, and are reported to work as claimed. Your "concern" although interesting intellectually, has no practical merit as it applies to dust collection. IMHOIf you want a system now, my opinion would be to buy a ClearVue system or make your own with Pentz's plans. I know it would be much easier to buy a name brand system as I struggled with this myself for months. If you trust the DC companies that have been misleading you for years, then by all means, go for it.
Todd
Todd,
So did he, and so did I, so we can agree that it is very important to not just buy the latest-and-greatest from the DC companies that have been making outrageous claims about CMF and particle size efficiency, and in general selling crap for years.
<cut>
Changing an entire industry of hobbyist woodworkers that have been mislead for years takes time. If you are truly curious, you should ask him.
Yes, I disagree with the wording here but can agree with the intent of what you are saying. I do not think that the industry has intentionally been misleading woodworkers, and for the most part commercial 'chip' collectors are not crap. I do not think the bag on bag collectors being sold today are directed to those with a concern for their health, and they do a fine job of collecting large chips. A system with a cartridge is healthier than the bag over bag... and so forth. That all systems do not meet Mr. Pentz design specifications is more a matter of demand.
I do not think that industry has intentionally mislead woodworkers, it would be completely unethical and most likely illegal. I think we can thank out Walmart mentality of buying cheap rather than buying quality.
I think you need to reread Pentz's sight, as you seem to have glossed over most of his important findings. The key issues are CMF, particle separation efficiency, and filter ratings.
You seem to have missed the pint of my comment. Mr. Pentz makes important and valid comments regarding ideal CMF, particle separation, and filters. His dust collection system is based around these specifications. This is all fine, but the final test is what's in the air; not in what the machine can theoretically do. The judgment on any system should not be held to Mr. Pentz's ideal calculations but instead actual tests.
This isn't a criticism of Mr. Pentz and his work. It is the next step in his work. Of course it's expensive, and time consuming. Not necessarily something that we should expect of Mr. Pentz.
If you trust Onieda, or Grizzly, or Fine Woodworking to do an objective and comprehensive test of current machines, then that is fine for you. I certainly don't.
Onieda and Grizzly would be silly and I did not suggest it. I don't know why you'd bring it up. Fine woodworking as an outside ajent could give a reasonably unbiased review. Also note I was not suggesting a comprehensive review, just a test of air quality in use.
Without knowing the details, you assume it indicates "bias"? You sound like a shill for the DC companies. The change to the site is new to me, so I suspect it is due to the new models currently available.
True I did assume that it indicates a bias, but there is no need to make your own assumptions about me. Bias, new models, or an innocent error; we will not know until the site is back up. So no need to make your own assumptions; you sound like a shill for Mr. Pentz...
There had been reviews of various DC systems on his site, and his conclusion in a nut shell was that Onieda and Woodsucker would provide the necessary CMF; however due to inefficient dust separation, the filters would clog and need cleaning often. He had plenty of test data to back that up.
I had read this portion of the sire some time ago, and I have trouble remembering the test data. To make a fair and accurate review he would have had to had each of these machines in a controlled environment to test appropriately. Using published measurements on impeller, motor horsepower, cyclone size etc... is not a test. Again we will have to wait until the site is back up to see what he has done.
I seem to have sidetracked here a little into the small details of what constitutes a test. I do not mean to put down Mr. Pentz's site. Given his tests on his own design it is reasonable to assume that the systems will preform as he predicts.
Your "concern" although interesting intellectually, has no practical merit as it applies to dust collection. IMHO
We need to look no further than an electrostatic furnace filter to see that EM forces can and do affect dust...
If you trust the DC companies that have been misleading you for years, then by all means, go for it.
There is no proof to this statement.
Buster
Buster,It is quite obvious to me that you either, are not fully versed in Pentz's site, or you are a shill for the DC companies."I do not think that the industry has intentionally been misleading woodworkers, and for the most part commercial 'chip' collectors are not crap."Bill has proven otherwise, and he has done so by scientific testing, not "calculations" as you put it alone. This is an excerpt from his site:"I trusted what I believed to be reputable hobbyist vendors to provide filters that worked as they advertised. After the first set failed to protect me landing me in the hospital, I then went to the ?best? recommended filters and ended up in the hospital again nearly dying because that vendor also lied badly.Because hobbyist filters are not subject to Federal oversight or testing, most hobbyist firms rate their own filters. Sadly, to improve sales many less reputable vendors play games with their filter ratings similar to the games they play in rating their blower performance. Frankly, they are playing with your health. Engineering practices rate filters when clean and specify what sized particles get filtered with a given volume of air at a specific pressure by a particular sized filter area. By not specifying the pressure, area, or air volume, hobbyist vendors can build up more and more dust known as a dust cake until the filter reaches the level of filtering they want to claim. Many just make up their own filtering numbers knowing that they can prove any level they want to claim with a thick enough dust cake. My personal testing and testing by a number of other university professors shows most hobbyist vendor fine filter bags and cartridge filters stop passing the air we need for dust collection long before reaching a third of the claimed filtering levels.Our testing showed at real working levels most hobbyist dust collector bags and cartridge filters passed between ten to twenty times the sized particles claimed."I noticed that you used the term "chip" collectors. I first heard that term use by Pentz after his extensive investigation showed that hobbyist "dust collectors" where very poor at collecting actual dust. "I do not think the bag on bag collectors being sold today are directed to those with a concern for their health"Really? Please, can I have a show of hands of those who are not concerned with there health? Anyone..., Anyone..., Anyone...? Who then would you say they are directed to? Smokers? Base jumpers?"A system with a cartridge is healthier than the bag over bag... and so forth."Healthier? Maybe. But it seems to me unwise to ignore Pentz's advice given here:"I now only trust filter ratings provided by an American Society of Heating, Refrigeration, and Air-conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) certified independent testing laboratory. ASHRAE is not a government organization, but instead a private, non-profit group of professional engineers that set the standards for their industry. The ASHRAE standards require a filter to capture 99% of the particle sizes claimed at full airflow without any cake. Because filter testing is very expensive, most vendors pass on the ratings of the filter material they buy and do not independently test each of their filters except for HEPA filters that require each filter to be independently tested and contain a specific certification test number. Unable to find any hobbyist certified dust collector bags and knowing that most bags have so little surface area that then need constant cleaning which exposes me to the very dust I must avoid, I personally use industrial 0.3-micron certified dust collection cartridge filters with a cyclone to protect those filters. My doctor says those without my allergies should use 0.5-micron certified cartridges.""That all systems do not meet Mr. Pentz design specifications is more a matter of demand.Your analysis is incomplete. Consumer awareness drives demand, and the public is only lately been educated to the dangers of fine dust, and the inadequacies of their current DC systems."I do not think that industry has intentionally mislead woodworkers, it would be completely unethical and most likely illegal."Unethical yes. And this is sufficient evidence for you to "think" that the industry would not do it? Your kidding right? Legality is a vague issue. The absence of regulation has given most venders a free pass on this issue. Also, it takes many years for most people to develop health problems related to fine dust. It would not supprise me if a law suit is brought forward at some point, although it would be hard to prove. Then all of the DC company CEO's can stand up in front of Congress and state "I do not believe that fine dust causes lung cancer"."This is all fine, but the final test is what's in the air; not in what the machine can theoretically do."Sounds great. Let me know when you locate someone who does these tests. I am sure Bill would also be interested. In the mean time, if a filter has been independently tested to meet a minimum requirement, and the cyclone collector efficiently separates the dust from the air, and you have enough CMF at the machine to capture all the dust, then you have the best system available and that is what I would recommend buying. If your filter is not certified (most aren't), and your cyclone blows to much dust into the filers (which they all do because their design wasn't meant for efficient dust separation), you have a poor system. No amount of testing is going to change that."The judgment on any system should not be held to Mr. Pentz's ideal calculations but instead actual tests."As an engineer myself, I recognize the need for testing, and so does Bill. Your summation of Bill's work as just a bunch of "ideal calculations" is at the very least, dishonest.
We are not mathematicians or physicists. We engineers have to live in the real world. That was a joke, well sort of. "Fine woodworking as an outside agent could give a reasonably unbiased review. Also note I was not suggesting a comprehensive review, just a test of air quality in use."I will believe it when I see it. Fine woodworking is a great mag, and does provide useful information in its tool tests, but I don't for a second believe that they would be sufficiently critical of any manufacturer. There is a reason "independent" testing is so trusted, and FW is not independent."True I did assume that it indicates a bias, but there is no need to make your own assumptions about me. Bias, new models, or an innocent error; we will not know until the site is back up. So no need to make your own assumptions; you sound like a shill for Mr. Pentz..."As I said, your claims suggest you are not fully knowledgeable of the information Pentz has provided on his web site our you are a shill. Although I am open to a third possibility, I can't currently surmise one."To make a fair and accurate review he would have had to had each of these machines in a controlled environment to test appropriately. Using published measurements on impeller, motor horsepower, cyclone size etc... is not a test. Again we will have to wait until the site is back up to see what he has done."Your criticisms are shallow. As part of the scientific community I have myself been published and have been responsible for peer reviewing the work of other scientists. I believe that Pentz's use of vender specification, calculations, and testing, adequately supports his conclusions. His methods are thorough and considerate."We need to look no further than an electrostatic furnace filter to see that EM forces can and do affect dust..."Throwing out vague similarities does not an argument make. If you believe that the forces on charged dust particles is appreciable enough to overcome the vacuum forces that are inherent to a dust collection system, then lets hear it. Having given it some, but little thought, I do not.---My statement:If you trust the DC companies that have been misleading you for years, then by all means, go for it.---"There is no proof to this statement."I can lead you to water, but I can't make you drink. Se la vi.Todd
Todd,
It is quite obvious to me that you either, are not fully versed in Pentz's site...
Apparently not as much as you. But that's why I spoke up in this forum. Mr. Pentz is qualified and has done research into dust collection, there is no doubt about that. His information on set-up is sound. I will admit I'm playing a bit of a devils advocate here. I wish he would provide more results on the webpage with regards to air quality using his cyclone design.
I noticed that you used the term "chip" collectors. I first heard that term use by Pentz after his extensive investigation showed that hobbyist "dust collectors" where very poor at collecting actual dust.
This was intentional, because I do believe that it is more appropriate term for what's on the market. In fairness to the companies that make the collectors they do collect sawdust... but only larger particles. I'm sure the name 'dust collector' was applied long before Bill wrote his website and people became informed about the dangers of small dust particles.
Really? Please, can I have a show of hands of those who are not concerned with there health? Anyone..., Anyone..., Anyone...?
My choice of word was poor, and a little broad. They are not marketing to people who are saying "I need this bag over bag system to protect my lungs from fine particles." I bought my first dust collector not to protect my health, rather to help control 'dust' and large chips in the workshop. I put emphasize 'dust' because at the time I was thinking about the large particles floating in the air I could visible see, not the smaller more dangerous particles. In particular my planer through off such a large amount of chips that my garage shop was becoming covered in chips.
Sure I thought it must be healthier that there is no (visible) sawdust in the air. But it wasn't until I became educated on the dangers of small particles that I became concerned about my long term health in the shop.
I suppose you could find fault with the companies for not informing you about the dangers of dust. But it is a danger of woodworking.
They should be held at fault for misleading consumers over the quality of filters. Filter are like HP ratings. Once one company does it, everybody follows even the reputable companies. It's a shame of marketing I guess.
As an engineer myself, I recognize the need for testing, and so does Bill. Your summation of Bill's work as just a bunch of "ideal calculations" is at the very least, dishonest.
What is the point of Mr. Pentz's research? To improve the quality of air in his shop. But as of now I have not found a test of his air quality after the new system is installed, or even how much fine particle dust escapes the cyclone separator to the filters. Is he wrong. Probably not, and my intention is not to mislead other readers. It is my responsibility to question the findings, and get as much information as I can to make my own decision. What would it take to get Buster's 100% stamp of approval? A test of a shop with no collection, and a test of a the shop with Mr. Pentz design.
We are not mathematicians or physicists. We engineers have to live in the real world. That was a joke, well sort of.
Well actually I am a physicist... Don't hold it against me.
I believe that Pentz's use of vender specification, calculations, and testing, adequately supports his conclusions.
All systems are not created equally. Say for instance one manufacturer has a coating on the inside of theirs that increases or decreases the friction in the cyclone. How would that affect the calculations? I hope you can follow my line of thought. I think for Mr. Pentz to accurately and fairly review any cyclone he has to test a representative machine. However this part of the discussion is moot, since there are no longer reviews on machines.
If you trust the DC companies that have been misleading you for years, then by all means, go for it.
To me the word misleading implies some sort of intention on the companies part. When the first dust collectors came out were people (woodworkers and industry) educated to the dangers? No. Mr. Pentz website was posted in 2000, which seems to me to be the first available and comprehensive writing on the subject. Education is slow. You said it yourself. I'm sure the dedicated DC companies have their own engineers that work on these problems daily. Should I trust them, no. No more than I should take Mr. Pentz on his word alone. It is my responsibility to question and do my own research.
I want to reassure you: Not all people are bad, not all corporations are evil, and the government is not out to get you.
Buster,
Pentz's cyclone reviews are back up. I assume the change was minor, as I can't really tell what was added or omitted.
http://billpentz.com/woodworking/cyclone/CycloneReviews.cfm
Don't miss the introduction and his review of Clear Vue, as it will answer a lot of your concerns. Also, don't be shy, if you still have questions then email him.Finally, if you play the "Devil's Advocate", don't be surprised if you annoy a lot of people.Good luck,Todd
Finally, if you play the "Devil's Advocate", don't be surprised if you annoy a lot of people.
Of course. Well understood and well prepared.
I admit I have some minor beef's with the site, but not with the factual information. Mr Pentz is definitely not trying to mislead anyone.
The tone of "Do it this way or you'll die!" is disruptive in digging out the facts. IMHO. Mr. Pentz is clearly passionate about dust collection, and given his susceptibility to dust I think it's understandable.
Anyway Mr. Pentz, and this discussion have led me to a renewed interest in dust collection in my shop... So that's a very good thing.
Buster
AntzyClancy, do you own and operate a Clear Vue Cyclone?Ron
I recently purchased one and am in the process of installing it. Should be running within a month or so.
Todd
Thanks for the reply,I will certainly check out Mr. Pentz.
Preceeding diatribes to the contrary, I am happy with my 2 HP 'Super Dust Gorilla' from Oneida.
While I am appreciative of Pentz' work, I don't have the time or resources to make 'do it yourself' dust collector, nor to assemble the parts myself, etc., etc..
So, I did my research as I would with any other power tool I'd buy. That means reading the reviews, doing research, etc., and it includes assuming that whatever I'm reading is slanted, biased, or otherwise mistaken in the details.
Like I said - just like any other power tool I'd buy.
So, I installed this thing and it sucks up almost all the dust which comes out of my unisaw, jointer, planer, bandsaw, etc.. Ok - a small amount of sawdust comes over the top of the blade of the table saw. Very little comes out of the planer or jointer.
Now, I don't know if the Dust Gorrilla would meet all the test specs, and claims, and so on. What I know is that it sucks the hell out of the dust coming out of my machines. Maybe the outlet filter doesn't take out 10 u or whatever, but the outside of it is still clean after filling 2 barrels with shavings, and there is almost no dust in the collection pan yet.
I am very happy with the purchase, but, as usual, I'm thinking maybe I should have gone for 3 hp.
If I had a resiratory problem I wouldn't rely on a dust collector to save my life: I'd jive up woodworking: after all there isn't a dust collector on the planet that will pick up half of the dust that comes off a random orbit sander.
Thanks for the info, I think I am leaning toward the Oneida also. I learned a long time ago it usually pays to go with the established , oldest ,most advertised,and most expensive anything that you purchase. A friend of mine told me one time "It doesn't cost but just alittle bit more to go first class" and that is true and usually things work out the best.
thanks,
JP
How loud is that Oneida 2hp Gorilla? I'm thinking of ordering one, but it would have to be in the shop (not in a separate room). I'd appreciate any feedback.
Well - dust collectors aren't quiet, and the start up is pretty loud, but so is a Unisaw, planer, etc..
When I run the dust collector in the basement I can barely hear it upstairs, but I have a mostly concrete house (including floor) so your mileage may vary.
I honestly don't think its that much noisier than my previous dust collector (a 2 HP model with fabric bag and a plastic lower bag).
The major difference is that the Oneida picks up the dust while the older unit mostly made noise.
The Oneida people are quite helpful. Give them a call - they may be able to put you in contact with a dealer or user so you can hear for yourself.
If you are near Toronto I'd let you ...
If you are near Toronto I'd let you ...
Speaking of Toronto and Onieda... how was the shipping into Canada? Or did you pick it up yourself?
I picked it up myself. There is a dealer ( Welbeck 519 369 2144) north of Toronto, much closer to me than Syracuse. However, Oneida was just coming out with the Gorilla and it took so long to get a price out of Welbeck that I assumed they didn't want the business. This was incorrect : it was because Oneida didn't have CSA approval yet, so they couldn't ship, etc., but I didn't realize that at the time.
Anyhow, I drove to Oneida. I may have saved a bit of money because most importers these days price the looney at stupid levels (like $0.75, effectively) but the ordeal took 12 hours round trip, and I had to pay NY sales tax, then GST and PST.
I didn, however, get to visit Oneida, meet a few folk, etc.. I repaid Welbeck by buying a lot of my ductwork there and that is real high margin stuff. I did, however, buy most of the spiral pipe at Don Park from their main location near the DVP. Most of the metal ductwork is basically HVAC stuff in any event.
By the way, I should reiterate that noise isn't such a problem, except at start up. I am considering building a baffle around the unit, which I figure will quieten it down considerably.
Try a Fein shop vac with an auto start. I think today there are other quiet systems like Fein, my unit is a bit aged. I use it with a 5 inch hook and loop random orbit sander and the air remains dust free. But I did spend the extra money to put the optional HEPA filter cartridge into the vac.
I never hear any mention of Penn State Industries on this site. I've had a PSI DC for several years. The performance is great.
I started with a 1 1/2 HP "filter bag" unit; later switched to a pleated paper filter. This made a big difference in the volume of air moved - and eliminated the 'puff' of dust on startup. I hate changing the chip collector bag though. I'm ready for a cyclone with a drum for chips.
Jerry
I'm using a trash can separator and it works great with my 1 1/2 Delta DC. Only a small amount of stuff even makes it past the trash can.My goal is for my work to outlast me. Expect my joinery to get simpler as time goes by.
Thanks. I'll look into that solution.Jerry
Since you've added the pleated filter, you really don't need the small amount of additional flow provided by the lower bag. Why not just put a can under the unit you have? Woodworker's Supply sells a "skirt" (don't know what they call it) that allows you to replace the lower bag with a standard garbage can.
I think I found it: page 219 in the Winter '06 catalog. I'll give them a call to make sure the diameter is correct. I've installed a band of sticky (one side) foam insulation tape to the collecter. This makes a good seal at the (present) bag connection. That should work well with the new setup.Many thanksJerry
Jet,
This book is what I used to begin my dust collection adventure and then the great resource of Bill Pentz's website other's have mentioned.
Woodshop Dust Control : A Complete Guide to Setting Up Your Own System: Completely Revised and Updated
by Sandor Nagyszalanczy
Getting the basics from these major sources helped me build my own collection system. Many parts came from flea markets.
The aluminum blower housings and impellers were brand new and cost $20 each. The motors are GE air compressor motors for $85 each, including shipping, from Harbor Freight. Although I live in Texas, the cyclone came from a company in Oklahoma that ground corn meal and is made of stainless steel...$75. The 55gal barrels once had chocolate in them, so they have an epoxy lining and liquid/air tight as they have a removeable lock ring: $7.50 each The 5 micron filter bags are 24" by 72", cost $85 each, and came from Penn State. (They now have 1 micron for the same price.)
The 2" tubing came from a steel vendor and the plexiglass window I put in the side of the barrels came from Home Depot.
So, you see, having enough data and a good place to find low cost parts, you can build the system that works for you. Here is a shot of my system. I enclosed it in a closet with fiberglass insulation in the between the walls and solid core doors to keep those two howling blowers quieted down.
Bill
This forum post is now archived. Commenting has been disabled