2. Mechanical filtration
Mechanical air filters remove airborne particulates by capturing them on filter materials (e.g. fiberglass, polyester, cotton). This class of filters does not include electronic filters which remove the particles from the air electronically (e.g. using static electricity or ions).
Efficient filters (at least MERV 14, F8 or ISO ePM1 70-80% is recommended; refer to Table 1 for efficiency ratings) should be installed in ACMV systems to treat recirculated air. In spaces where ventilation cannot be easily improved and/or high-risk activities are ongoing, portable air-filtering devices for localised air cleaning may be considered as an interim measure.
Table 1. Efficiency rating of mechanical air filters
Filter grade | Average particle size removal efficiency (Em) |
| 0.4 µm | 0.3-1.0 µm | 1.0 – 3.0 µm | 3.0 – 10.0 µm |
| MERV 14 | - | Em ≥ 75% | Em ≥ 90% | Em ≥ 95% |
| MERV 15 | -
| Em ≥ 85% | Em ≥ 90% | Em ≥ 95% |
| MERV 16 | - | Em ≥ 95%
| Em ≥ 95%
| Em ≥ 95% |
| F8 | 90% ≤ Em < 95% (min efficiency 55%) | - | - | - |
| F9 | Em ≥ 95% (min efficiency 70%)
| - | - | - |
| ISO ePM1 70% | - | 70% ≤ Em < 75% (min efficiency 50%) | - | - |
| ISO ePM1 75% | - | 75% ≤ Em < 80% (min efficiency 50%) | - | - |
| ISO ePM1 80% | - | 80% ≤ Em < 85% (min efficiency 50%) | - | - |
Portable air-filtering devices
Filter efficiency
Portable air-filtering devices are often equipped with a high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filter. HEPA filters are at least 99.97% efficient at capturing particles 0.3 µm in size, and can capture particles both larger and smaller than 0.3 µm with even higher efficiency, due to the use of multiple particle collection mechanisms (Figure 1). A particle size of 0.3 µm approximates the filters’ most penetrating particle size (MPPS), i.e. the worst case. As the SARS-CoV-2 virus is about 0.1 µm in size and is likely exhaled in larger respiratory droplets, HEPA filters are therefore at least 99.97% efficient at capturing viral particles associated with SARS-CoV-2.
Products with HEPA filters are recommended for use in environments with higher risk of COVID-19 transmission,[1] while products with non-HEPA filters may be used in lower-risk environments.

Figure 1. Filtration efficiency of HEPA filters at different particle sizes. HEPA filters are at least 99.97% efficient at capturing particles 0.3 µm in size, and can capture particles both larger and smaller than 0.3 µm with even higher efficiency. This is due to the use of multiple particle collection mechanisms such as interception, impaction, and diffusion, which act on a range of particle sizes. A particle size of 0.3 µm approximates the filters’ most penetrating particle size (MPPS), at which the filtration efficiency is the lowest. Figure taken from [3].
Sizing of portable air-filtering devices
The effectiveness of a portable air-filtering device at removing particulates depends on both the airflow rate through the device and the filter efficiency. One standard measure of effectiveness is the Clean Air Delivery Rate (CADR), which is assigned to the device upon testing. CADR may be reported in cubic feet per minute (cfm) or cubic meter per hour (cmh) for removal of smoke (0.1-1.0 µm), dust (0.5-3.0 µm) and pollen (5-11 µm) from the air. The smoke CADR best represents the effectiveness at filtering virus particles.
When choosing a portable air-filtering device, select a unit that is appropriately sized for the space. The minimum smoke CADR that a unit should provide for a particular room size can be estimated as follows, according to AHAM AC-1 standard:[4]
smoke CADR (cmh) ≥ room size (cubic meter) × 5
smoke CADR (cfm) ≥ room size (cubic feet) ÷ 12
For example, a room with a floor area of 24 m2 and a ceiling height of 2.6 m (room volume of 62.4 m3) will need a portable air-filtering device with a minimum smoke CADR of 62.4 x 5 = 312 cmh (i.e. 184 cfm).
Some portable air-filtering devices may contain additional electronic air-cleaning technologies such as ionisers. As the effectiveness of electronic air-cleaning technologies against virus particles is not well established, it is recommended that sizing of portable air-filtering devices be based on smoke CADR of the filters alone. Portable air-filtering devices with a high ratio of smoke CADR (based on filters alone) over airflow rate are more efficient at cleaning the air (i.e. higher output of clean air per pass through the units), and are recommended for use in environments with higher risk of COVID-19 transmission. For example, portable air-filtering device A with smoke CADR (based on filters alone) of 312 cmh and an airflow rate of 400 cmh will be more efficient at cleaning the air than portable air-filtering device B with the same smoke CADR (based on filters alone) but an airflow rate of 800 cmh.