1. C. C. S. S. - lith COLLABORATIVE ST=
EFFECTS OF THE IMAW RESISTANCE OF FILTER A.SSDMLIES AFTER smoKnqG
Reports from 11 laboratories, together with a collation in graphical forms
were circulated to all ICCSS Members at the 12th Meeting.
Each laboratory bad smoked the same cigar at the rates of one and two ci
ga"
per filter, using two different filters. The filters were those in current
use at each laboratory, and filters as cut by, each laboratory from
Hollingsworth & Vose material HC4021 as supplied by General Cigar.
1. Draw Resistance of Filter Assemblies after Smoking
On the EC4021 filters, all laboratories found an increase in draw
resistance of the filter assembly, after smoking two cigars per filter
higher than after smoking on* cigar per filter. In the majority of
cases, this difference was statistically significant but the largest
average increase found by any laboratory was only 4-9mm water column
(49 Ps. or 0.49 mbar) measured at a flow rate of 17.5 Ml/S.
on their own filters, the majority of laboratories found an increase
in draw resistance of the filter assembly after smold-ax two cigars per
filter higher than when smoking one cigar per filter. Again, in the
majority of cases, this difference was statistically significant and
the largest average increase found by any laboratory was 12.5mm water
column (125 Ps or 1.25 mbar).
Po= 'how laboratories using filters reference T39Z, the differenCe in
the increase in draw resistance was higher than when using the IC4021
filters.
2. Source of the Cambridge Filter Material
Filters used by the laboratories as their own were filters reference
T39Z (four laboratories), CM113A (two laboratories, though r@ported as
now having been discontinued), and an supplied by Borgwaldt (tares
laboratories), Cigarette Components, and Phipps & Bird. Insufficient
is knovn to be certain of the source and sizilaxit7 or otherwise of
all these filters, though it was recorded in the Minutes of the 1 1 th
Meeting of the ICCSS that the probable original source is Hollingsworth &
Voss in all cases.
3- Effects an Puff Number
There were no statistically significant differences in puff number
found when =oking two cigars per filter compared with one cigar per
filter, either when laboratories were using the EC4021 filters or their
own filters.
2.
co
%10
BATCo document for Province of British Columbia 16 April '1999

4. Effects on TM Results
On the EC4021 filters, ons laboratory found an increase in TpX .1evel
when =01-i"Ar two cigars per filter as compared to one cigar per filter,
this being correlated with the largest increase in draw resistance found.
However, no other laboratory found significantly different TPH results,
the majority of TFM being marglmlly lower when smoking two cigars per
filter.
On their own filters, two laboratories found slightly higher TFM results
when smoking two cigars per filter, these being correlated, though not
to the same degree, with the largest increases in draw resistance found.
However, no other laboratory found significantly different TPM results,
even though increases in draw resistance of the filter assembly were
noted (1. above).
There was thus no clear correlation between the TFM results found and
the increase in draw resistance of the filter assembly after smoking.
5. Precision of TPM Results
Of the eight laboratories with quoted precision of individual TFM results,
six laboratories consistently found improved precision when smoldne two
cigars per filter, and only one laboratory consistently found improved
precision when smoking one cigar per filter.
Pive laboratories found consistently improved precision with their own
filters, whereas two laboratories found consistently improved precision
with the EC4021 filters.
The overall pattern of TPX results between laboratories van remarkably
similar when using the EC4021 filters or their own filters, particularly
for the smoking of two cigars per filter.
The total average TPK level was almost identical when smoking one or two
cigars per filter and when using the EC4021 or the laboratori*s own
filters.
6. Blockage or Collapse of Cambridge Filters
No cases of blockage or collapse of Cambridge Filters were reported in
this study, it being noted that in only =* individual case was there
an increase in draw resistance of the filter assembly after Smoking of
more than 25mm water column (250 Pa or 2.5 mbar).
G.D. EDGE
3 May 1979 CD
CZ>
ON
4@
BATCo document for Province of British Columbia 16 April 1999