THE EVIDENCE NOTEBOOK

Good questions.
Proper evidence.

You shouldn’t have to take our word for a technical number. Here’s what each kind of evidence can — and can’t — tell you.

For a useful pump comparison, start with the required airflow at operating pressure, then check the conditions attached to each power or noise figure. A measurement at one duty point does not establish performance at another, or prove compatibility with your plant.

01 / PUBLISHED

What the maker states.

Specifications and marketing claims are different things. A published figure still needs its conditions.

Inspect the rated power

Manufacturer specification

Original source reviewed

150 mbar · 50 Hz · 230–240 V supply context

47/51 maps to 50/60 Hz in the Japan table; not 230/240 V. UK datasheet corroborates 47 W / 50 Hz.

Source & full detail ↗

Inspect the noise figure

Manufacturer specification

Original source reviewed

50 Hz · 230–240 V supply context

Source says dB, not dB(A). Distance, acoustic weighting, measurement method and background are unspecified.

Source & full detail ↗

02 / INDEPENDENT

What a laboratory measured.

A laboratory result describes the particular sample and test conditions. Accreditation marks do not make it a universal product rating.

Inspect Eurofins 56932a

Independent laboratory test

Original source reviewed

100 mbar · frequency not stated · 240 V · hot steady state

Only the sample and test conditions in report 56932a. Frequency not stated; UKAS/ILAC marks are recorded, not a broader accreditation conclusion.

Source & full detail ↗

03 / COMPARATIVE

What someone observed.

Airblow/MPC’s comparative tests belong to a separate channel. The phone-app sound test is not controlled laboratory acoustics.

46.6 W · Airblow observation

Third-party observation

Research compilation evidence · primary review pending

pressure not stated · frequency not stated

Not controlled to a common stated back-pressure in article; use as comparative field observation, not accredited test. Separate Airblow/MPC channel; not a Haigh or accredited-laboratory test.

Source & full detail ↗

38.6 dB(A) · Airblow observation

Third-party observation

Research compilation evidence · primary review pending

Test conditions not stated

Useful comparative observation, not an accredited acoustic measurement. Separate Airblow/MPC channel; not a Haigh or accredited-laboratory test.

Source & full detail ↗

04 / INTERPRETATION

Why we prefer it.

Our preference for FujiMAC is a judgement informed by the evidence and the details we value. It does not establish that a particular model fits your installation.

Read our reasons ↗

KEEP THE DETAIL ATTACHED

The R2-80 reference desk.

These are the current R2-80 assertions checked against original sources. Earlier transcriptions remain in the research record so changes can be traced.

Good questions.Proper evidence.

What the maker states.

What a laboratory measured.

What someone observed.

Why we prefer it.

The R2-80 reference desk.

Good questions.
Proper evidence.