A kitchen electrostatic precipitator catalogue can make selection appear to be a choice between efficiency labels. The highest percentage attracts attention, while airflow coverage, equipment resistance and cabinet arrangement receive less scrutiny. For a restaurant project, those details decide whether a proposed model belongs on the shortlist at all.
Polygee’s LK-E family offers a useful example of why tier selection and model selection are separate tasks. Its electrostatic precipitation equipment has several design grades, and the grade with the widest airflow range is not the grade with the highest stated efficiency. The buyer needs to compare each candidate at the required duty before requesting a final configuration.
Establish the airflow before choosing the tier
Obtain the design extract duty from the person responsible for the hood and ventilation system. Include the cooking process, operating pattern and the proposed treatment location. Do not select a model from floor area or assume that a cabinet that matches the duct dimensions must have the right duty.
Polygee’s kitchen electrostatic precipitator catalogue distinguishes the LK-E engineering family from other in-duct products and integrated hoods. Keep that family identity on the enquiry. A comparison that borrows a rating from one product line and a dimension from another does not describe an orderable assembly.
Ask each supplier to name the proposed model against the stated airflow. A family range is helpful for screening candidates, but it is not a substitute for a model selection. The quotation should make that step visible before the project commits to connections or supports.
Read the efficiency labels as design information
Polygee lists LK-E2 at at least 98% design efficiency, LK-E1 at at least 95%, and LK-E0 at at least 90%. These are the manufacturer’s design grades. They should not be rewritten as independently verified removal results for a proposed installation, or as a guarantee of the condition at a restaurant’s discharge.
Ask what supporting performance evidence is available for the offered model and the operating conditions it covers. Keep that evidence separate from the project’s required outcome. A requirement at the discharge may involve the cooking duty, capture, gas-phase treatment and maintenance as well as the electrostatic collector.
Do not order from the percentage alone. Before a candidate selected for its higher design grade becomes a purchase recommendation, the project team still needs to establish that it covers the required airflow, fits the planned arrangement and has supporting evidence relevant to the electrostatic precipitation duty assigned to it. That work determines the shortlist.
Compare airflow coverage without extending the catalogue
Published LK-E2 and LK-E1 ranges each cover 3,000-24,000 m³/h across eleven models. LK-E0 covers 4,000-40,000 m³/h across eleven models. That upper endpoint belongs to a different tier from the highest design-efficiency label.
If the required duty lies outside a tier’s published range, ask for a project-specific arrangement. Do not simply assign the largest cabinet in that tier to the higher duty. Nor should a buyer assume that combining cabinets is a complete solution without a defined distribution, connection and service arrangement.
At a duty covered by several tiers, compare the actual model proposals. The questions then become more precise: what supports the requested removal objective, how much resistance is assigned to the stage, and what physical arrangement does the candidate require? This creates a technical shortlist without pretending that the catalogue has already sized the project.
Keep equipment resistance attached to its tier
According to the LK-E page, equipment resistance is 34 Pa for LK-E2, 23 Pa for LK-E1 and 31 Pa for LK-E0. Among these tiers, the middle efficiency grade has the lowest published resistance. Keep each value attached to its named electrostatic-stage boundary when entering it into a comparison.
Ask the designer to confirm the selected model’s resistance at the project duty and include the rest of the system in the fan calculation. UV-C, activated carbon, transitions and the duct route cannot be treated as if they contribute no resistance merely because the electrostatic-stage figure is small.
Grade substitutions need review. Even when a purchasing change preserves nominal airflow and appears to affect only the price, the revised selection must reach the person responsible for the fan because it may alter the electrostatic-stage resistance, change the equipment layout or affect how UV-C and activated carbon modules are connected. Record the accepted revision.
Compare cabinet depth and service arrangement together
The manufacturer’s description gives LK-E2 an 848 mm cabinet depth and LK-E1 and LK-E0 a 560 mm depth. It describes drawer-style washable collector cells across the family. Cabinet depth is a product dimension; the space needed to open, withdraw and handle components is a separate installation question.
Place the proposed cabinet and service envelope on the project drawing. Check the approach route, adjacent equipment and the area needed for maintenance work. A deeper collector may be feasible in one plant arrangement and difficult in another. A shallower cabinet still needs an unobstructed service side.
Follow the cells to the cleaning location. Before the lowest equipment price becomes the preferred option, ask the service provider to review the withdrawal route, handling space and reinstatement requirements, because a cabinet that fits on a drawing may still create an awkward maintenance task once neighbouring services and equipment are installed. Service access affects the buying decision.
Check odor modules against the same duty
The published standard UV range covers 3,000-15,000 m³/h. Its presence alongside the LK-E range does not mean a single standard UV module covers every electrostatic model. UV-C selection needs the proposed flow and reaction arrangement, not just a matching product-family illustration.
The standard activated carbon range also covers 3,000-15,000 m³/h. Carbon media is a consumable, and the selected module’s resistance needs to be obtained with the quotation. The fact that the carbon cabinet needs no separate electrical supply does not remove its fan-pressure or media-replacement costs.
Where gas-phase treatment is required, request a complete stage schedule at the same design duty. Electrostatic precipitation, UV-C and activated carbon serve different functions; the highest airflow printed on one stage cannot become the capacity of the entire treatment train.
Do not carry certification from another product line
The LK-E page distinguishes this family from the specific LK models covered by the manufacturer’s UL 867 file. The LK-E selection should therefore be reviewed using documents applicable to the offered LK-E model. A certificate appearing elsewhere in the catalogue is not evidence that this family has the same coverage.
UL’s explanation of UL 8782 also states that its safety assessment does not measure pollution-removal efficacy. Keep safety scope, design-efficiency information and installed performance evidence separate. A document in one category cannot be used to fill a missing answer in another.
Send the exact model identity and proposed configuration to the project reviewer. Where a document does not cover that selection, record the gap and seek the appropriate evidence before purchase. This is more useful than collecting a thick certificate pack whose model references do not match the quotation.
Request a model comparison that leads to a decision
A useful final comparison starts with the required duty and names each candidate. Beside it, place the design grade, applicable performance evidence, pressure boundary, physical arrangement and service needs. Include the selected odor stages where those form part of the proposed solution.
Require reasons for the recommendation. A supplier comparing the candidates should explain how the preferred tier fits the airflow, removal objective and installation constraints, and why the alternatives were rejected, rather than relying on the largest efficiency label or choosing a lower grade solely because its catalogue extends to a higher flow. Both shortcuts leave requirements unresolved.
The purchase can proceed on a firmer basis when the project team agrees on the model and its interfaces. The selected kitchen electrostatic precipitator then has a defined job, a documented selection basis and a place in the complete exhaust arrangement.
