Kerf & Press
Search⌘K

Lab status: every product page is marked researched until a machine we bought has been through the test protocol.

Test protocol · version 1.0

Laser fume (PM2.5) protocol

We run a standard engraving job in a closed room and log PM2.5 once per second at 1 m from the machine, before, during and after the job. We report the rise over background, the peak, and how long the air takes to clear.

Last updated

Version
1.0 (September 25, 2026)
Applies to
diode lasers, galvo lasers, CO2 lasers, fiber lasers, fume extractors, enclosures
Results so far
None. Testing starts with our first purchased machines.

What we measure

Measurements in this protocol
MeasurementUnitBetterNotes
Mean PM2.5 rise over baseline during a 10-minute jobµg/m³LowerMain number.
Peak PM2.5 (10-second average)µg/m³LowerShort spikes you would breathe standing next to the machine.
Clear-down timeminutesLowerTime for PM2.5 to return to within 10% of baseline after the job.

Why this test

Burning wood, leather and acrylic releases smoke with fine particles. Many small sellers run lasers in spare rooms and garages.

Fume extractor and enclosure makers quote airflow (CFM) and filter stages, not what ends up in the room. This protocol measures the room.

Equipment

We list instrument classes and specifications rather than brands, because the exact units are still being purchased. Each result page will name the exact model and serial-level calibration date.

Equipment list
ItemMinimum specWhy
Two optical PM2.5 monitorsLaser-scattering particle sensors with ≥ 1 Hz logging, factory-calibrated; side-by-side agreement checked before each sessionTwo units catch a drifting sensor. Optical sensors are not reference instruments; see limitations.
Tripod mounts1.0 m from the machine’s front edge, sensor inlet at 1.2 m heightRoughly where a seated or standing operator breathes.
Test roomClosed room of measured volume (target 25–35 m³), HVAC and fans off, door closed, sealed window duct portMakes runs comparable. Volume is published so you can scale to your room.
AnemometerVane type, 0.3–30 m/sChecks extractor duct airflow against the rated figure.
Thermo-hygrometer±0.5 °C, ±3% RHHumidity affects optical particle readings.

Setup

  1. Ventilate the room, then close it and let PM2.5 settle to a stable baseline (10 minutes with < 2 µg/m³ drift).
  2. Configure the machine as it ships: built-in fan, exhaust hose routed out of the window port if one is supplied.
  3. For fume extractors: a reference laser (the same one every time) exhausts into the extractor under test, which recirculates into the room as a buyer would use it.
  4. For enclosures: the reference laser runs inside the enclosure under test; sensors sit outside it at 1 m.

Procedure

  1. Log 10 minutes of baseline.
  2. Run the standard job for 10 minutes: repeat KP-ENG-01 on 3 mm basswood plywood.
  3. Stop the job and keep logging until PM2.5 returns to within 10% of baseline, or 60 minutes, whichever comes first.
  4. Air the room fully; repeat the whole sequence three times on separate days.
  5. Optional material series (published separately): leather and cast acrylic.

Controls

  • Same reference laser and same job for every extractor and enclosure tested.
  • Same room, same sensor positions (marked on the floor).
  • Runs with baseline above 25 µg/m³ are postponed.
  • Humidity kept below 70% RH; optical sensors over-read in humid air.

Scoring

The fume sub-score (0–10) compares like with like: lasers with lasers, extractors with extractors.

Scoring weights
ComponentWeightBased on
Mean rise during job50%µg/m³ over baseline
Peak (10 s)30%µg/m³
Clear-down time20%minutes
Total100%

Formula. Each component scores 10 × (best value in the group ÷ this value), capped at 10. Weighted sum, one decimal.

Scores are a convenience. The raw measurements are always published next to them, and our picks explain which measurement mattered for which kind of seller.

What we publish

  • The full 1-second log from both sensors for every run (CSV), plus baseline and room conditions.
  • Room volume, window-port size and duct routing photos.
  • Measured duct airflow next to the manufacturer’s rated airflow.

Limitations

  • Low-cost optical sensors are useful for comparing machines in the same room but are not reference-grade monitors, and their accuracy depends on the type of smoke. We compare, we do not certify.
  • PM2.5 is not the whole story: laser fumes also contain gases (VOCs and others) that this v1.0 protocol does not measure.
  • Nothing on this site is a health or safety assessment. WHO and EPA guideline values are shown only as context, not as a pass mark.

Where results will appear

On every product page this protocol applies to, a lab slot like the one below stays empty until we have measured that machine:

Lab slotpm25_1m

Mean PM2.5 rise over baseline during a 10-minute job

Measurement pendingWe'll measure this on a unit we buy ourselves and publish the raw data. Read the protocol for Mean PM2.5 rise over baseline during a 10-minute job

Protocol changelog

When we change a protocol, we bump its version, explain why here, and re-run or flag any results measured under the old version.

Protocol version history
VersionDateChange
v1.0September 25, 2026First public version, published before any machine was tested so readers can critique the method first. Not yet run on any machine.

Other protocols

Sources

Every spec and number on this page links back to where it came from.

  1. US EPA — Particulate Matter (PM) Basicsepa.gov
  2. US EPA — Air Sensor Toolbox (performance and limits of low-cost sensors)epa.gov
  3. South Coast AQMD — AQ-SPEC sensor evaluationsaqmd.gov
  4. WHO global air quality guidelines (2021)who.int