Roesler AR 8404 vs AR 8405: Process-Water Cleaner Catalog Review
Compare AR 8404 and AR 8405 using the qualitative process-water cleaner table in Roesler EN.154.21, revision07/2026, physical page15. Filter suitability, variant and remark fields; record your own fluid, contaminants, foam conditions and acceptance reference; then download the current review. Preserve the printed symbols and distinguish standard, LF and defoaming entries before arranging a representative fluid trial. This independent catalog reference does not establish a Jintaijin offer or a chemical recipe.
Compare source fields and record a fluid review
Read the printed qualitative comparison
All three printed suitability markers match for AR 8404 and AR 8405. This table does not provide a performance ranking between them.
Matching printed suitability labels: Solids +, Oil /Surfactants •, Universally usable +. Matching symbols are not measured equivalence in the actual fluid.
| Source field | AR 8404 | AR 8405 |
|---|---|---|
| Solids | + | + |
| Oil /Surfactants | • | • |
| Universally usable | + | + |
| LF variant | AR 8404 LF | AR 8405 LF |
| Version with defoaming effect | AR 8604/2 | AR 8605/2 |
| Publisher remark | Good floc characteristics under high mechanical load (joint AR8404/AR8405 cell) | Good floc characteristics under high mechanical load (joint AR8404/AR8405 cell) |
Legend: ++ = Excellent/high suitability; + = Medium suitability; • = Limited suitability. These are qualitative labels with no numeric conversion.
Separate standard, LF and foam-management references
LF entries: AR 8404 → AR 8404 LF; AR 8405 → AR 8405 LF. Defoaming entries: AR 8404 → AR 8604/2; AR 8405 → AR 8605/2. A NOT_LISTED entry means no entry in this table; ask the responsible supplier about current availability rather than treating it as an absent product.
Check remark attribution and fluid-trial scope
Publisher remarks: AR 8404 — Good floc characteristics under high mechanical load (joint AR8404/AR8405 cell); AR 8405 — Good floc characteristics under high mechanical load (joint AR8404/AR8405 cell). AR8404 and AR8405 share a merged remark cell; preserve this joint attribution. A nickel-related remark does not supply an inlet/outlet concentration or a discharge approval.
Specify whether the main issue is suspended solids, oil/surfactants, foam or another measured condition. Keep inlet-water observations separate from the desired acceptance target. Record the operating context and intended offered variant. A shared symbol is insufficient to approve substitution; a shared merged remark is not an individual product test.
Source and review boundary
Official Roesler EN.154.21 brochure, revision07/2026, physical page15. This independent comparison does not establish partnership, current product availability, Jintaijin supply, an equivalent chemical or a successful treatment result. Earlier-language or older catalog dilution and dosage text has not been merged into this table.
The publisher discusses variable dosing and fluid analysis. Obtain the current product documentation and a representative fluid trial from the responsible supplier. User records and original diagrams on this page are review aids; they are not samples, chemical recommendations or acceptance evidence.
Questions about this pair
What differs between AR 8404 and AR 8405 in the source table?
All three printed suitability markers match for AR 8404 and AR 8405. This table does not provide a performance ranking between them. Matching printed suitability labels: Solids +, Oil /Surfactants •, Universally usable +. Matching symbols are not measured equivalence in the actual fluid.
Which printed variants belong to this pair?
LF entries: AR 8404 → AR 8404 LF; AR 8405 → AR 8405 LF. Defoaming entries: AR 8404 → AR 8604/2; AR 8405 → AR 8605/2. A NOT_LISTED entry means no entry in this table; ask the responsible supplier about current availability rather than treating it as an absent product.
Do the symbols give dosing or removal efficiency?
No. They are publisher qualitative suitability labels. A plus sign is not a percentage, numeric score or chemical dose. The source says dosing varies with contaminant quantity and fluid analysis determines selection; no recipe is derived here.
Can I use the review as a supplier-approved trial result?
No. The export identifies versioned catalog data and separates your own records as USER_RECORDED_NOT_VERIFIED. Confirm the current offered variant, fluid analysis and an agreed trial acceptance method with the responsible supplier. No Jintaijin supply, partnership or equivalent product is asserted.
Related review tools
Prepare an equipment and sample-review enquiry
For SurfacePolish equipment or media discussions, provide the actual workpiece, finishing objective, current process-water context and a responsible acceptance owner. This link does not pre-approve a chemical choice or confirm supply of the third-party catalog models.
Open the SurfacePolish enquiry form
+86-592-2381506 
IPv6 network supported 