Systematic experimental comparison of particle filtration efficiency test methods for commercial respirators and face masks

Abstract Respirators, medical masks, and barrier face coverings all filter airborne particles using similar physical principles. However, they are tested for certification using a variety of standardized test methods, creating challenges for the comparison of differently certified products. We have...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Joel C. Corbin, Greg J. Smallwood, Ian D. Leroux, Jalal Norooz Oliaee, Fengshan Liu, Timothy A. Sipkens, Richard G. Green, Nathan F. Murnaghan, Triantafillos Koukoulas, Prem Lobo
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Nature Portfolio 2021
Materias:	Medicine R Science Q
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/214c9097c0c045f8950a66eb41dfaa4e
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:214c9097c0c045f8950a66eb41dfaa4e
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:214c9097c0c045f8950a66eb41dfaa4e2021-11-14T12:23:14ZSystematic experimental comparison of particle filtration efficiency test methods for commercial respirators and face masks10.1038/s41598-021-01265-82045-2322https://doaj.org/article/214c9097c0c045f8950a66eb41dfaa4e2021-11-01T00:00:00Zhttps://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-01265-8https://doaj.org/toc/2045-2322Abstract Respirators, medical masks, and barrier face coverings all filter airborne particles using similar physical principles. However, they are tested for certification using a variety of standardized test methods, creating challenges for the comparison of differently certified products. We have performed systematic experiments to quantify and understand the differences between standardized test methods for N95 respirators (NIOSH TEB-APR-STP-0059 under US 42 CFR 84), medical face masks (ASTM F2299/F2100), and COVID-19-related barrier face coverings (ASTM F3502-21). Our experiments demonstrate the role of face velocity, particle properties (mean size, size variability, electric charge, density, and shape), measurement techniques, and environmental preconditioning. The measured filtration efficiency was most sensitive to changes in face velocity and particle charge. Relative to the NIOSH method, users of the ASTM F2299/F2100 method have commonly used non-neutralized (highly charged) aerosols as well as smaller face velocities, each of which may result in approximately 10% higher measured filtration efficiencies. In the NIOSH method, environmental conditioning at elevated humidity increased filtration efficiency in some commercial samples while decreasing it in others, indicating that measurement should be performed both with and without conditioning. More generally, our results provide an experimental basis for the comparison of respirators certified under various international methods, including FFP2, KN95, P2, Korea 1st Class, and DS2.Joel C. CorbinGreg J. SmallwoodIan D. LerouxJalal Norooz OliaeeFengshan LiuTimothy A. SipkensRichard G. GreenNathan F. MurnaghanTriantafillos KoukoulasPrem LoboNature PortfolioarticleMedicineRScienceQENScientific Reports, Vol 11, Iss 1, Pp 1-16 (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Medicine R Science Q
spellingShingle	Medicine R Science Q Joel C. Corbin Greg J. Smallwood Ian D. Leroux Jalal Norooz Oliaee Fengshan Liu Timothy A. Sipkens Richard G. Green Nathan F. Murnaghan Triantafillos Koukoulas Prem Lobo Systematic experimental comparison of particle filtration efficiency test methods for commercial respirators and face masks
description	Abstract Respirators, medical masks, and barrier face coverings all filter airborne particles using similar physical principles. However, they are tested for certification using a variety of standardized test methods, creating challenges for the comparison of differently certified products. We have performed systematic experiments to quantify and understand the differences between standardized test methods for N95 respirators (NIOSH TEB-APR-STP-0059 under US 42 CFR 84), medical face masks (ASTM F2299/F2100), and COVID-19-related barrier face coverings (ASTM F3502-21). Our experiments demonstrate the role of face velocity, particle properties (mean size, size variability, electric charge, density, and shape), measurement techniques, and environmental preconditioning. The measured filtration efficiency was most sensitive to changes in face velocity and particle charge. Relative to the NIOSH method, users of the ASTM F2299/F2100 method have commonly used non-neutralized (highly charged) aerosols as well as smaller face velocities, each of which may result in approximately 10% higher measured filtration efficiencies. In the NIOSH method, environmental conditioning at elevated humidity increased filtration efficiency in some commercial samples while decreasing it in others, indicating that measurement should be performed both with and without conditioning. More generally, our results provide an experimental basis for the comparison of respirators certified under various international methods, including FFP2, KN95, P2, Korea 1st Class, and DS2.
format	article
author	Joel C. Corbin Greg J. Smallwood Ian D. Leroux Jalal Norooz Oliaee Fengshan Liu Timothy A. Sipkens Richard G. Green Nathan F. Murnaghan Triantafillos Koukoulas Prem Lobo
author_facet	Joel C. Corbin Greg J. Smallwood Ian D. Leroux Jalal Norooz Oliaee Fengshan Liu Timothy A. Sipkens Richard G. Green Nathan F. Murnaghan Triantafillos Koukoulas Prem Lobo
author_sort	Joel C. Corbin
title	Systematic experimental comparison of particle filtration efficiency test methods for commercial respirators and face masks
title_short	Systematic experimental comparison of particle filtration efficiency test methods for commercial respirators and face masks
title_full	Systematic experimental comparison of particle filtration efficiency test methods for commercial respirators and face masks
title_fullStr	Systematic experimental comparison of particle filtration efficiency test methods for commercial respirators and face masks
title_full_unstemmed	Systematic experimental comparison of particle filtration efficiency test methods for commercial respirators and face masks
title_sort	systematic experimental comparison of particle filtration efficiency test methods for commercial respirators and face masks
publisher	Nature Portfolio
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/214c9097c0c045f8950a66eb41dfaa4e
work_keys_str_mv	AT joelccorbin systematicexperimentalcomparisonofparticlefiltrationefficiencytestmethodsforcommercialrespiratorsandfacemasks AT gregjsmallwood systematicexperimentalcomparisonofparticlefiltrationefficiencytestmethodsforcommercialrespiratorsandfacemasks AT iandleroux systematicexperimentalcomparisonofparticlefiltrationefficiencytestmethodsforcommercialrespiratorsandfacemasks AT jalalnoroozoliaee systematicexperimentalcomparisonofparticlefiltrationefficiencytestmethodsforcommercialrespiratorsandfacemasks AT fengshanliu systematicexperimentalcomparisonofparticlefiltrationefficiencytestmethodsforcommercialrespiratorsandfacemasks AT timothyasipkens systematicexperimentalcomparisonofparticlefiltrationefficiencytestmethodsforcommercialrespiratorsandfacemasks AT richardggreen systematicexperimentalcomparisonofparticlefiltrationefficiencytestmethodsforcommercialrespiratorsandfacemasks AT nathanfmurnaghan systematicexperimentalcomparisonofparticlefiltrationefficiencytestmethodsforcommercialrespiratorsandfacemasks AT triantafilloskoukoulas systematicexperimentalcomparisonofparticlefiltrationefficiencytestmethodsforcommercialrespiratorsandfacemasks AT premlobo systematicexperimentalcomparisonofparticlefiltrationefficiencytestmethodsforcommercialrespiratorsandfacemasks
_version_	1718429215594905600

Systematic experimental comparison of particle filtration efficiency test methods for commercial respirators and face masks

Ejemplares similares