Cargando…
Systematic experimental comparison of particle filtration efficiency test methods for commercial respirators and face masks
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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Nature Publishing Group UK
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8578374/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34753968 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-01265-8 |
_version_ | 1784596238536015872 |
---|---|
author | Corbin, Joel C. Smallwood, Greg J. Leroux, Ian D. Norooz Oliaee, Jalal Liu, Fengshan Sipkens, Timothy A. Green, Richard G. Murnaghan, Nathan F. Koukoulas, Triantafillos Lobo, Prem |
author_facet | Corbin, Joel C. Smallwood, Greg J. Leroux, Ian D. Norooz Oliaee, Jalal Liu, Fengshan Sipkens, Timothy A. Green, Richard G. Murnaghan, Nathan F. Koukoulas, Triantafillos Lobo, Prem |
author_sort | Corbin, Joel C. |
collection | PubMed |
description | 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 | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8578374 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Nature Publishing Group UK |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-85783742021-11-10 Systematic experimental comparison of particle filtration efficiency test methods for commercial respirators and face masks Corbin, Joel C. Smallwood, Greg J. Leroux, Ian D. Norooz Oliaee, Jalal Liu, Fengshan Sipkens, Timothy A. Green, Richard G. Murnaghan, Nathan F. Koukoulas, Triantafillos Lobo, Prem Sci Rep Article 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. Nature Publishing Group UK 2021-11-09 /pmc/articles/PMC8578374/ /pubmed/34753968 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-01265-8 Text en © Crown 2021, corrected publication 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Article Corbin, Joel C. Smallwood, Greg J. Leroux, Ian D. Norooz Oliaee, Jalal Liu, Fengshan Sipkens, Timothy A. Green, Richard G. Murnaghan, Nathan F. Koukoulas, Triantafillos Lobo, Prem Systematic experimental comparison of particle filtration efficiency test methods for commercial respirators and face masks |
title | 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_short | 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 |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8578374/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34753968 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-01265-8 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT corbinjoelc systematicexperimentalcomparisonofparticlefiltrationefficiencytestmethodsforcommercialrespiratorsandfacemasks AT smallwoodgregj systematicexperimentalcomparisonofparticlefiltrationefficiencytestmethodsforcommercialrespiratorsandfacemasks AT lerouxiand systematicexperimentalcomparisonofparticlefiltrationefficiencytestmethodsforcommercialrespiratorsandfacemasks AT noroozoliaeejalal systematicexperimentalcomparisonofparticlefiltrationefficiencytestmethodsforcommercialrespiratorsandfacemasks AT liufengshan systematicexperimentalcomparisonofparticlefiltrationefficiencytestmethodsforcommercialrespiratorsandfacemasks AT sipkenstimothya systematicexperimentalcomparisonofparticlefiltrationefficiencytestmethodsforcommercialrespiratorsandfacemasks AT greenrichardg systematicexperimentalcomparisonofparticlefiltrationefficiencytestmethodsforcommercialrespiratorsandfacemasks AT murnaghannathanf systematicexperimentalcomparisonofparticlefiltrationefficiencytestmethodsforcommercialrespiratorsandfacemasks AT koukoulastriantafillos systematicexperimentalcomparisonofparticlefiltrationefficiencytestmethodsforcommercialrespiratorsandfacemasks AT loboprem systematicexperimentalcomparisonofparticlefiltrationefficiencytestmethodsforcommercialrespiratorsandfacemasks |