Preliminary evaluation of filtration efficiency and differential pressure astm f3502 testing methods of non-medical masks using a face filtration mount

8Citations
Citations of this article
35Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Research surrounding the mandated use of non-medical fabric masks is inconsistent and often confusing when compared to the standard N95. A recently published standard from ASTM International and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention attempts to normalize evaluation procedures. The purpose of this study is to conduct a preliminary evaluation of the new methods for testing filtration efficiency of masks outlined by ASTM International F3502, where results can be directly compared to standards outlined for non-medical fabric masks. Eleven consumer non-medical fabric masks were tested for filtration efficiency and airflow resistance using a face filtration mount in accordance with the newly released ASTM International standard for facial barriers. The mean FE% (SD) ranged from 0.46% (0.44) to 11.80% (2.76) with the 3-layer athletic mesh having the highest performance and the highest deviations. All the masks tested following the procedure failed to meet to minimum FE of 20%; however all masks performed below the minimum upper limits for airflow resistance. Using a non-medical fabric masks as the sole mitigation strategy may not be as effective, as previously reported. With efforts to standardize and regulate the non-medical fabric mask market, this study demonstrates a variety of currently available consumer mask products do not meet the minimum standards nor are these remotely close to the standards of surgical or N95 masks.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Freeman, C., Burch, R., Strawderman, L., Black, C., Saucier, D., Rickert, J., … Callans, T. (2021). Preliminary evaluation of filtration efficiency and differential pressure astm f3502 testing methods of non-medical masks using a face filtration mount. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(8). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18084124

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free