Filtration Efficiency, Pressure Drop and Total Inward Leakage of Anti-Yellow Sand Masks, Quarantine masks, Medical Masks, and General Masks

Transcription

1 Filtration Efficiency, Pressure Drop and Total Inward Leakage of Anti-Yellow Sand Masks, Quarantine masks, Medical Masks, and General Masks Chung sik Yoon, Ph.D., CIH Seoul, Korea Hyejung Jung 1, Seungju Lee 2, Jinho Lee 2, Jooyoun Kim 3 1 Institute of Health and Environment, School of Public Health, Seoul National University, Seoul, South Korea 2 Occupational Health & Environmental Safety Division, APAC laboratory, 3M Korea, Hwaseong-Si, South Korea 3 Department of clothing and textiles, Ewha Womans University, Seoul, South Korea

2 Contents 1 Introduction, question and purposes 2 General citizens masks filtration and pressure drop 3 Total inward leakage test 4 Summary

3 For Workers Air Purifying Respirator Atmosphere Supplying Respirator Respiratory protection For Health Care workers? Regulated by Ministry of Labor (Korea) OSHA (US) Certified by KOSHA(Korean NIOSH) NIOSH (US) For Citizens Yellow sand mask, Surgical mask, Quarantine mask/influenza mask, general mask, handkerchief Regulated by where? Ministry of Health and Welfare? CDC? Not strict regulation.

4 Yellow sand dust in East Asia Wang et al, A deflation module for yellow sand transport. J. of geophy res 2000, 105: Beijing, China Yamaguchi Japan I. Mori et al. Atmospheric Environment 37 (2003) My Lab data Not published yet It s like a PM10

5 Surrogate Material Respirator Filtration Efficiency (for Worker) NIOSH, Korea, Japan: NaCl for Solid particulate DOP for Liquid particulate EU: Paraffin Oil for Liquid particulate Collecti on Efficien cy Korea Special 99.0% 3 Japan (RS, RS, DS, DL) * 99.0% (99.9) ** EU US (N, R, P- series) **** FFP3(P3*** 99.0% % Grade % % FFP2(P2) 94.0% % Grage % % FFP1(P1) 80.0% % *DS; Disposable type-solid, DL; Disposable type-liquid, RS-Replaceable Type ** For Replaceable type(rs), *** For P3, 99.95% ****N; not resistant to oily mist, R; oil resistant, P; oil proof,

6 Yellow Sand Mask, Quarantine Mask, Surgical Mask Surgical Mask, general mask No regulation for filtration efficiency of Regulated by Korean FDA Yellow Sand Mask, Quarantine Mask KF80 KF94 KF99 Collection Effi. 80% Test Aerosol NaCl NaCl Paraffin Oil NaCl Paraffin Oil Pressure Drop 6.2 mm H2O 7.2 mm H2O 10.3 mm H2O TIL* 25% 11% 5% Use For Yellow Sand For Quarantine - * Total Inward Leakage

7 Question and Purpose Do general masks, not regulated strictly, work well? -Yellow sand (Asian dust) mask Adults/Children use - Quarantine mask/influenza mask - Surgical mask - Dental mask - General cloth mask To evaluate 1) the filtration efficiency 2) the pressure drop of above masks using NIOSH and EU(KFDA) protocol 3) the total inward leakage KFDA means the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety (MFDS)

8 Tested Aerosol and equipment N : not resistant, R : oil resistant, P: oil proof US : NaCl for Solid aerosols, DOP for Oil type aerosols Example) count median diameter (CMD) of nm, GSD of EU : NaCl for Solid aerosols, Paraffin Oil for Oil type aerosols NaCl, 5,000X, SEM NaCl, 50,000X, SEM TSI 8130

9

10 Mask Types and Test Methods Brands NaCl (NIOSH ) Test Method NaCl (EU) Paraffin Oil (EU) Limit (Korea) Penetration Limit (%) Pressure Drop(mmH 2 O) Yellow sand Mask 9 O O Yellow sand Mask (Children) 7 O O Surgical Mask 4 O O - - Dental Mask 3 O O - - Influenza Mask 5 O O O - - Quarantine Mask 4 O O O General Mask(Cloth) 9 O O - - Handkerchief 3 O O - - Total 44 KFDA adapts EU test protocol.

11 Initial penetration using KFDA protocol and NIOSH protocol by mask types Initial PN (%) KFDA(EU) NIOSH Mask classification N Mean ± SD P * Mean ± SD P P Yellow sand mask for adult ± ± 14.5 Yellow sand mask for children ± ± 25.5 Dental/Surgical mask ± ± 35.7 <0.01 Quarantine mask ± ± 0.5 < General mask ± ± 26.2 Handkerchief ± ± 3.2 * P value between mask types using KFDA method. P value between mask types using NIOSH method. P value between KFDA and NIOSH test methods.

12 Penetration as a function of NaCl aerosol accumulation on the mask using EU protocol and NIOSH protocol (a) Product 9 Product 24 Product 25 Product 27 (b) Product 9 Product 24 Product 25 Product 27 Penetration (%) Penetration (%) NaCl load (mg) NaCl load (mg) EU protocol NIOSH Protocol

13 Penetration, % Penetration (%) of each mask NIOSH Ini PEN (%) EU Ini PEN (%) Adult Children Yellow Sand Mask Surgical Dental Influenza Quarantine General Mask Handkerchief

14 [C1] Pressure drop pattern using EU protocol and NIOSH protocol (b) Pressure drop (mmh 2 O) Product 9 Product 24 Product 25 Product 27 (a) Pressure drop (mmh 2 O) Product 9 Product 24 Product 25 Product NaCl load (mg) NaCl load (mg) EU protocol NIOSH Protocol

15 Pass rate, % Yellow Sand Mask O X Adults Children_Certified Children_Not certified Adult Use % of P 6% of P O x X O Certified Children Use Uncertified Children Use

16 Penetration, % Pass rate, % Surgical Mask & Dental Mask X X O Surgical Mask Dental Mask Surgical O X % of P 6% of P 21 Dental Inward-NIOSH Outward-NIOSH Inward-EU Outward-EU <Surgical A> <Surgical B> <Dental A> <Dental B > <Dental C>

17 Total Inward Leakage Examines all possible leakages, including filtration efficiency, facial leakage, and exhalation leakage, both with and without speaking and facial motion Test Protocol (EU Protocol) 5 masks with 12 panels Activity on a treadmill at a speed of 6 km/h three times repeat. walking with normal breathing, turning their head from side to side, up and down movement of their head, talking and walking with normal breathing.

18 Characteristics of tested masks Type Approval and class KFDA a NIOSH b Respirator material Shape A KF80 N95 Nonwoven Flat B Anti-yellow sand KF80 N95 Nonwoven Flat C KF80 - Nonwoven Flat D KF94 - Nonwoven Cup Quarantine E KF94 - Nonwoven Flat a KFDA approves anti-yellow sand masks for KF80 and quarantine masks for KF94. b NIOSH: National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health in the US, which approves respirators.

19 Comparison of initial filtration efficiency and TIL values Mask classification Anti-yellow sand Quarantine Initial Filtration e fficiency (%) Mean ± SD Mean ± SD Mask A 1.6 ± ± 6.2 Mask B 1.2 ± ± 1.0 Mask C 0.6 ± ± 6.4 Total 1.1 ± ± 5.4 Mask D 1.1 ± ± 19.0 Mask E 0.8 ± ± 5.7 Total 0.9 ± ± 17.2 TIL values (%) P value * P value ** < < < * The difference in test results between the initial filtration efficiency value and total inward leakage within each mask type. ** The difference in test results between the initial filtration efficiency value and total inward leakage of anti-yellow sand masks and quarantine masks.

20 Mean TIL value among test panels for each mask Test panel (No.) Anti-yellow sand mask TIL values (%) Quarantine mask Mask A Mask B Mask C Mask D Mask E * P value ** < < < < * Data were lost by the researcher. ** The difference in TIL values among test panels for each mask tested.

21 Take home message Wide variation of penetration was observed Average of Penetration was 35.6 ± 34.7 % Influenza masks and quarantine masks satisfied the penetration criteria of 6% (KF94 criteria=eu FFP 2). Six out of nine yellow sand masks (67 %), four out of seven children use yellow sand masks (57 %) satisfied KF 80 % criteria(eu FFP1). Penetration value of most surgical masks and dental mask were over 20% General cloth masks and handkerchiefs have no protection function TIL Values are much higher than penetration Depends on the mask types, panels, and activity