High-quality and easy-to-regenerate personal filter
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
Proper respiratory tract protection is the key factor to limiting the rate of COVID-19 spread and providing a safe environment for health care workers. Traditional N95 (FFP2) respirators are not easy to regenerate and thus create certain financial and ecological burdens; moreover, their quality may vary significantly. A solution that would overcome these disadvantages is desirable. In this study a commercially available knit polyester fleece fabric was selected as the filter material, and a total of 25 filters of different areas and thicknesses were prepared. Then, the size-resolved filtration efficiency (40–400 nm) and pressure drop were evaluated at a volumetric flow rate of 95 L/min. We showed the excellent synergistic effect of expanding the filtration area and increasing the number of filtering layers on the filtration efficiency; a filter cartridge with 8 layers of knit polyester fabric with a surface area of 900 cm 2 and sized 25 × 14 × 8 cm achieved filtration efficiencies of 98% at 95 L/min and 99.5% at 30 L/min. The assembled filter kit consists of a filter cartridge (14 Pa) carried in a small backpack connected to a half mask with a total pressure drop of 84 Pa at 95 L/min. In addition, it is reusable, and the filter material can be regenerated at least ten times by simple methods, such as boiling. We have demonstrated a novel approach for creating high-quality and easy-to-breathe-through respiratory protective equipment that reduces operating costs and is a green solution because it is easy to regenerate.
Article activity feed
-
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2021.12.16.21267766: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Ethics not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Table 2: Resources
No key resources detected.
Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).
Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.
Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.
Results from JetFighter:…
SciScore for 10.1101/2021.12.16.21267766: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Ethics not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Table 2: Resources
No key resources detected.
Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).
Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.
Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.
Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.
Results from rtransparent:- Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
- Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
- No protocol registration statement was detected.
Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.
-
