An open source software (Aerosol and Air Quality Research Lab-Aerosol Dynamics Model, AAQRL-ADM) used for aerosol dynamics simulations is developed by including four models: discrete, discrete-sectional, method of moments, and modal. First, the mathematical description of these models as well as the effects of aerosol dynamics available in the software are reviewed, and a modal model is developed to use multiple modes to represent particle size spectrum. Second, the design of a working principle and user graphical interface (GUI) of AAQRL-ADM is described. Third, the models in AAQRL-ADM are validated by investigating the evolution of particle size distribution (PSD) in considering the effects of coagulation, condensation, and nucleation. Next, the trade-off between simulation accuracy and numerical efficiency is discussed for all of the four models, and a guide to choosing the appropriate aerosol dynamic model in practical simulation is presented. Finally, discrete-sectional, moment, and modal models are used to investigate the particle size distribution in a furnace aerosol reactor along a streamline, coupled with the velocity and temperature profiles. AAQRL-ADM is provided free of charge for the use of public researchers.

ObjectiveThe COVID-19 pandemic has precipitated widespread shortages of filtering facepiece respirators (FFRs) and the creation and sharing of proposed substitutes (novel designs, repurposed materials) with limited testing against regulatory standards. We aimed to categorically test the efficacy and fit of potential N95 respirator substitutes using protocols that can be replicated in university laboratories.SettingAcademic medical centre with occupational health-supervised fit testing along with laboratory studies.ParticipantsSeven adult volunteers who passed quantitative fit testing for small-sized (n=2) and regular-sized (n=5) commercial N95 respirators.MethodsFive open-source potential N95 respirator substitutes were evaluated and compared with commercial National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)-approved N95 respirators as controls. Fit testing using the 7-minute standardised Occupational Safety and Health Administration fit test was performed. In addition, protocols that can be performed in university laboratories for materials testing (filtration efficiency, air resistance and fluid resistance) were developed to evaluate alternate filtration materials.ResultsAmong five open-source, improvised substitutes evaluated in this study, only one (which included a commercial elastomeric mask and commercial HEPA filter) passed a standard quantitative fit test. The four alternative materials evaluated for filtration efficiency (67%–89%) failed to meet the 95% threshold at a face velocity (7.6 cm/s) equivalent to that of a NIOSH particle filtration test for the control N95 FFR. In addition, for all but one material, the small surface area of two 3D-printed substitutes resulted in air resistance that was above the maximum in the NIOSH standard.ConclusionsTesting protocols such as those described here are essential to evaluate proposed improvised respiratory protection substitutes, and our testing platform could be replicated by teams with similar cross-disciplinary research capacity. Healthcare professionals should be cautious of claims associated with improvised respirators when suggested as FFR substitutes.

The use of facemasks is proven to mitigate the spread of the coronavirus and other biological agents that cause disease. Various forms of facemasks, made using different materials, are being used extensively, and it is important to determine their performance characteristics. The size-dependent filtration efficiency and breathing resistance of household sterilization wrap fabrics, and isolation media (American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM)- and non-ASTM-rated), were measured in filter-holder- and mannequin-in-chamber-based systems, focusing on particles sizes between 20 nm and 2 μm. Double-layer MERV-14 (Minimum Efficiency Reporting Values with rating 14) showed the highest filtration efficiency (94.9–73.3%) amongst household filter media, whereas ASTM-rated isolation masks showed the highest filtration efficiencies (95.6–88.7) amongst all the masks considered. Filtration efficiency of 3D-printed masks with replaceable filter media was found to depend on the degree of sealing around the media holder, which depended on the material’s compressibility. Filtration efficiencies of triple-layer combinations (95.8–85.3%) follow a profile similar to single layers but with improved filtration efficiencies.

No abstract

No abstract