MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285821921 · doi:10.4209/aaqr.220044

Filtration and Breathability of Nonwoven Fabrics Used in Washable Masks

2022· article· en· W4285821921 on OpenAlexafffund
Thomas W. Bement, David J. Downey, Ania Mitros, Rebecca Lau, Timothy A. Sipkens, Jocelyn Songer, Heidi Alexander, Devon Ostrom, Hamed Nikookar, Steven N. Rogak

Bibliographic record

VenueAerosol and Air Quality Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicTextile materials and evaluations
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council CanadaUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Research Council CanadaPublic Health AgencyPublic Health Agency of Canada
KeywordsPolypropyleneMaterials scienceFiltration (mathematics)Composite materialWoven fabricPolyesterMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider fabrics that can improve upon the performance of the widespread all-cotton mask, and examines the effect of layering, machine washing and drying on their filtration and breathability. Individual materials were evaluated for their quality factor, Q, which combines filtration efficiency and breathability. Filtration was tested against particles 0.5 μm to 5 μm aerodynamic diameter. Nonwoven polyester and nonwoven polypropylene (craft fabrics, medical masks, and medical wraps) showed higher quality factors than woven materials (flannel cotton, Kona cotton, sateen cotton). Materials with meltblown nonwoven polypropylene filtered best, especially against submicron particles. Subsequently, we combined high performing fabrics into multi-layer sets, evaluating the sets’ quality factors before and after our washing protocol, which included machine washing, machine drying, and isopropanol soak. Sets incorporating meltblown nonwoven polypropylene designed for filtration degraded significantly post-wash in the submicron range where they excelled prior to washing (Q > 50 kPa-1 at 1 μm, respectively, degraded to Q < 10 post-wash). Washing caused lesser quality degradation in sets incorporating spunbond non-woven polypropylene or medical wraps (Q = 12 to 24 pre-wash, Q = 8 to 10 post-wash). Post-wash quality factors are similar for all multi-layer sets in this study, and higher than Kona quilting cotton (Q = 6). Washed multi-layer sets filtered 12% to 42% of 0.5 μm, 27% to 76% of 1 μm, 58% to 96% of 2.8 μm, and 72% to 100% of 4.2 μm. The measured filtration and pressure drop of both the homogeneous and heterogeneous multi-layer fabric combinations agreed with the estimations from a model assuming layers filter independently. Further examination of selective nonwovens showed that IPA degraded their filtration, while washing and drying produced variable effects on their filtration. Variability in filtration and pressure drop was observed in and across Filti samples.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.169
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.249 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAerosol and Air Quality ResearchSame topicTextile materials and evaluationsFrench-language works237,207