A battery operated respirator? Is it better? Testing the 3M Powerflow powered respirator.
Вставка
- Опубліковано 6 лип 2024
- Does a battery powered blower really make respirators work better? I finally got chance to test a powered respirator thanks to Flan, who supplied a 3M 6800 Powerflow Powered Air Purifying Respirator (PAPR) for testing.
Putting a blower on a respirator not only means you no longer have to work hard to suck air through the filters, the positive air pressure from the blower also helps reduce leaks. The air wants to blow out of the mask rather than in, making it harder for contaminated air to get in around the seal of the mask. But I wanted to know for myself just how much the positive air pressure helps.
There are different kinds of PAPRs. This is one of the simplest designs. It it is a standard 3M 6800 with the nose cup removed and a special adapter added to attach the blower and filter. The battery goes on your belt, which is a good thing because the battery weighs almost a kilo.
Noise is a big consideration outside of industrial uses of this mask. On the video you can hear the loudness relative to my voice. And it feels a bit louder than that when wearing the mask because the blower is attached to the mask, which conducts sound right to your skull in addition to the sound transmitted through the air.
A big thank you to Flan for this opportunity.
00:00 Start
01:15 Talking wearing the 6800PF without the blower
02:18 Testing the 6800PF in negative pressure mode without the blower
03:11 6800PF in negative pressure mode - results
05:23 Talking in the 6800PF with the blower on
05:50 Testing the 6800PF with the blower on
06:44 Testing the 6800PF with the blower on - results
07:05 Comparison table
---
In the video I'm using a PortaCount mask fit testing machine that gives scores in "Fit Factor". Fit factor is the the concentration of ambient particles outside the mask divided by the concentration inside the mask. So if there were 1000 particles outside and 10 inside, 1000 divided by 10 is 100, so the air inside the mask is 100 times cleaner and the fit factor is 100. The PortaCount counts particles from .02 to 1 micron in size.
To pass a fit test, a normal half mask, such as an N95, has to pass with a fit factor of 100, meaning the air is 100x cleaner inside the mask. For a regular full face mask the fit factor required varies depending on the standard being used, but 500 is common. The full face 6800PFF respirator in this test was well over 500 in all exercises, both with and without the blower on.
If you have questions about masks, please leave a comment.
You can also get feed back on respirators on Reddit: / masksforeveryone
Excellent video. So well done, interesting and informative. Thank you!
Love the videos thanks Gerard.
Thank you very much, this was very useful for my work 👌
This is the blower and facepiece i jave been issued at various companies ive worked at. Same issues you pointed out are what i had with it. Heavy on the neck noisy, low intelligibility of speech and i dont think it puts out much air. Expensive
Could you test the 4 or so P100 rated disposable respirators? The two available ones from the US are the Moldex 4400 P100 and the 3M Particulate Respirator 8293. The other 2 on the Niosh list appears to be hard to obtain. I know their filter medium passes muster (I hope) but I like to see how it does in a QNFT. I see the Moldex 4200 does poorly in your spreadsheet, but the 4400 has full foam and a valve which should get a better fit factor (I hope, since I often use this model). And the moldex accordion design should work well with vertical jaw movement (at least I hope).
Would love to see you do the CleanSpace Halo (or any of their other products) someday!
I have a CleanSpace2 I'll be testing. It's more affordable than the halo, but not waterproof, and cannot power a full face mask. However, I assume that it will otherwise test similarly. I got a good price on it as a new open box item on eBay, but I have not yet sourced the fit testing adapter necessary to PortaCount test it.
The CleanSpace PAPRs are advertised as being compatible with PortaCount testing, so I had assumed that it had built-in compatibility for attachment to the test machine. But as it turns out you have to buy the adapter separately for $$$, the same way it works for many other elastomeric masks.
@@gerardhughes Amazing! Looking forward to your video on it!
Curious about other PAPRs. Would have possibly gone to one if could not find an elastomeric respirator which passed a fit test.
I've got 3 other to test: CleanSpace2, 3M TR 300, and a Honeywell 700.
My preliminary impressions are that I like the TR 300. I haven't used the PortaCount on any of them yet, though.
@@gerardhughes TR300 is fantastic and comfortable. I use a helmet headpiece.
@@PhattPhillip
I'm kind of surprised how much I like it. The effortless breathing and the fogless visor contribute to it.
I don't have a hard top for it yet, they are expensive to buy individually.
@@gerardhughesGerard you are an ABSOLUTELY legend, a true king of kings in this space. You deserve millions of views ✌️
Can you recommend any air filtration product that does not have anything blocking the view ( like a nose “cone”), allows glasses to be worn, has a seal around the entire face, and is light weight? The seal does not have to be airtight around the neck. Lots of requirements.
When wood carving, I have to bend way over to see past the nose cone on half face respirators. Most respirators do not allow a comfortable fit for glasses. No matter what glasses I wear, wood particles, float up behind them, or around them or over the top of them and get into my eyes. Goggles do not allow for glasses to fit under them.
Any ideas?
A "loose fitting" PAPR will do all of that. Full face protection from particles and debris - including impact protection. You can wear your glasses normally without leaks. No fogging or humidity build up.. No breathing effort needed. I've seen more and more wood workers wearing them for all day protection and comfort.
A 3M TR 300 with a M 206 hard top is one of the best options if you need just particulate filtration. If you need chemical filtration (for painting or other VOCs) you'd need a TR 600.
(Some of the hard tops cost more for features you may or may not need. The M207 is heat resistant, that M307 has a rated hard had for working construction)
The 3M TR 300 is sometimes under $500 on Amazon, but only with the soft top. The hard top can be bought separately, but is always >$250. The MSRP for the 3M PAPRs is really high, though.
I've also seen some woodworkers wearing cheaper alternative PAPRs that put the blower and battery on your head that are less comfortable and not NIOSH approved, such as the Powercap and Trend Airshield Pro, but I haven't used either of those and can't vouch for them.
@@gerardhughes would I need so buy the tube and belt unit for the TR 300?
@@jellyfish2b
Yes, with the VersaFlow PAPRs, it's a system. You need the belt pack with the blower and battery and filter, the connecting hose, plus the head top of your choice.
Having a hose and a belt mounted blower makes it seem cumbersome. However, It makes the head top much lighter than if you have to wear the blower and battery and filter on your head as in some of those other units I mentioned.
Another advantage of having the belt mounted blower is that it helps keep your filter cleaner. It's not right above your work piece, it's behind you typically, so you're going to get less sawdust into it.
I was expecting higher fit factors from a full face. Suspect there is a small leak around the edge?
I'm rather surprised by the numbers. Way lower than I expected. There are all sorts of possible confounding factors, including leakage of the test adapter. So I don't consider any one test, or one person's testing, to be definitive.
Leakage of the fit test adaptor should be easy to check. Have you tried it on a half mask with p100 filters?
Interesting review. My company has been at work on a PAPR that's simpler (all in one design monocoque manifold). Our aim is a PAPR that's more accessible to the DIY crowd. When we have certification, would you be willing to give it a try to compare? Its called MicroClimate Air3.
Sure, I would love to get a chance to test out the Air 3 when it becomes available.
I've been following your development of the Microclimate with interest. I've been impressed that you decided to go the extra mile and transition from making a consumer PAPR that was distinctive, protective and fairly priced for what It was to engineering and manufacturing one that will meet the newer NIOSH PAPR class performance requirements and expand your market to include OSHA compliant workplace use, while still at the same time, better serving what seems like it was your original target market of individuals.
Even if they didn’t have an air pressure sensor, surely they could’ve added a fan speed sensor? Most computer fans have had speed sensors for years, so I really feel like they don’t have any good excuses.
Thanks for the comprehensive test. Can’t imagine using something so noisy even if I was alone.
Please don’t test a Versaflow PAPR unless you know it’s going to be extra noisy. I don’t want to be tempted. :)
Doh! The Versaflo TR-300 is my favorite, and is much smaller, quieter, lighter and more convenient than I thought it would be. And there are some good deals on them on eBay. I got a new, open box one for way less than I expected (I wasn't interested in used ones, because they could be covered in all sorts of toxic chemicals from being used for remediation and who knows what else).
I'll have to check on what happens when air flow is restricted to the blower for the 6800 PF. With the TR-300, air pressure automatically increases to try to keep the air flow rate up. It is self-adjusting for altitude, as well as filter loading. I don't think the 6800 PF has any of that, I couldn't find it in the literature. Whereas it's a selling point for the TR-300.
When you review would be good to note what face shape, size measurements they fit. Thanks for all your videos!!!
@@swes2934
I would love to give more information on fit for elastomeric fit, but it's difficult because sizing isn't standardized. I had to take a guess when I bought the medium size 6800 mask, which I found described as fitting "most" people - I often take a large in a half face mask, so I was reluctant to buy the medium size for the full face, but it turned out to work well. I couldn't find actual facial measurements to correspond with the claim that the 6800 fits most people.
However, the good thing about full face masks, is that the shape of your nose doesn't matter. That takes one of the variables that makes half masks tricky to fit out of the equation.
You also don't need to consider face size when it comes to loose fitting PAPRs, such as the head coverings, both soft and hard, that are typically used with the 3M TR 300. They are not designed to fit tightly, and there is no seal to check. They rely largely on the air pressure from the blower to keep contaminated air away from your breathing zone. The head coverings are based more on head circumference, to make sure that the harness inside the head covering will fit on top of your head well. It's more like hat fit, than mask fit. And the harnesses are adjustable, like the harness inside of a hard hat.
I will try to include more information about sizing going forward. I do tend to mention that more in my videos about N95s and other filtering face piece respirators, because my high nose bridge makes it hard to get a good fit with most N95s.
CAN YOU TEST A TYPICAL SURGICAL MASK ALONE? These are what hospitals and doctors are using. They seem useless. Thanks so much for your tests!
Surgical masks leak around 50%. They are not tight fitting, nor are they meant to, and are not considered respiratory protection by OSHA. The fact that OSHA does not consider them respiratory protection makes them especially convenient for employers who require their use because even when required for employees, that does not trigger the fit test requirement needed for mandatory respirator use, such as for N95s. Since they aren't respirators, they don't need respirator fit testing. But it does not protect very well. Not a good savings.
(Voluntary use of N95s in a workplace by employees does not require fit testing, but fit testing is required when they are mandated by their employers.)
@@gerardhughes, thank you! Pretty useless for immunocompromised in hospital/healthcare settings, but that’s all everyone is required to use… for now. The smart people use 3M auras or better. Thank you for all of your reviews. They are extremely helpful. ❤️