Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: I bought and tested the filtration of every mask on Amazon

armbrustusa.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 250 posts

Re: Show HN: I bought and tested the filtration of every mask on Amazon

#161

Post by watersb »

lloydarmbrust wrote: post #12

I've spent about 1,000 hours on this with my team using a very expensive (~$250k) lab and I'd love for this to be a great resource for people when choosing a mask. The heavy lift we are doing here is around our particulate filtration efficiency test in which we do either the NIOSH N95 NaCL (0.3 micron) test or the ASTM 0.1 micron latex particle test. I'd love HN feedback on how we improve the interface and make this…

My budget is limited, but I just purchased a $50 shipment of your masks because this is awesome.

Thank you.

Re: Show HN: I bought and tested the filtration of every mask on Amazon

#162

Post by throwaway81523 »

jcims wrote: post #133
throwaway81523 wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've had a lot of strap welds break on all kinds of masks. I fix them with hot melt glue and they are as good as new.

I just stab a hole in the mask just inside the weld spot and tie the elastic to it. Works surprisingly well when I'm in the produce section at Kroger. XD

I wonder if that is more likely to cause an air leak than fixing the strap with glue. I usually have a few spare masks with me in case one breaks while out of the house. In practice the straps usually break when taking the mask off or putting it on, not while wearing it. So I'm unlikely to experience breaks at Kroger ;).

Re: Show HN: I bought and tested the filtration of every mask on Amazon

#163

Post by curling_grad »

buescher wrote: post #8
sschueller wrote: post #6

I'm a bit confused by the listed results. For example one mask is listed a KN95 and has a fail although filtering is stated as 99.87%. Isn't a KN95 specifically rated to hold at least 95% of particles of a certain size? Anything above is irrelevant as it holds up to the minimum requirement? Or is it 99.87% of 95% which I would still consider within margins of manufacturing variations. A KN95 that filtered only 75% is…

How they rate masks as passing and failing is not transparent. They indicate they rate the masks on construction and smell but do not give the scores.

The website says:

> Subjective Scoring: Construction > Ear loop strength, build quality, and comfort. This test is somewhat subjective, which is why we don’t include in pass/fail analysis.

> Smell is not considered as part of pass/fail analysis.

Re: Show HN: I bought and tested the filtration of every mask on Amazon

#164

Post by okl »

lloydarmbrust wrote: post #12

I've spent about 1,000 hours on this with my team using a very expensive (~$250k) lab and I'd love for this to be a great resource for people when choosing a mask. The heavy lift we are doing here is around our particulate filtration efficiency test in which we do either the NIOSH N95 NaCL (0.3 micron) test or the ASTM 0.1 micron latex particle test. I'd love HN feedback on how we improve the interface and make this…

Thanks for putting in the effort and publishing the data. Are there indications that point to good/bad filtration quality? What do the good/bad products have in common?

Re: Show HN: I bought and tested the filtration of every mask on Amazon

#165

Post by [deleted] »

thro1 wrote: post #106
dpark wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because of course people wearing vented masks wear them whenever they are near another human. It’s not like they have family or friends they spend time with maskless.

Sad, but true. Those who don't care had to leave..

[deleted]

Re: Show HN: I bought and tested the filtration of every mask on Amazon

#166

Post by pcl »

lloydarmbrust wrote: post #71
wrycoder wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your filtration test appears to be only testing the mask fabric, but not the fit. I see a number of surgical masks over 95%. I don't think that would be possible in practice, because of leaks at the sides and top. I'd expect more like 50%. But, you don't appear to have the equipment to do a fit test. Refer to the 3M video on how to fit test an N95. I realize that N95 and surgical masks have different standards, but y…

A good mask needs both fit and filtration... most people can put a mask on, check for air gaps and see how well it fits, but they don't have a $250k mask lab to make sure the fabric is good. We are just solving for the filtration and letting people figure out the fit. But, you make a good point, in the videos I try to point this out but we could do better. Where could I add this to make this more clear?

Perhaps you could add a “fit ease” row to your scoring? Masks with head straps could have a check and others could have a ? or something.

Re: Show HN: I bought and tested the filtration of every mask on Amazon

#167

Post by MailNerd »

Thanks for this comprehensive test!

Here's a (translated) test from half a year ago of the German "Stiftung Warentest" (similar to the US "Consumer Reports")

https://www-test-de.translate.goog/Masken-Welcher-Mund-Nasen...

Surprisingly there's only one mask in both tests as far as I can see: - Kingfa, deemed not suitable by Stiftung Warentest, passed in this test

Not totally sure it's the same mask though.

Re: Show HN: I bought and tested the filtration of every mask on Amazon

#168

Post by blip54321 »

halpert wrote: post #50
fnord77 wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

these don't have filtered output, do they?

No, but if everyone is wearing one it doesn't matter. Some of the masks on this site are vented as well.

The effect is multiplicative. If my mask filters 95% of the air on the way out, and yours filters 95% on the way in, that's 99.75% filtration. Add a HEPA into the room, and you're pretty safe.

Studies show the same too.

Re: Show HN: I bought and tested the filtration of every mask on Amazon

#169

Post by [deleted] »

GavinMcG wrote: post #78
BugsJustFindMe wrote: post #70

The page claims over 99% filtration by some dinky earloop surgical masks, which seems impossible unless they are only measuring the fabric and not the mask as a whole. It definitely seems like the testing method can't possibly account for side leakage, which IMO makes the measurements basically useless.

Useless? It still tells me that the US-made masks I bought from a reputable manufacturer aren't up to spec. Eliminating the ones that fail regardless of fit is extremely helpful.

[deleted]

Re: Show HN: I bought and tested the filtration of every mask on Amazon

#170

Post by _n_b_ »

lloydarmbrust wrote: post #12

I've spent about 1,000 hours on this with my team using a very expensive (~$250k) lab and I'd love for this to be a great resource for people when choosing a mask. The heavy lift we are doing here is around our particulate filtration efficiency test in which we do either the NIOSH N95 NaCL (0.3 micron) test or the ASTM 0.1 micron latex particle test. I'd love HN feedback on how we improve the interface and make this…

I think this is great and thanks for doing this! I have three small suggestion:

1. For masks that fail on marking issues but not filtering efficiency, could they get a third category that’s not pass or fail (something like ‘non-compliant’)?

2. I wish you could filter on pass/fail

3. I wish you included/could filter on price per box and price per mask.

Post reply on HN