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

181–190 of 250 posts

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

#181

Post by dboreham »

jpindar wrote: post #23
david_allison wrote: post #9

How does one verify whether the product on Amazon is legitimate? Most masks have reviews referring to comingled fakes, and it's put me off buying.

If it's on Amazon or eBay, you have no way of knowing if it's fake. Buy directly from a distributor such as https://www.projectn95.org , https://bonafidemasks.com , etc. If you prefer the KF94 types, I've heard good things about https://kollecteusa.com and https://behealthyusa.net .

There's also Costco which I suspect has control over its supply chain.

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

#182

Post by roeles »

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…

Perhaps interesting for you: The University of Delft has done research on mask fit. A report in Dutch can be found here[1]. Perhaps auto-captions in English work for you?

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zJZBNwa6QMk

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

#183

Post by vertis »

waynesonfire wrote: post #125
tallanvor wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read through your "methodology", and it seems to be too simple to explain your pass/fail results. For example, you fail this mask: https://www.armbrustusa.com/blogs/mask-review/kn95-arun-flat... even though it seems to meet the filtration and breathability standards, but is still listed as having failed. I guess maybe you explain the failure in the video, and maybe there's a good reason that it failed, but you're a…

Read their methodology, > A good example of this is in the text written on the front of N95 and KN95 masks. The standards for each of these masks demand that very specific information be printed on the device. If a KN95 mask does not have the manufacturer name and the standard number they are meeting (GB 2828-2019 or GB2828-2006), then they cannot be considered KN95 masks Such masks are marked failed. My guess is tha…

I disagree with this methodology. At the very least it should be called out as the reason for the 'fail'. Yes, it's less than ideal to not follow the standard. But I would far rather an N95/KN95 mask that didn't have it correctly printed but otherwise passes the criteria than none at all.

If it's a filtration test and it filters correctly give it a pass with an asterisk.

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

#185

Post by MrDresden »

This is great, and thank you for going out of your way to do this.

There seems to be some minor issue (I think) with the table you present on the page.

I just watched the test done on the Gerson N95 Model 3230+ mask, and in that video you mention that you had just done a test on the Gerson N95 Model 3230.

However it does not seem to exist in the table. Perhaps there are more missing?

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

#186

Post by jmpman »

lloydarmbrust wrote: post #92
jmpman wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Make sure that however you graph it, up and to the right is better.

Sounds like a PG quote....

PG?

The up and right = better guidance came from a sales guy that I didn’t initially have a lot of respect for. But, he was right. People naturally assume up and right is better on any graph, so present your data in that way.

So, 1/resistance versus filtration? Or how much air is passed through the filter (cubic meters per second) given a fixed amount of lung power.

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

#187

Post by lloydarmbrust »

wrycoder wrote: post #103
lloydarmbrust wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not exactly.. it really depends on the situation. For example an ASTM 2 or 3 surgical mask fabric has a filtration of 98%+ On my face I have a leakage of about 21% or PFE of 79% when worn normally. With an ear saver, it jumps to 91%. With a mask brace, it jumps to 98%. So it really is about the fit. If I put leakage % it would vary from person to person and many people would be mislead by this.

How did you determine those percentages?

Using the industry standard TSI PORTACOUNT® RESPIRATOR FIT TESTER 8048

It measures the air outside the mask verses inside the mask.

https://tsi.com/products/respirator-fit-testers/portacount-r...

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

#188

Post by lloydarmbrust »

usrusr wrote: post #140
tallanvor wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read through your "methodology", and it seems to be too simple to explain your pass/fail results. For example, you fail this mask: https://www.armbrustusa.com/blogs/mask-review/kn95-arun-flat... even though it seems to meet the filtration and breathability standards, but is still listed as having failed. I guess maybe you explain the failure in the video, and maybe there's a good reason that it failed, but you're a…

And it gets worse when you look at the page on mobile, miss the entire filter percentage column and that the list is ordered by that: then all random samples reached without excessive scrolling are mystery failures despite good filter result. Really strong example of how a seemingly harmless presentation failure can taint the perception of content.

We have updated the mobile view please LMK what you think.

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

#189

Post by BTCOG »

Lloyd, I very much appreciate all your work and efforts put into this testing! I stocked up on the Powecom masks very early after seeing all their thorough testing and backing and I'm glad that I did. I also went overboard and bought nice high end gas masks and CBRN filters and P3 particle gas mask filters in February 2020 but I've not used/wasted any of those. :)

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

#190

Post by lloydarmbrust »

nopenopenopeno wrote: post #47
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…

Table only shows mask names on mobile. Don’t be surprised if your announcement doesn’t have the impact you wanted it to. You need a website that does its job on mobile.

Okay we updated the site to work on mobile. Thanks for this... seems obvious now but total miss on our part.

Thank you!!

Post reply on HN