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

201–210 of 250 posts

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

#201

Post by lloydarmbrust »

3np wrote: post #128
lloydarmbrust wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

I think it should be made way more clear - and here I take the opposite stance of the person you're replying to. Change title to "Comprehensive Mask Material Testing" or "Comprehensive Mask Fabric Testing" or similar. Similarly; "...that's why we're testing the filtration capabilities of every mask in our laboratory" At some point (on the front page, above the fold) there could be a small notice box explaining the di…

Okay I put a disclaimer and typing up a post to link to LMK what you think: https://www.armbrustusa.com/pages/mask-testing

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

#202

Post by lloydarmbrust »

wrycoder wrote: post #107
lloydarmbrust wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

You could add a clear statement to the testing procedure popup that you are measuring the fabric only, and that (except for N95) the filtration of a mask is strongly dependent on fit and leakage.

Done

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

#203

Post by TrueGeek »

bjarneh wrote: post #160
lloydarmbrust wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

> but they don't have a $250k mask lab to make sure the fabric is good Hard to argue against that, but on HN I'm sure someone's gonna try :-)

Someone on HN recently did:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29878971

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

#204

Post by pimlottc »

lloydarmbrust wrote: post #104
pimlottc wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With regards to #3, I found it a bit incongruous that you failed some KN95 masks (like Boncare) for incomplete labeling, while allowing a mask to pass that met a standard that appears to be entirely of their own devising (the Lutema M95i [0]). This seems to be a bit unfair, given that they both performed well in the PFE and breathability tests. It seems like if Boncare decided to call theirs an “MN95” mask, it would…

A few things. The PFE test I'm doing is a 2min test and doesn't tell you what the mask will do under load (all day use). It's really a simple way to tell if the mask sucks but not if the mask is good (if that makes sense). If someone doesn't label the mask correctly...are they even reading the standard? The gb2626-2019 standard is 57 pages and in it you have to do a lot of very technical testing. One test requires se…

Thanks for the response. I understand your reasoning for failing the KN95s, but then what about the Lutema mask, which uses a proprietary standard? Lutema includes some lab test documents [0] but I can't find any technical information about what results exactly is required to qualify as an "M series" mask. They mostly seem to compare with with KN95 masks, but without really saying what makes them different [1] (note that the testing info on that page are for their surgical mask).

It seems like the "M series" designation is mostly a branding effort to make their masks stand out from the competition, and less about specific technical improvements.

I did look to see if you had a video on this mask but there doesn't seem to be one, would love to hear your take on this unusual designation.

And regarding the Boncare (et al) masks, I suspect the omission is at least partially motivated by style; it makes the mask less conspicuous for mainstream use. The labeling on most (passing) masks tends to be rather obtrusive.

0: https://lutema.com/collections/made-in-usa-masks/products/ad...

1: https://lutema.com/pages/m95-vs-kn95-masks

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

#205

Post by 3np »

lloydarmbrust wrote: post #201
3np wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it should be made way more clear - and here I take the opposite stance of the person you're replying to. Change title to "Comprehensive Mask Material Testing" or "Comprehensive Mask Fabric Testing" or similar. Similarly; "...that's why we're testing the filtration capabilities of every mask in our laboratory" At some point (on the front page, above the fold) there could be a small notice box explaining the di…

Okay I put a disclaimer and typing up a post to link to LMK what you think: https://www.armbrustusa.com/pages/mask-testing

Hey, I think it's a lot more clear now :)

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

#206

Post by pimlottc »

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…

That doesn't seem to be the case here, the product images clearly show the required labeling and it's even pointed out specifically in the video review [0] at 3m30s.

Would be good to see what the update notes say for this one. It might be because the product listing still claims it's approved from emergency use; the FDA rescinded the EUA for all non-N95 masks back in July [1].

0: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zeYlKgOI8-w&t=210s

1: https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/emergency-use-authorizat...

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

#207

Post by lloydarmbrust »

3np wrote: post #205
lloydarmbrust wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay I put a disclaimer and typing up a post to link to LMK what you think: https://www.armbrustusa.com/pages/mask-testing

Hey, I think it's a lot more clear now :)

woot

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

#208

Post by pimlottc »

newman314 wrote: post #65
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…

Sorting by breathability is broken. It'd be nice if you had pop-up dialogs upon hover over each of the fields. For example, if I hover over breathability, explain what it is and how you measure it. Some color codes/gradient would be nice to help with the visual effect (Green for Pass, Red for Fail etc.) But please do include a toggle for color-blind mode if you do add color.

> Sorting by breathability is broken.

I'm seeing this too; I think the single entry [0] that includes a percent sign in its breathability score is screwing up the sort.

0: https://www.armbrustusa.com/blogs/mask-review/surgical-beixi...

> Some color codes/gradient would be nice to help with the visual effect (Green for Pass, Red for Fail etc.) But please do include a toggle for color-blind mode if you do add color.

If the green and red shades are chosen to have enough contrast to look different when convert into black and white (e.g. when printed), it should be usable even for most colorblind people, while also being easier to read for everyone.

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

#209

Post by lloydarmbrust »

TrueGeek wrote: post #203
bjarneh wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but they don't have a $250k mask lab to make sure the fabric is good Hard to argue against that, but on HN I'm sure someone's gonna try :-)

Someone on HN recently did: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29878971

hahaha got me on that one.

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

#210

Post by pimlottc »

lloydarmbrust wrote: post #90
koyote wrote: post #46

That's a real trove of information! I see there are no cloth masks tested. I'd love to know how useful they are (or can be) as I much prefer being able to reuse my masks. Edit: just realised that both Type and Style can be cloth and the cloth ones are presumably all under Style. All of them failed :(

Cloth is pretty useless... here's a neck gaiter compared to a surgical mask: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=40gAXGOlEmI Also tested my kids minion pillow case which beat the gaiter :) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EK_WryN-Y40

That's what I suspected... it would be instructive to include the cloth mask on the chart, just as a comparison to show the difference.
Post reply on HN