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

231–240 of 250 posts

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

#231

Post by wrycoder »

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

Thanks!

https://www.armbrustusa.com/blogs/news/mask-fit-vs-filtratio...

Oh, excellent update!

(It might be a good idea to break your database into two sections: one for N/KN/KF respirators and one for other masks.)

I also notice that you have a "collections" page

https://www.armbrustusa.com/collections/

That page has a very helpful section, "USA made N95 masks and KN95 respirators".

https://www.armbrustusa.com/collections/usa-made-n95-masks-r...

Exactly what we need. Two questions:

1. Aren't all N95 "masks" actually respirators? 2. Why do you offer "made in USA" KN95 (Chinese standard) instead of an Armbrust branded N95?

Thank you for doing this!

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

#232

Post by yrral »

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…

Hi, thanks for doing this. 1 piece of feedback is to have a couple lists of masks that you recommended so we don't have to comb through all the listings. I would put this page as the front page and then link/refer to the list to provide authority/weight to your recommendations.

Eg by type (surgical,duckbill,n95,kn95), by budget (budget, price/performance, premium), ships now on amazon, doesn't ship now but better in some way if you're willing to wait, etc.

Also I was looking at the 3m 9210 that you have 2 entries for in your table. The breathability is quite different between the two samples (98 vs 242). Is this expected? That seems a lot of variability for the same mask.

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

#233

Post by anotheryou »

GavinMcG wrote: post #214
anotheryou wrote: post #144

Why is one pass one fail here? https://www.armbrustusa.com/blogs/mask-review/kn95-powecom-f... https://www.armbrustusa.com/blogs/mask-review/kn95-allmed-fl... isn't the passing one worse actually?

From elsewhere in the thread (and on the site's methodology information) it looks like the one that failed was not marked with the information required by the standard, so it fails to meet the standard.

thanks!

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

#234

Post by forgotmyoldacc »

lloydarmbrust wrote: post #221
forgotmyoldacc wrote: post #113

This is great! This is what I wanted to see early on in the pandemic. Just curious, why test now? This would've been (more) useful a year or two ago.

This data set took me 2 years to compile but just recently seemed complete enough to post.

Got it. Thanks for doing this!

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

#236

Post by jerlam »

pimlottc wrote: post #204
lloydarmbrust wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

The Lutema does not claim to have an internationally recognized standard, which is why it "passes" because there is no way to fail it.

The pass/fail column can be considered more of a "is this manufacturer lying?" field. Perhaps it needs another value if it doesn't claim any standards.

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

#237

Post by jerlam »

For another set of data, NIOSH, the official US government agency tasked with certifying respirators and other PPE, has tested and released a large set of data, including masks that were already in volume production before the pandemic:

https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/npptl/respirators/testing/default....

https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/npptl/ppecase.html

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

#238

Post by nier »

lloydarmbrust wrote: post #211
nier wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Greetings from Germany. Of course my local interest lead me to the one and only product tested that originated here. https://www.armbrustusa.com/blogs/mask-review/surgical-medte... The accompanying video is informative and I can add that the way the earloops are attached is wide-spread in Germany. Also confirmation from my side that the strings rip right off with this type of attachment regardless of the actual manuf…

If it helps 100% of my grandparents are from Germany :) might be obvious by my last name.

Crossbow. Yeah, you mentioned in the video. :)

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

#239

Post by mjevans »

fknorangesite wrote: post #226
mjevans wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess they just got slammed with orders? It would be much nicer if they showed 'SOLD OUT' on anything not in stock rather than nothing. (Firefox, Linux, even on my 'no plugins' profile and after creating an account.) It just shows reviews and nothing else on any masks page. Debug console shows... They aren't depending on Facebook for antifruad are they? How will they ever sell to someone security minded like me tha…

> How will they ever sell to someone security minded like me that refuses to ever sign up there? You represent a small enough proportion of the population that it's not worth their time to cater to you.

Probably, their support system mailed me back overnight asking me to use anything webkit based (using consumer terms; Edge or Chrome).

I know that Apple's other webkit fork has to be on the tested path too, but you'd think they could also at least do BASIC validation (does it work at all) against some version of Firefox (even if it isn't the Linux version).

Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:95.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/95.0

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

#240

Post by donavanm »

jerlam wrote: post #225
donavanm wrote: post #25

Related, for those who havent seen, is Aaron Collins collection of mask test data https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1M0mdNLpTWEGcluK6hh5L...

I think it's important to point out that Collins is doing on-face quantitative testing, while Armbrust is only testing the material of the mask. They're not really comparable - a loose surgical mask may be made of good materials and filter well in Armbrust's test, but it's not even worth including in Collins' list because it doesn't seal against the face and won't ever get more than around 60% efficiency. Collins doe…

Indeed. And ideally everyone would get a third party to do a fit test. Or at least do their own self test. But either way Im happy for both datapoints so consumers can filter out obvious junk and then focus on their best available option insyead of starting tabula rosa.
Post reply on HN