Design of customizable personal protective equipment for 3-D printing: Performance evaluation of N95 respirators using computational fluid dynamics

References

• American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2021. Standard specification for barrier face covering. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM International. (Designation: F3502–21). doi: 10.1520/F3502-21.
   Google Scholar
• Arora S, Majumdar A. 2022. Face masks to fight against COVID-19 pandemics: a comprehensive review of materials, design, technology and product development. J Ind Text. 51(3_suppl):3613S–3647S. doi: 10.1177/15280837211069869.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bandi MM. 2020. Electrocharged facepiece respirator fabrics using common materials. Proc Math Phys Eng Sci. 476(2243):20200469. doi: 10.1098/rspa.2020.0469.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cai M, Li H, Shen S, Wang Y, Yang Q. 2018. Customized design and 3D printing of face seal for an N95 filtering facepiece respirator. J Occup Environ Hyg. 15(3):226–234. doi: 10.1080/15459624.2017.1411598.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Capizzano F. 2011. A turbulent wall model for immersed boundary methods. AIAA J. 49(11):2367–2381. doi: 10.2514/1.J050466.
   Google Scholar
• Carter LN, Reed CA, Morrell AP, Fong AKH, Chowdhury R, Miller E, Alberini F, Khambay B, Anand S, Grover LM, et al. 2021. A feasible route for the design and manufacture of customised respiratory protection through digital facial capture. Sci Rep. 11(1):21449. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-00341-3.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen C, Zhao B. 2010. Some questions on dispersion of human exhaled droplets in ventilation room: answers from numerical investigation. Indoor Air. 20(2):95–111. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0668.2009.00626.x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dalla S, Bacon B, Ayres JM, Holmstead S, Ahlberg-Elliot AJ. 2020. 3D-printed N95 equivalent for personal protective equipment shortages: the Kansas City Mask. J 3D Printing Med. 4(4):211–217. doi: 10.2217/3dp-2020-0019.
   Google Scholar
• de Tullio MD, De Palma P, Iaccarino G, Pascazio G, Napolitano M. 2007. An immersed boundary method for compressible flows using local grid refinement. J. Comput. Phys. 225(2):2098–2117. doi: 10.1016/j.jcp.2007.03.008.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duran K, Duran D, Oymak G, Kiliç K, Öncü E, Kara M. 2013. Investigation of the physical properties of meltblown nonwovens for air filtration. Tekstil ve Konfeksiyon. 23(2):136–142.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Epps HH, Leonas KK. 2000. Pore size and air permeability of four nonwoven fabrics. Int Nonwovens J. 9(2):18–22. doi: 10.1177/1558925000OS-900215.
   Google Scholar
• Gibson P, Rivin D, Kendrick C. 2000. Convection/diffusion test method for porous textiles. Int. J. Cloth. Sci. 12(2):96–113. doi: 10.1108/09556220010324803.
   Google Scholar
• Herron JBT, Hay-David AGC, Gilliam AD, Brennan PA. 2020. Personal protective equipment and Covid-19- a risk to healthcare staff? Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 58(5):500–502. doi: 10.1016/j.bjoms.2020.04.015.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Imbrie-Moore AM, Park MH, Zhu Y, Paulsen MJ, Wang H, Woo YJ. 2020. Quadrupling the N95 supply during the COVID-19 crisis with an innovative 3D-printed mask adaptor. Healthcare (Basel). 8(3):225. doi: 10.3390/healthcare8030225.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• International Organization for Standardization (ISO). 2009. Biological evaluation of medical devices – part 5: tests for in vitro cytotoxicity (ISO 10993-5). 3rd. [accessed 2021 Aug 28]. http://nhiso.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/ISO-10993-5-2009.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Ishack S, Lipner SR. 2021. Use of 3D printing to support COVID-19 medical supply shortages: a review. J 3D Print Med. 5(2):83–95. doi: 10.2217/3dp-2020-0031.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Joshi M, Khan A, Sapra BK. 2020. Quick laboratory methodology for determining the particle filtration efficiency of face masks/respirators in the wake of COVID-19 pandemic. J Ind Text. 51(5_suppl):7622S–7640S. doi: 10.1177/1528083720975084.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karsli E, Yilmaz A, Kemancı A, Canacik O, Ozen M, Seyit M, Şahin L, Oskay A, Sabirli R, Turkcuer I. 2022. The effect of N95 respirators on vital parameters, PETCO2, among healthcare providers at the pandemic clinics. Ir J Med Sci. 192(2):853–860. doi: 10.1007/s11845-022-03013-x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khosronejad A, Santoni C, Flora K, Zhang Z, Kang S, Payabvash S, Sotiropoulos F. 2020. Fluid dynamics simulations show that facial masks can suppress the spread of COVID-19 in indoor environments. AIP Adv. 10(12):1–10. doi: 10.1063/5.0035414.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee BU. 2020. Minimum sizes of respiratory particles carrying SARS-cov-2 and the possibility of aerosol generation. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 17(19):1–8. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17196960.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee BU, Yermakov M, Grinshpun SA. 2005. Filtering efficiency of N95- and R95-type facepiece respirators, dust-mist facepiece respirators, and surgical masks operating in unipolarly ionized indoor air environments. Aerosol Air Qual Res. 5(1):25–38. doi: 10.4209/aaqr.2005.06.0003.
   Google Scholar
• Lei Z, Yang J, Zhuang Z, Roberge R. 2013. Simulation and evaluation of respirator faceseal leaks using computational fluid dynamics and infrared imaging. Ann Occup Hyg. 57(4):493–506. doi: 10.1093/annhyg/mes085.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Livingston E, Desai A, Berkwits M. 2020. Sourcing personal protective equipment during the COVID-19 pandemic. JAMA J Am Med Assoc. 323(19):1912–1914. doi: 10.1001/jama.2020.5317.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• López-Rebollar BM, Posadas-Bejarano A, García-Pulido D, Torres-Maya A, Díaz-Delgado C. 2021. Proposal of a mask and its performance analysis with CFD for an enhanced aerodynamic geometry that facilitates filtering and breathing against COVID-19. Fluids. 6(11):408. doi: 10.3390/fluids6110408.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morris V. 2020. LaFactoria3D COVID-19 MASK v2 [blog]. [accessed 2021 Aug 28]. https://3dprint.nih.gov/discover/3dpx-013477.
   Google Scholar
• National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). 1997. 42 CFR Part 84 respiratory protective devices: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; [accessed 2021 Aug 24]. https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/npptl/topics/respirators/pt84abs2.html.
   Google Scholar
• Ngo TD, Kashani A, Imbalzano G, Nguyen KTQ, Hui D. 2018. Additive manufacturing (3D printing): a review of materials, methods, applications and challenges. Composites, Part B. 143:172–196. doi: 10.1016/j.compositesb.2018.02.012.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nold J, Metzger MC, Schwarz S, Wesemann C, Wemken G, Pieralli S, Kernen F, Weingart J, Schirmeister CG, Schumann S, et al. 2021. Air seal performance of personalized and statistically shaped 3D-printed face masks compared with market-available surgical and FFP2 masks. Sci Rep. 11(1):19347. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-98963-0.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Dowd K, Nair KM, Forouzandeh P, Mathew S, Grant J, Moran R, Bartlett J, Bird J, Pillai SC. 2020. Face masks and respirators in the fight against the COVID-19 pandemic: a review of current materials, advances and future perspectives. Materials (Basel). 13(15):3363. doi: 10.3390/ma13153363.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Kelly E, Arora A, Pirog S, Ward J, Clarkson PJ. 2021. Comparing the fit of N95, KN95, surgical, and cloth face masks and assessing the accuracy of fit checking. PLoS One. 16(1):e0245688. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0245688.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). 2013. 1910.134 – Respiratory protection. [accessed 2021 Aug 24]. https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/regulations/standardnumber/1910/1910.134.
   Google Scholar
• Radonovich LJ, Simberkoff MS, Bessesen MT, Brown AC, Cummings DAT, Gaydos CA, Los JG, Krosche AE, Gibert CL, Gorse GJ, et al. 2019. N95 respirators vs medical masks for preventing influenza among health care personnel: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA J. Am. Med. Assoc. 322(9):824–833. doi: 10.1001/jama.2019.11645.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rodríguez NB, Formentini G, Favi C, Marconi M. 2021. Engineering design process of face masks based on circularity and life cycle assessment in the constraint of the COVID-19 pandemic. Sustainability. 13(9):4948. doi: 10.3390/su13094948.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sobachkin A, Dumnov G. 2014. Numerical Basis of CAD-Embedded CFD. Paper presented at: NAFEMS World Congress 2013; Salzburg, Austria.
   Google Scholar
• Staymates M. 2020. Flow visualization of an N95 respirator with and without an exhalation valve using schlieren imaging and light scattering. Phys Fluids (1994). 32(11):111703. doi: 10.1063/5.0031996.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tcharkhtchi A, Abbasnezhad N, Seydani MZ, Zirak N, Farzaneh S, Shirinbayan M. 2021. An overview of filtration efficiency through the masks: mechanisms of the aerosols penetration. Bioact Mater. 6(1):106–122. doi: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2020.08.002.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tuñón-Molina A, Takayama K, Redwan EM, Uversky VN, Andrés J, Serrano-Aroca A. 2021. Protective face masks: current status and future trends. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces. 13(48):56725–56751. doi: 10.1021/acsami.1c12227.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xu C, Nielsen PV, Liu L, Jensen RL, Gong G. 2017. Human exhalation characterization with the aid of schlieren imaging technique. Build Environ. 112(1):190–199. doi: 10.1016/j.buildenv.2016.11.032.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Zhang T, Zhang T, Liu S. 2022. A modified surgical face mask to improve protection and wearing comfort. Buildings. 12(5):663. doi: 10.3390/buildings12050663.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhu JH, Lee SJ, Wang DY, Lee HP. 2016. Evaluation of rebreathed air in human nasal cavity with N95 respirator: a CFD study. Trauma Emerg. Care. 1(2):15–18. doi: 10.15761/tec.1000106.
   Google Scholar