4 ms·

300nm is specifically the size the filters are worst at collecting. Below that, _eletrostatic_ forces kick in, and they're much better than 95%.

egberts1 3y ago
Citation, please, like I do.
- ThePowerOfFuet 3y ago
  https://www.mpg.de/17916867/coronavirus-masks-risk-protection https://www.mpg.de/17916867/coronavirus-masks-risk-protectio... https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8452097/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8452097/
  - egberts1 3y ago
    First link is an article that merely summarize following link. Not exactly the peer-reviewable source. Second link also has zero “actionable” citation and scarily so, has a paltry 84 citations-by. Making this actionless, “citation-free” paper an even terrible source. Sole reference: https://www.pnas.org/syndication/doi/10.1073/pnas.2110117118 https://www.pnas.org/syndication/doi/10.1073/pnas.2110117118
- tiberious726 3y ago
  It's like the second result when you Google for n95 electrostatic: https://pubs.aip.org/aip/pof/article/32/9/093304/1060745/Recharging-and-rejuvenation-of-decontaminated-N95 https://pubs.aip.org/aip/pof/article/32/9/093304/1060745/Rec... (read the first section (not the abstract)) It was actually a really cool story when this happened during the pandemic. The original inventor of the current n95 mask production technique came out of retirement to help out.
  - egberts1 3y ago
    Cool whitepaper, bro. Too bad that the whitepaper's test sensors only works on particles greater than 300nm. But it does rejuvenate the mask for another working day and alleviate N95 mask shortages. But does not measure for virus-sized water-based particles.
egberts1 3y ago
Electrostatic seems to have nothing below 460nm. Maybe Van der Wahl force. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsomega.9b02646 https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsomega.9b02646
egberts1 3y ago
Do not confuse “droplets” with “aerosols”, like CDC is doing. https://granitegrok.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/1_Petty_New_Hampshire_Legislature_Presentation_January_27_2022.pdf https://granitegrok.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/1_Petty_N...

egberts1 3y ago

Citation, please, like I do.

ThePowerOfFuet 3y ago
https://www.mpg.de/17916867/coronavirus-masks-risk-protection https://www.mpg.de/17916867/coronavirus-masks-risk-protectio... https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8452097/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8452097/
- egberts1 3y ago
  First link is an article that merely summarize following link. Not exactly the peer-reviewable source. Second link also has zero “actionable” citation and scarily so, has a paltry 84 citations-by. Making this actionless, “citation-free” paper an even terrible source. Sole reference: https://www.pnas.org/syndication/doi/10.1073/pnas.2110117118 https://www.pnas.org/syndication/doi/10.1073/pnas.2110117118
tiberious726 3y ago
It's like the second result when you Google for n95 electrostatic: https://pubs.aip.org/aip/pof/article/32/9/093304/1060745/Recharging-and-rejuvenation-of-decontaminated-N95 https://pubs.aip.org/aip/pof/article/32/9/093304/1060745/Rec... (read the first section (not the abstract)) It was actually a really cool story when this happened during the pandemic. The original inventor of the current n95 mask production technique came out of retirement to help out.
- egberts1 3y ago
  Cool whitepaper, bro. Too bad that the whitepaper's test sensors only works on particles greater than 300nm. But it does rejuvenate the mask for another working day and alleviate N95 mask shortages. But does not measure for virus-sized water-based particles.

egberts1 3y ago

Electrostatic seems to have nothing below 460nm. Maybe Van der Wahl force. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsomega.9b02646 https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsomega.9b02646

egberts1 3y ago

Do not confuse “droplets” with “aerosols”, like CDC is doing. https://granitegrok.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/1_Petty_New_Hampshire_Legislature_Presentation_January_27_2022.pdf https://granitegrok.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/1_Petty_N...