Cloth Face Coverings: Effect of Decontamination Method on Fabric Performance
Source abstract
Abstract
Various textiles have previously been evaluated for use in cloth face masks as a reusable option to help control the spread of respiratory viruses, but only their initial performance was tested. In this study, a broad range of fabrics (3 knit, 7 woven, and 3 nonwoven) were characterized for filtration efficiency (FE) and air permeability (AP) before and after 40 decontamination cycles by home laundry, microwave-generated steam, or dishwasher sterilization. AP was quantified following ASTM D737, and FE was assessed using NaCl aerosol in a simulated breathing system. While most fabrics maintained or improved their FE after 40 decontamination cycles, the AP of many fabrics decreased due to detergent buildup, fiber breakage, and fabric shrinkage. Tightly woven cotton fabrics had unacceptably low AP and FE performance. Knit and nonwoven structures had the best balance of properties, and although they are not recommended for use in single-layer masks, they have potential use in multilayer masks.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Infection Control and Ventilation · COVID-19 and healthcare impacts · Burn Injury Management and Outcomes
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Human Centered Design, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA
Funding
AATCC Foundation · Cornell Atkinson Center for Sustainability
References (23)
Show source-provided references
1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), https://www.cdc.Gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/prevent-getting-sick/about-face-coverings.html (2020, accessed 4 August 2021).
2. 10.1016/j.bpj.2021.02.00210.1016/j.bpj.2021.02.002 ↗
3. 10.1007/s11606-020-06067-810.1007/s11606-020-06067-8 ↗
4. 10.1371/journal.pone.000261810.1371/journal.pone.0002618 ↗
5. Rengasamy S · Ann Occup Hyg · 2010 · 54 · 789
6. 10.1021/acsnano.0c0325210.1021/acsnano.0c03252 ↗
7. 10.1021/acsnano.0c0502510.1021/acsnano.0c05025 ↗
8. 10.1126/sciadv.abd308310.1126/sciadv.abd3083 ↗
9. 10.1016/j.matt.2020.07.00610.1016/j.matt.2020.07.006 ↗
10. 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.13951010.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.139510 ↗
11. 10.1371/journal.pone.024462610.1371/journal.pone.0244626 ↗
12. 10.1080/15459624.2020.186848210.1080/15459624.2020.1868482 ↗
13. 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2020.08.00210.1016/j.bioactmat.2020.08.002 ↗
14. Viscusi DJ · Ann Occup Hyg · 2009 · 53 · 815
15. 10.1080/15459624.2010.48479410.1080/15459624.2010.484794 ↗
16. 10.1021/acsnano.0c0359710.1021/acsnano.0c03597 ↗
17. Lore MB · Ann Occup Hyg · 2012 · 56 · 92
18. 10.3201/eid2609.20152410.3201/eid2609.201524 ↗
19. 10.1016/j.ssci.2020.10483010.1016/j.ssci.2020.104830 ↗
20. 10.1053/jhin.1999.072010.1053/jhin.1999.0720 ↗
21. Annual book of ASTM standards , vol. 7.01-02, West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM, 2021
22. AATCC technical manual , vol. 95. Research Triangle Park, NC: AATCC, 2020, pp. 446–450.
23. 10.1002/app.4475910.1002/app.44759 ↗