CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 58Aerosol Filtration and Electrostatic PrecipitationOccupational Health and Safety in WorkplacesInfection Control and Ventilation

Performance of Mechanical Filters and Respirators for Capturing Nanoparticles ―Limitations and Future Direction

Open access
MOSTOFI, Reza, WANG, Bei, HAGHIGHAT, Fariborz, BAHLOUL, Ali, JAIME, Lara·2010·Industrial Health
DOI 10.2486/indhealth.48.296
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

There is an increasing concern about the health hazard posed to workers exposed to inhalation of nanoparticles. Inhaling nanoparticles possess an occupational hazard due to elevated amount emitted to the atmosphere and working environment. Nanoparticles have potential toxic properties: the high particle surface area, number concentration, and surface reactivity. Inhalation, the most common route of nanoparticle exposure, has been shown to cause adverse effects on pulmonary functions and the deposited particles in the lung can be translocated to the blood system by passing through the pulmonary protection barriers. Filtration is the simplest and most common method of aerosol control. It is widely used in mechanical ventilation and respiratory protection. However, concerns have been raised regarding the effectiveness of the filters for capturing nanoparticles. This paper reviews the literature on the filtration performance of mechanical filters and respirators against nanoparticles. It includes the discussion about filtration mechanisms, theoretical models, affecting factors of the filtration efficiency, and testing protocols for respirator and filter certification.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2486/indhealth.48.296

Cites

52 of 52 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The little change in filtration after heat treatments was because filtration efficiency of respirator was also affected by mechanical filtration based on inertia impaction, interception, and diffusion, which are not markedly influenced by charge.

    “This was because filtration efficiency of respirator was also affected by mechanical filtration that is based on inertia impaction, interception, and diffusion-these are not markedly influenced by charge. 34”

    From Assessment of N95 and K95 respirator decontamination: fiber integrity, filtration efficiency, and dipole charge density (2020) · cites this paper as [34]

    Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • The lack of significant change in filtration efficiency between H2O2 and heat treatment on the N95 respirator is because of the involvement of mechanical filtration and particle size.

    “because of the involvement of mechanical filtration 34 and the particle size. 36”

    From Assessment of N95 and K95 respirator decontamination: fiber integrity, filtration efficiency, and dipole charge density (2020) · cites this paper as [34]

    The “Particle filtration mechanisms” and “Most penetrating particle size” sections explain that particle size affects filtration mechanisms and respirator efficiency (section pages are not identified in our copy). They do not compare H2O2 with heat treatment or explain why those treatments would produce no significant difference in N95 filtration efficiency. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Mechanical filtration and particle size are involved in determining filtration efficiency.

    “because of the involvement of mechanical filtration 34 and the particle size. 36”

    From Assessment of N95 and K95 respirator decontamination: fiber integrity, filtration efficiency, and dipole charge density (2020) · cites this paper as [34]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Tait K (2004) Control banding: an improved means of assessing and managing health and safety risks at Pfizer. Presented at the Second International Control Banding Workshop: Validation and Effectiveness of Control Banding. 1-2 March 2004, Cincinnati.
  2. Davies CN (1973) Air Filtration. Academic Press, London.
  3. Hinds WC (1999) Aerosol Technology: Properties, Behavior, and Measurement of Airborne Particles, 2nd Ed., Wiley, New York.
  4. Grafe T, Gogins M, Barris M, Schaefer J, Canepa R (2001) Nanofibers in filtration applications in trans- portation. 1-15, Proceedings of the Filtration 2001 International Conference and Exposition of the INDA (Association of the Nowovens Fabric Industry), Chicago.
  5. Otani Y, Cho SJ, Emi H (1994) Removal of nanome- ter size particles and ions from air. 21-5, Proceedings of the 12th ISCC, Yokohama.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
MOSTOFI, R., WANG, B., HAGHIGHAT, F., BAHLOUL, A., & JAIME, L.
Affiliations
  • Concordia University (US)
  • Institut de recherche Robert-Sauvé en santé et en sécurité du travail (CA)
ORCID
Venue
Industrial Health
Publisher
National Institute of Industrial Health
Published
2010
Volume
48
Issue
3
Pages
296-304
ISSN
  • 0019-8366 (ISSN-L)
  • 1880-8026
DOI
10.2486/indhealth.48.296
OpenAlex
W2133979815
Cited by
58
References
52
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 2
FWCI
2.77
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Industrial Health (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PhareSST (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Electrical and Electronic Engineering › Aerosol Filtration and Electrostatic Precipitation
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Occupational Therapy › Occupational Health and Safety in Workplaces
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Infection Control and Ventilation
Keywords
nanoparticles, mechanical filters, respirators, filtration mechanism, occupational exposure, inhalation exposure, lung deposition, respiratory protection, aerosol control
MeSH terms
Air Pollutants, Occupational, Filtration, Forecasting, Humans, Models, Theoretical, Respiratory Protective Devices, Occupational Exposure, Inhalation Exposure, Nanoparticles

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review