NANOMASK TEST

I have been following this board for several months now and appreciate all that I have been able to learn from it. It has also posed questions that are hypothetic in value and this is what got my colleagues and I to perform the following test on the NanoMask.

I am not going to go into the NanoMasks claimed attributes or NIOSH testing (or lack of.)
This test is being performed without prejudice, facts only.

The following is an OPINION based an actual circumstances and tests that have been conducted by myself and nine other professionals.
The qualifications are (for myself) a degree in respiratory therapy.
For the other nine (to include) two Doctors, three respiratory therapists, and four registered nurses.
Of course I asked their permission to post this message, but, of course agreed not to name the Hospital or participants as this is an independent test not sanctioned by the institution and was totally based on a curiosity of the NanoMask claims and its effectiveness.

They also agreed that the public should be made aware of this device as it could be (literally) a choice of life and death.

Okay, lets go. All measurements are approximate.

We pooled our monies and purchased 10 NanoMasks with filters. This was in October.
After a two month wait, we received the products from John Hart, a supplier on the Internet. As far as we could tell the masks and filters come from Oregon Digital that is claimed on his site. http://www.buynanomask.com/

The mask itself consists of two pieces. (Not including the filter or straps.)
An inner shell that has the consistency of a stiff but semi-malleable silicone and an outer shell with the consistency of a hard but semi-malleable plastic.
These two shells separate and the filter is held between them by compression and two “buttons”, one being square and the other circular. The dimensions of these buttons is approximately 3/16 inch x 3/16 inch. The filter has matching holes cutout in the filter itself so you cannot go wrong in attaching the filter.

The filter is then matched up on the inner shell with the square matching square and the circular matching circular.
The mask is then squeezed and the outer (harder) shell is mated to the inner mask.
At the bottom of the inner and outer masks there is also a male female mating slit in the chin area.
At the bottom of the inner mask is an extrusion approximately 7/8 in wide, 1/8 inch tall by approx 1/32 inch thick.
These mate in harmony with the outer mask that holds a matching cut out.
The rest of the filter is held by compression from the above mentioned components.
The filter area now resembles a triangle within the two shells.

The resulting filter area after the mask is assembled with filter is approximately 2 1/8 inch at the bottom of the triangle to 2 1/8 inches measured from the center of the bottom to the apex that rests on the nose. (Triangular configuration.) This was measured in a two dimensional aspect.

Measuring to include the curve at the bottom of the mask we now approach 3 inches at the bottom with the apex going to the “flat” with very little curvature. Curvature at the apex of the mask is negligible.

I should also mention that the “raw filter” measures 6 inches at the widest portion to 3 5/8 inches measured vertically from the center of the wide portion to the apex. (Triangular formation.) When the filter is in the mask, ¾ inch of this filters entire circumference is now covered by the harder outer shell mask.

Straps

Two straps are provided. They appear to be made of surgical rubber and are quite elastic. The dimensions are approx. 24 inches long by 3/8 inch wide.
Strap configuration on the outer mask is (measured from the apex of the nose.) to be 1 ½ and 3 1/8 inches centered, on each side. One full side of the mask measured from apex to heel is 4 ¼ inches.

Each end of the strap is equipped with a retainer. However the back (loose strap end) of the retainers has an open slit in the center of the plastic. We’ll get to this part later.

The Test
Each individual “loaded” their mask with a filter and then we compared all ten.
It took a few tries for some of us, but, we finally got the hang of it.

Now we donned the masks. All had the same problem of the straps popping out of the retainers, thus having to remove the mask to rethread the retainer.
This is definitely a two handed many fingers in different locations operation.
We decided to do the tests one person at a time.

Having now a person with a mask “on” we asked him to tighten the straps to give a snug but not uncomfortable fit. He ran into the same problem of the straps “popping” off due to the retainer, however, with a little help the mask was on and snug.

Leak testing was done with an instrument resembling a dandelion that has gone to seed. Very fluffy, made of extruded cotton.
Smoke tests were also done.

The leak tests failed exhalation at the apex of the nose and the center of the chin area so we tightened the straps. This also failed.

Straps were tightened to the point of circulation failure of the face and exhalation test continued to fail.
We also used an ordinary pair of glasses and these would “fog up” on exhalation from the apex of the nose.

Inhalation tests were done with feather, dandelion, smoke, and video. These tests also failed in the apex of the nose and center bottom of the chin area, no matter how tight the straps were pulled, with the chin area being only slightly worse than the nose area.
The only success was holding the mask firmly to the face with one hand and spreading the fingers along the circumference of the mask.

We concluded that possibly is was the configuration of his face. Not all masks fit all people. Nine to go.

ALL ten people’s tests failed, in both the inhalation and exhalation tests. No matter how tight the straps were pulled or reseating the mask in many different configurations. The only way to get a tight seal was to hold the mask firmly with one hand and spreading the fingers along its circumference. After removing the mask, the straps had been pulled ever increasingly tight that deep welts were noticed on the participants’ faces. This would not facilitate an acceptable comfort level.

Breathing at rest is acceptable. However, if one was under any stress, the volume and exchange of air with exerted breathing would not be adequate as there is significant resistance to inhalation and no exhalation valve.

So this was a ten out of ten failure rate with a high percentage of individuals face contours represented. The mask seems to be too stiff and unforgiving to facilitate a good seal and the filter area is quite small.

These tests were done with no prejudice towards the product and only the facts as we have seen from testing have been presented.

Remember, this is only an OPINION, from our tests.
What you do and use is up to you. It’s our job to care for people.
If you use a mask (any mask) also please use eye protection. Your eyes are as susceptible as your airways.