Science Physics experiment underscores the value of triple-layer masking

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account

An experimental study carried out by an international team of engineers and physicists has added more evidence for the value of triple-layer masking to prevent the spread of COVID-19 and similar diseases.

“Any form of mask is better than no mask,” says Professor Swetaprovo Chaudhuri (UTIAS), one of the co-authors of a new paper published today in Science Advances.

“But what we also show is that if they have enough momentum, large liquid droplets can penetrate single or even double-layer masks. When they do, they break up into smaller droplets that are more persistent in the air.”

The team — which also includes Professor Abhishek Saha at the University of California San Diego, and Professor Saptarshi Basu of the Indian Institute of Science — is leveraging expertise they developed while studying aircraft engines. They use computer models and physical experiments to understand finely dispersed droplets in air, known as aerosols.

In two previous papers, the team used models to describe the ways that droplets and aerosols created by a cough or sneeze can travel and persist in air. These mechanisms were then incorporated to develop a disease spread model, the first one to be developed from the flow physics of transmission.

In the latest paper, they used a device known as a droplet dispenser to fire liquid droplets at a piece of material from single-, double- and triple-layer masks.



Learn more about the experiment in this video, created by the authors for the 73rd annual meeting of the APS Division of Fluid Dynamics. (Authors: Shubham Sharma, Roven Pinto, Abhishek Saha, Swetaprovo Chaudhuri, Saptarshi Basu)

The liquid used by the team was not real saliva but rather a facsimile made of water, salt and various proteins. The mask material was ordinary fabric with an average pore size of 30 micrometres, about the width of a human hair. Specialized cameras were used to take microscopic images up to 20,000 times per second to observe what happened.

“A pore size of 30 micrometres can easily stop large solid particles that aren’t travelling too fast, but liquid droplets are a different story,” says Chaudhuri. “Liquids can deform, and big droplets can break up into smaller droplets, which have different characteristics.”

Chaudhuri says that liquid droplets larger than 100 micrometres in diameter don’t usually spread very far, because they quickly drop to the ground via gravity. But droplets smaller than 100 micrometres wide form aerosols, which can persist in the air for much longer. The time period ranges from a few seconds in the case of those with diameters near 100 micrometres, to hundreds of hours for those near 10 micrometres.

The team’s experiments showed that when droplets larger than 250 micrometres were fired at a single layer mask, they atomized, breaking up into pieces small enough to penetrate the material and form aerosols. This also happened with double-layer masks, but the proportion of pieces that made it through was only about 9%, compared with about 70% with the single-layered mask. Triple-layer masks were enough to stop virtually all the droplets.

The diagram in A shows how larger, high-velocity liquid droplets can break up into smaller ones when they collide with mask material. The photographs in B demonstrate how double- and triple-layer masks prevent transmission of these secondary droplets. (Image: Shubham Sharma and Roven Pinto)
The diagram in A shows how larger, high-velocity liquid droplets can break up into smaller ones when they collide with mask material. The photographs in B demonstrate how double- and triple-layer masks prevent transmission of these secondary droplets. (Image: Shubham Sharma and Roven Pinto)
Chaudhuri is quick to point out that little is known about the fate of the aerosols created by the atomization process. More research is needed to determine whether they could carry enough viral material to be infectious or how far they could travel.

Still, the findings provide more experimental evidence for what public health agencies around the world are recommending: any mask is better than no mask, but the more layers, the better.

Furthermore, fitting and leakage are very important issues. “An N95 is best, but if that is not available, the latest recommendation is a cloth mask supplemented with a medical procedure mask,” says Chaudhuri. “The combined effect of procedural and well fitted cloth masks provide good filtration while reducing leakage”

While previous studies have looked at how droplets leak from the sides of masks, they typically have not captured how the mask itself can play a role in atomization.

“Most studies also don’t look at what is going on at the individual droplet level and how aerosols can be generated,” Basu adds.

This finding underlines the importance of a physics-based approach.

“When we study combustion and sprays and the turbulent flows involving them as in aircraft engines, we think about droplets and aerosols a lot, from a lot of different angles,” says Chaudhuri. “I think there’s great value in bringing these perspectives to bear on the challenge of COVID-19, which affects us all.”
 
I think the world's elites are just having a giggle at this point. I know I'd laugh if I saw some moron wearing five masks.
 
You can't convince some people to not sneeze directly onto each other, nobody is wearing two masks let alone three. You can whine and scream about the science as much as you want, it's not gonna happen.
 
I'm confused. Is this talking about wearing multiple masks or a single mask that has multiple layers? Recommending wearing 3 masks is so fucking stupid.
 
The diagram in A shows how larger, high-velocity liquid droplets can break up into smaller ones when they collide with mask material.
So just don't have someone sneeze literally right in your face. Problem solved!

Goddamn, I know the physicists have better shit to be doing than this. But I can't wait to see the counter-paper where some other team tried to replicate the experiment and found some limitation with the three masks idea, and we should really be using four masks instead.
 
nobody is wearing two masks
I started seeing it literally the day after the idea started popping up on the news. People are actually doing it.
I'm confused. Is this talking about wearing multiple masks or a single mask that has multiple layers? Recommending wearing 3 masks is so fucking stupid.
I think the point is either/or. As long as there's three layers involved I think it meets the criteria.
 
I started seeing it literally the day after the idea started popping up on the news. People are actually doing it.
That's crazy as hell, I've seen none of that but I most likely live in a different places. Might as well toss yourself out a window if you're that afraid of the what ifs.
 
I think the point is either/or. As long as there's three layers involved I think it meets the criteria.
That isn't very sciencey, though. This crack team of international physicists should specify and maybe say a certain type of mask and material is best if they're going to waste time doing this.
Even after all this they're basically like "lol idk if the aerosol droplets are actually that bad though that'd require more science ™️ "

As has already been pointed out, I await the experiments showing how 4 masks is even better.
 
The most frustrating thing is that i use a neck gaiter and that can be easily doubled, tripled, however many more layers placed across the mouth/nose by folding it over.

Nope, not good enough because it's not a "mask". When they say trust the science they mean follow the exact wording to a T not interpret and understand the results.
 
just say we need to wear 10 n95s and replace them every hour and be done with it.
 
That's crazy as hell, I've seen none of that but I most likely live in a different places. Might as well toss yourself out a window if you're that afraid of the what ifs.
I live in a kinda weird place. It's a "swing" county in California. I can walk into the grocery store without a mask and the staff don't give a shit. A good handful of local businesses outright defied lockdowns and law enforcement openly stated they're not enforcing shit. However, there's also a ton of people that get all uppity if they can see your nostrils and they walk everywhere wearing latex gloves yet still refuse to touch basically anything.
 
Wearing layered masks is retarded imo, but nothing is more infuriating than seeing people wearing masks outdoors, alone, when it's not even remotely fucking cold and no one else is anywhere close to them. I automatically assume that anyone who does that is literally an imbecile.
 
The most frustrating thing is that i use a neck gaiter and that can be easily doubled, tripled, however many more layers placed across the mouth/nose by folding it over.

Nope, not good enough because it's not a "mask". When they say trust the science they mean follow the exact wording to a T not interpret and understand the results.
You're not supposed to science on your own bro, trust the experts.

Like how could a guy with an 8th grade education figure out controlled powered flight

Glenn-Curtiss-Golden-Flyer-Mineola-1909-CradleofAv-1068x804[1].jpg
 
I started seeing it literally the day after the idea started popping up on the news. People are actually doing it.

I think the point is either/or. As long as there's three layers involved I think it meets the criteria.

that's a big difference, 3 3-layer masks is 9 layers. its shitty enough working in those blue 3 layered masks at the warehouse, i can't imagine doing it in 3 of the fucking things.

i'venet seen anyone wear 2 masks but a mask and face shield.
 
Back
Top Bottom