It's called MultiVapor. Creative name, I know, but it might be useful if you get Conyer'd by a chemical spill or something else like it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-UEKtJRI4pk - New video on the qualitative fit test procedure by @ghhughes@zeroes.ca

#CPCSupport

No, Peter Tsai did not invent the N95, contrary to what rumors would have you believe. Nor was it invented in 1970.

It was actually quite recent... well... relatively speaking in terms of labor issues. 1995. Rhymes, doesn't it?

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/NIOSH_Guide_to_the_Selection_and_Use_of_Particulate_Respirators_Certified_Under_42_CFR_84

This is going to be a short one, but hey, it has to be said.

• It is possible to fit test a full face respirator with a crude adapter made of duct tape. Just make sure to remove the nosecup so you don't miss sampling the exhalation valve. See this for more context.

• And hey, you might as well do a fit test with the nosecup, just to be sure it all fits nicely.

• A mysterious fit test failure with my PortaCount-connected-to-a-full-face-respirator also happened to be caused by a broken exhalation valve. Who knew?

• For those interested, this particular failure occurred after deep breathing, and during the side-to-side exercises.

• So, if you even a little suspicious your exhalation valve has been slightly warped from use, best to assume it has been.

Fun fact: That giant hole made through the pictured full-face-respirator's lens is an adapter from Dynatech Frontier. If you had any idea what I just said, please go to the microblog section through this link.

Wow, time flies. Has it really been over a year since a train in Ohio derailed and spilled a bunch of Vinyl Chloride everywhere?

Well, hopefully, it won't ever happen to you, but if a train happens to derail in your area, remember this:

DO NOT RELY ON CHEMICAL CARTRIDGE COLOR-CODING.

All the cartridge color information online is wrong or outdated. And the US government's 42 CFR 84-approved standard, ANSI™ K13.1-1973, provides a generic color for combinations of chemicals not listed in the (paywalled!) table.

This leaves, unfortunately, the tedious read of your respirator's cartridge packaging to determine what volatile chemicals it blocks.

It'll go something like: "AG/AM/OV/CO," or maybe it'll just tell you what the chemicals are, which, in this case, is "Acid gas/Ammonia/Organic Vapors/Carbon Monoxide."

• Here's a guide from NIOSH™ for the acronyms..

• You'll also want to check the NIOSH™ pocket guide for more respirator use instructions. Be aware: no matter what it says, you should not use a cartridge that doesn't have the corresponding chemical listed on its packaging and documentation.

• Don't use cartridges if the use-indicator is darkened (check your respirator's documentation for details).

• And of course, always check the manufacturers website, to get chemical cartridges from official vendors.

• The NIOSH TC# should start with TC-23C (chemical cartridge) or TC-14G (gas mask).

• "Canisters" and "cartridges" can have different color codes under K13.1-1973. And sometimes, like with "Ammonia" and "Carbon Monoxide," they have the same color code. That's not confusing at all.

More fun facts:

• K13.1-1973 got revised in 2001. It's called ANSI Z88.7-2001, mostly to address 42 CFR 84 updates in 1995. It's the new K13.1-1973, and that one's official.

• Chemical cartridges are approved by NIOSH™, the same government entity that approves N95™s. Unlike the N95™ though, chemical cartridges are not trademark-able. So you'll have to be careful where you get your cartridges form.

• Did you know that ANSI K13.1-1973 has an alternate color for P100™ filters? They're normally magenta in color under 42 CFR 84, but the ANSI standard allows for purple P100™ filters.

And now you know why the 3M™ 7093 P100™ filter is purple.

• There are max use concentrations for chemical cartridges. 42 CFR 84 says you shouldn't use an ammonia cartridge if the concentration is above 300 ppm. In that case, officially, you would have to wear a firefighter's SCBA.

Yes, you can fit test SCBAs with a CPC/PortaCount too. Filters are added to the mask and it's tested in negative pressure mode...

(Speaking of firefighters, did you know a lot of US law relies on NFPA™ guidelines which are also paywalled? Seems like a tradition, I guess)

• 42 CFR 84 states that, at the worst possible concentration, chemical cartridges can at worst filter 90% of a given chemical in the air. There's no easy way of testing this, so you'll have to take NIOSH™'s word on it.

That's a worse show of performance than most N95™s do with particulates!

All this makes our prepper who only hoards gas masks for the apocalypse, but not for our entrenched, and evolving, SARS biohazard seem even more insane.

Even more insane if they insist that N95™s are trash...

but their hundred-dollar-plus-gas-mask-with-canisters-I-have-no-way-of-testing-so-I-have-to-trust-the-government-department-NIOSH™-who-also-certifies-N95™s?-in-case-the-government-fails

...is a perfectly reasonable form of protection. Despite the fit all being tested on the same OSHA-cleared equipment, like the PortaCount.

One more useless fact!

• The Federal Register, you know, the journal that holds all the CFRs for the president and stuff (the executive branch, if you recall civics class), was created when FDR was president.

If you have any Dynatech Frontier / Frontier Enterprises documentation, Dynatech Nevada software for the FitTester 3000, or documentation from PortaCount Pluses dated from 1998 and prior, reply here, or DM @fedivesefittester@fedia.social (on fedia.social, not .io)

#dynatech #portacount #CPCSupport

This thread is a work in progress, see open questions Need guidance?

Somehow, while half-asleep looking for info on respirator fit testing, I managed to also sloppily assemble a list of fit novel, interesting test protocols across various eras. Probably not of great use to anyone, including PortaCount users like myself (ironically)...

But, since Lemmy/The Threadiverse is in desperate need of niche, pedantic, semi-historical content, I might as well go to the effort to assemble it all here. I mean, who else is going to publish the stuff I've seen in the Federal Register?

This thread was originally also going to only include protocols that were designated across all fit test methods by regulatory authorities, but I might as well include them all here, for conveniences' sake. (Except CNP, cause this is /m/CPCSupport, and that's a whole can of worms...)

::: Open Questions

• Certain custom protocols that were made up for scientific papers are missing. I can't be bothered to add them at the moment, though.

• There may also be another country that has developed its own weird protocol, but that seems unlikely (given how long this list is...)

• We're not sure why fit test protocols changed over time. I mean, we can guess a motive, but not the data or experimental results that lead to these changes.

• We're also not sure why international regulators generally copy OSHA and remove 'grimace'. (What's wrong with grimace?!)

• It's up in the air which of these official protocols is the best. I'm placing my bets on the 1990s OSHA protocol, but maybe 'grimace' is really tough, who knows.

:::

Historical and Current Protocols, Mandated by law in the US

::: Current OSHA. 8 Exercises, Qualitative and Quantitative

1 minute per exercise, except for grimace (15 seconds)

1. Normal Breathing
2. Deep Breathing
3. Head Side to Side
4. Head Up and Down
5. Talking (use rainbow passage, or count)
6. Grimace
7. Bending
8. Normal Breathing

(Insert 'grimace' jokes here)

:::

::: Early 90s OSHA. 8 Exercises, Qualitative and Quantitative

This was part of the impetus for this whole thread. I found a document where exercises 6 and 7 aren't quite as you remember them today...

1 minute per exercise.

1. Normal Breathing
2. Deep Breathing
3. Head Side to Side
4. Head Up and Down
5. Reading (use rainbow passage, or count)
6. Bending
7. Jogging
8. Normal Breathing

:::

::: NIOSH/OSHA Protocol, 6 Exercises, Qualitative and Quantitative

I call this the "NIOSH" protocol because it's a protocol described in Appendix B, in the NIOSH Guide to Industrial Respiratory Protection. But according to TSI, OSHA apparently used this protocol for certain occupations well into the late 1990s, even after the 8-exercise protocols were made. Oh, bureaucracy.

1 minute per exercise.

1. Normal Breathing
2. Deep Breathing
3. Head Side to Side
4. Head Up and Down
5. Talking (use rainbow passage, or count)
6. Normal Breathing

:::

::: US Military Protocol, 5 Exercises

1 minute per exercise

1. Normal Breathing
2. Deep Breathing
3. Head Side to Side
4. Head Up and Down
5. Rotate Chin

:::

::: US Military Protocol, 6 Exercises

1 minute per exercise. Sourced from a TSI demo program found on Archive.org.

1. Normal Breathing
2. Deep Breathing
3. Head Side to Side
4. Head Up and Down
5. Rotate Chin
6. Jog in Place

:::

::: MESA Protocol, 4 Exercises, Qualitative

This was another major impetus for this thread. Before NIOSH, respirators were regulated by the Mining Enforcement and Safety Administration, and before that, the Bureau of Mines. Fit testing wasn't done in the early days, but by the 70s, this was the protocol we got:

2 minutes per exercise!

1. Nodding and Turning Head
2. Move Arms
3. Run in Place
4. Use Tire Pump

Is this scientifically backed? Who knows. (Foreshadowing...) :::

::: OSHA "Fast Fit Test Protocol" for Quantitative CPCs, 4 Exercises

This is a new protocol. Note: By the book, you'll also need to modify the sampling times when using this protocol. And not for the better...

By the book: 50-30-30-39 seconds

1. Bending Over
2. Jogging
3. Head Side to Side
4. Head Up and Down

Is this scientifically backed...? :::

International Protocols

::: Most of them, 7 Exercises, Qualitative and Quantitative

1 minute per exercise. The main difference between this and OSHA is that 'grimace' is removed. And sometimes they rearrange the exercises...

1. Normal Breathing
2. Deep Breathing
3. Head Side to Side
4. Head Up and Down
5. Talking (use rainbow passage, or count)
6. Bending
7. Normal Breathing

:::

::: EN 149, 5 Exercises

Made for Europe. 2 minutes per exercise. Kind of a hybrid between the MESA and OSHA protocols. Eh, not really.

1. Walking
2. Head Side to Side
3. Head Up and Down
4. Talking (Alphabet)
5. Walking

:::

::: Crash UM, 6 Exercises, Qualitative and Quantitative

1 minute per exercise. Significantly shorter than Crash UM.

1. Normal Breathing
2. Talking
3. Normal Breathing
4. Normal Breathing
5. Talking
6. Normal Breathing

:::

CPC Timings

::: Standard

8020 Actions	Timings
Mask purge	11 sec.
Ambient sample	5 sec.
Ambient purge	4 sec.
Mask sample	40 sec.
Total time per exercise	60 sec.

:::

::: 2-Minute Example

8020 Actions	Timings
Mask purge	11 sec.
Ambient sample	5 sec.
Ambient purge	4 sec.
Mask sample	100 sec.
Total time per exercise	120 sec.

:::

::: N95 (Slow)

Extra tubing necessitates longer timings.

8020A Actions	Timings
Mask purge	15 sec.
Ambient sample	15 sec.
Ambient purge	6 sec.
Mask sample	50 sec.
Total time per exercise	86 sec.

:::

::: OSHA "Fast"

On the first exercise:

8030 Actions	Timings
Mask purge	11 sec.
Ambient sample	5 sec.
Ambient purge	4 sec.
Mask sample	30 sec.
Total time per exercise	50 sec.

If you're using FitPro, you just have to click "Fit test with 2 ambient samples" and you'll be done with configuration. But just for the heck of it, let's keep going:

On the second and third exercise:

8030 Actions	Timings
Mask purge	0 sec.
Ambient sample	0 sec.
Ambient purge	0 sec.
Mask sample	30 sec.
Total time per exercise	30 sec.

Final Exercise

8030 Actions	Timings
Mask purge	0 sec.
Ambient sample	5 sec.
Ambient purge	4 sec.
Mask sample	30 sec.
Total time per exercise	39 sec.

You won't be able to do a 0 second purge/ambient time on an 8020, so the best time you can get is ~3 minutes on a 8020.

:::

::: Military Timings

Sourced from the TSI demo program.

8020 Actions	Timings
Mask purge	11 sec.
Ambient sample	5 sec.
Ambient purge	4 sec.
Mask sample	20 sec.
Total time per exercise	40 sec.

:::

::: Military Timings (N95??)

Note: The 8020M does not support the N95-Companion. However, these timings were left in the TSI demo program for some reason...

8020 Actions	Timings
Mask purge	15 sec.
Ambient sample	15 sec.
Ambient purge	6 sec.
Mask sample	50 sec.
Total time per exercise	86 sec.

:::

::: TL;DR

• Make sure to fit test. It is not a user seal check.
• If you think you've failed a fit test, you've failed.
• For everyday use, it's almost never the filter; replace the exhalation valve. :::

Users of elastomeric respirators are usually concerned about their filters. I mean, you change your filters in your furnace every year (or if you're paranoid, every season). Maybe you don't need to change it as often as an N95, but shouldn't you have to change your elastomeric filters, say every six months?

Well, I'm going to cover in later post why throwing out old, unused filters is, surprisingly, almost never necessary (but only if you aren't stressing it by grinding stone or removing asbestos... or anything else that requires a respirator), but in short:

It's almost never the filter.

But you know what does need changing every six months? That's just as exposed to dust as the filters? A piece of rubber that, if you fail to pay attention, can plummet your fit factor scores to single-digit surgical mask territory?

Notes When Fit Testing Your Respirator

Besides the commonly given advice to:

• Fit test, with the help of Bitrex/Saccharin + a nebulizer, or, if you're healthy, irritant smoke,

• fit test at regular intervals (which is usually how faulty exhalation valves and changing faces are discovered),

• and do user seal checks (located in your respirators manual, usually),

The most important thing to remember is never ignore failures.

• If you coughed, even slightly in, say, an irritant smoke test, you've failed the fit test and need to investigate what went wrong.

I had previously swapped an exhalation valve with one from another respirator, promptly forgot about it, and inadvertently swapped it back, assuming the irritant smoke test was faulty. It wasn't. After that, only regular testing with a CPC caught the failure.

If you do happen to only have a CPC, here's a telltale sign of exhalation valve failure:

• Do repeated exercises of Normal Breathing-Deep Breathing.

• Normally, after the first exercise, you'll notice a slight drop in fit factor when 'Deep Breathing' compared to 'Normal Breathing.' This is because there's an increase in filter penetration when 'Deep Breathing.'

• But, if the exhalation valve is leaking, you'll notice a 'Normal Breathing' score lower than a 'Deep Breathing' score, well into the third exercise and beyond.

• You'll usually notice this pattern on multiple attempts.

If your respirator isn't visibly damaged, replace the exhalation valve immediately. Alternatively, if you feel a stream of air leaking, your respirator does not fit and needs to be replaced with a different brand or size.

And of course, unless the exhalation valve is absolutely destroyed, you won't be able to detect this mode of failure on current CNP fit testing machines. Makes you wonder why OSHA is still allowing this style of fit test...

::: Edit: It's a little late to opt out of Discord forced arbitration, unless you've recently created a new account. Unfortunate, but in the meantime, you might want to watch out for regulations in your state's legislature...

Sidenote: If you're still on Discord, make sure you opt out of mandatory arbitration ASAP! And maybe consider joining Matrix where they don't have a skeleton in a closet?

Have you heard of another social platform (corporate or not) mandating arbitration? :::

::: Edit 2: If you are a Bluesky lurker... Please follow @ap.brid.gy Explanation. Oh yeah, they mandate arbitration too. :::

Back on topic...

This should hopefully be the last equipment wanted post. Yes, I know they're a bit annoying, but these things are just hard-to-find, you know?

In case you're wondering, yes, we're still looking for a PMLT/TDA-99M. Any leads or demos, as always, should go to DMs. But ATI isn't the only vendor making photometer-based fit testers. Okay, they used to be, when their first competitor went out of business, but guess who stepped up in their place...

Yep. Here's the manual for the 8587A. IIRC, it's been described as a miniature version of the 8130A, the giant filtration tester used by respirator manufacturers. Except, this one acts a little more like a PortaCount, in that you can fit test with this thing!

The 8587A doesn't include a vacuum pump, so that's a little disappointing, but in all other respects, it's just like a PMLT/TDA-99M with regards to requiring oil-based aerosols and a hood for the person being tested.

DM links: @fediversefittester@fedia.social (Mastodon, fedia.social) or @fediversefittester@fedia.io (Lemmy, fedia.io)

If you've been thoroughly reading /m/CPCSupport, you might be aware of the most common accessory for the 8020A, the N95-Companion, which was integrated into later models of the PortaCount. But did you know there's another, more obscure accessory for the PortaCount?

Consider yourself lucky! ...if you manage to find this accessory at a discount. I could only find one unit on the largest auction site for an unreasonable price, and they haven't shown up in any government auctions yet.

The 8120 is believed to be TSI's answer to the ATI's PMLT/TDA-99M, an already rare fit tester. So unsurprisingly, the 8120 is almost nonexistent. You can't even more than half a page worth of results on a Google Image Search.

::: What is this thing?

The accessory essentially adds standardized elastomeric testing involving stuff like the drink tube and the exhalation valve, features of the TDA-99M, to the PortaCount. Oh, did I also mention:

• It was released after the end 8020A manufacturing, yet the 8120 still supports it?

• But it doesn't support the 8040.

• And it's placed 10 model numbers behind the super-expensive 8130, which has the 8119 accessory?

Curious...

Here's the manual, if you're interested. And the 8120 is not just limited to super expensive CBRN respirators either; here's a manual for the 3M Bayonet adapters, which no one has been able to find yet.

:::

Yeah, even if you find an 8120, with no adapters, you're not going to be able to use it for its intended purpose anytime soon. But feel free to let us know if you've found or acquired one.

This is perhaps the ~~rarest~~ aerosol based quantitative fit tester out there. We'd appreciate getting any leads on Craigslist or something.

"PMLT" is the model name given to the civilian version AFAIK, (manual here), while "TDA-99M" is the military model, sorta like the 8020A and the 8020M for the PortaCount.

Yes, we already know about the three available on the biggest auction site, but unfortunately, they are all missing the components needed to do a quantiative fit test. One of the biggest ones is the shroud...

...not to mention all the tubing required.

::: Why is it rare? Photometer-based quantitative fit testers used to be the only option to do a quantitative fit test for about a decade before the PortaCount. ATI was one company that provided equipment during this era, along with another company that has since gone out of business... but since about the late 80s, the PortaCount, along with other CPC and CNP machines, basically displaced any market for these expensive machines. ATI continues to exist as a sort of competitor to TSI in other related HVAC/aerosol products, but with a significantly attenuated role in the quantitative fit testing market. :::

I recommend going through the manual, and DMing @fediversefittester@fedia.social (or @thetester@discuss.online on Lemmy) if you have any information.