Powered Air Purifying Respirators (PAPR) - Advantages and disadvantages
Tight fitting RPE – aka masks, just aren’t suitable for everyone, nor are they suitable for all circumstances and environments.
Over the last few years, we have seen a surge in demand for Powered Air Purifying Respirators (PAPR). Many terms have been adopted for said devices such as loose-fitting , powered hoods, positive pressure (EN12941)…. but all give a clue as to their principal of function. They do not rely on a seal to the wearers face.
Despite an increase in popularity, there is still a lot of confusion and misconceptions about the devices, and a lack of knowledge surrounding the advantages (and disadvantages) Vs tight fitting respiratory protection, i.e. masks
So, tight fitting RPE relies on a seal to the face; when the wearer inhales, they create negative pressure within the mask, meaning that air will rush into the mask, hopefully through the filter media. If however, the mask does not create an effective seal to the face (due to facial features or facial hair for example) then unfiltered air will enter the mask via the path of least resistance. Seemingly minor gaps between the face and the mask will result in lots of unfiltered air entering the lungs.
PAPR works on a different principal; a battery driven motor draws air through a filter and forces clean air into the hood at a positive air pressure compared to the surrounding atmosphere. So what are the advantages (and disadvantages) of this you may wonder?
hsg53
Here we look at the advantages and disadvantages Vs tight fitting half face masks & respirators (I.E. the most common type of “mask” currently in use).
PAPR advantages over Half Masks
The big one, they do not rely on a seal to the face therefore they do not require the wearer to be clean shaven! Facial hair is bang on trend and seems to be so for the foreseeable future. Many people are simply unable or unwilling to be clean shaven in order to correctly wear tight fitting masks.
Because PAPR doesn’t rely on a seal to the face, there is no requirement for the wearer to be face fit tested (a cost saving).
They can incorporate not just respiratory protection but also eye / face, head and hearing protection.
There is no inhalation resistance, they are therefore easier to wear from a breathing perspective and thus have increased wear times (non-powered RPE should be worn for up to one hour). This also means that they can be better suited for works of a more physical nature and are more suited for those with underlying respiratory conditions or poor physical fitness.
They actively keep the wearer cool as air movement within the head top helps to promote evaporation; similarly, you don’t get a build-up of warm, damp exhaled air within the unit.
They can offer higher levels of respiratory protection Vs half face RPE, if correctly specified.
Two way communication can be easier as you now get to see lip movement and facial expression, they typically don’t muffle the voice either compared to a half mask.
They can typically be worn with corrective lenses; this may or may not be the case for half face RPE (the wearer would need to be face fit tested with their corrective (or protective) eyewear.
So, what are the disadvantages of PAPR Vs Half Masks.
Again, the obvious one first, the unit cost makes it a considerable initial outlay (though they could prove cost effective over time).
They fail to danger, it has to be running in order to protect. Most units will some kind of warning system.
The filters are often (not always!) 2,3,4 or even 5 times more expensive than their tight-fitting equivalent.
They are typically big, bulky and heavy although the weight could be distributed to the waist or back.
They can be more difficult to decontaminate, require inspection )vs FFPs) and or could require servicing by a third party provider.
If they aren’t charged, the wont work!
They cannot accommodate all filter types, AX filters for example (VOCs, boiling point below 65 degrees Celsius).
They typically offer no filtration of the wearers exhaled breath, not great in certain workplaces.
They don’t really lend themselves that well to certain sectors such as Asbestos work.
Due to the visor, it would be difficult to use certain optical equipment such as a microscope.
Hopefully you found that a brief but objective summary!
One point of note is that they too also offer different levels of protection and thus need to be specified correctly. Focusing on particulate protection, PAPR rated TH1 would offer an Assigned Protection Factor of 10, equivalent of a FFP2 / P2 half mask. PAPR rated TH2 would offer APF20, equivalent of a P3/FFP3 half mask and PAPR rated TH3 would offer APF40, equivalent of a P3 full face mask.
So, what would I wear given the choice (and I do have the choice!)? All depends on what I’m doing, the environment, what other PPE / workwear I’m expected to wear and the hazard(s).
In summary – it is unlikely that most organisations will rely on just one type of RPE, a range of devices will probably be needed to ensure that all wearers are protected, i.e. selecting “adequate and suitable” respiratory protective equipment.
Examples of some of the PAPR that we supply can be found in the below link or feel free to get in touch where we’ll gladly guide you through the selection process and or facilitate a product demonstration.
Comments