In summary, AYO WX FFM-LF PAPR can provide over 3M Versaflo TR-315A+ PAPR Kit with 307C helmet:

• Higher protection.
• Longer battery life.
• Half the weight.
• Better wearability and mobility.
• Easier maintenance.
• 1/3 of the cost

When should AYO WX FFM-LF PAPR System be used instead of 3M Versaflo TR-315A+ PAPR Kit with a 307C helmet?

When doing work requiring frequent donning and doffing and physical movements, such as tunneling or building work instead of work just sitting or standing for a long period:

• The long hose and heavy belt-mounted power unit are a nuisance to don and doff, and for doing mobile and highly physical work.

When doing work with heavy dust:

• The bulky Versaflo system is difficult to clean, while the AYO WX FFM-LF PAPR system is far easier to clean and handle.

When doing high-exertion work that causes heavy breathing:

• The Versaflo will not provide protection when you over-breathe the blower with a peak of 205 L/min. For example, you may well breathe over 250 L/min doing heavy work, which will cause negative pressure in the face shield at the initial phase of inhalation. Due to the loose-fitting nature of the 307 helmet, you will breathe in harmful dust or gas easily. In this situation, if you have an AYO WX FFM-LF PAPR System, you can configure it into a AYO WX FFM-DS PAPR system, which has a tight-fitting double-seal Full-face mask that can still protect you when the pressure in the mask goes negative briefly during inhalation.

When you are on a budget:

• The Versaflo is over 3 times the cost of the AYO WX FFM-LF PAPR system. Why pay so much more for a product that is not as suitable for doing the same job?

In summary, AYO WX FFM-LF is on par with most other PAPR brands regarding peak flow performance, while it stands out in mobility, flexibility, ease of use, and value-for-money.

Buy AYO WX FFM-LF Loose-Fitting Full-Face Mask PAPR System – the best all-rounder Full-Face Mask PAPR System in the world.

In the area of WHS on respiratory protection, there are two common issues:

1. Workers with facial hairs, such as a beard, present an issue when selecting a proper respirator for respiratory protection, as tight-fitting PAPRs are not recommended, which limits the choice of selection.

2. Even if workers are clean-shaven, for many organizations, the annual fit-testing is a pain and burden, as it is time-consuming and costly, especially when the workforce is large or has a high turnover rate.

However, although loose-fitting PAPRs like 3M Versoflo are a good fit for some niche applications, it is by no means the most suitable solution for many other work conditions, such as:

• Works that require frequent heavy physical exertions and movement, the headtop, hose and belt-mounted heavy Power unit are quite troublesome.
• Works that need frequent donning and doffing, PAPRs with headtop+hose+belt-mounted Power units are pain and nonsense for productivity.
• For very dusty works, such as stone cutting and grinding, bulky PAPRs like 3M Versaflo are difficult to clean daily.
• Works that don’t need head protection, PAPRs that must work with a headtop are overkill or not convenient.
• Work conditions that need higher protection that most loose-fitting PAPRs can’t provide.
• PAPRs like 3M Versaflo are quite expensive and not an economical and value-for-money solution for many applications.

All the above shortcomings could be resolved by PAPRs with facepieces without helmets, hose, and belt-mounted Power units, provided the facepieces of either half-face or full-face can be both tight-fitting and loose-fitting, such that they don’t require a fit test when a lower level of protection can be accepted, but can provide higher protection when fit-tested.

Here comes the question of this article: Can Facepieces be loose-fitting?

If we refer to AS/NZS 1715-2009, it defines both half facepiece and full facepiece as tight-fitting devices.

The Standard also demands a suitable fit test to be carried out for RPE with a tight-fitting facepiece.

Note that, the definition of a fit test requires testing the fit during the Power Off mode of a PAPR. Surely, with hairs present between the facepiece and the facial skin, the fit test will fail miserably.

Therefore, the Standard goes further by stating that no one who requires respiratory protection shall wear either a full facepiece or half facepiece RPE over a beard.

Here is our rationale:

• Facepieces don’t have to be tight-fitting to provide good protection. Powered respirators normally rely on generating positive pressure in the facepieces to achieve protection. Even AS/NZS 1715:2009 acknowledges that positive pressure RPE may diminish the effect of poor facial fit.
• Recent products from Europe show both half facepieces and facepieces loose-fitting PAPRs. For example, Optrel Swiss Air System and CleanAIR Unimask for Basic PAPR.

The new ISO respiratory standard ISO 16973-2023 specifies Respiratory Interface Classes with loose-fitting for a few types of facepieces as below:

• We have repeatable fit test data at Power On mode for our facepiece-based PAPR AYO WX, and our data show a similar fit factor for a bearded person to a clean-shaven person, indicating good protection for our PAPR on a person with facial leaks, and demonstrating that PAPRs could provide good protection without a tight-fitting.
• Therefore, we can expect a suitable PAPR with a loose-fitting facepiece to provide a good level of protection, although it may not provide the same protection as a tight-fitting PAPR when the pressure in the facepiece becomes negative.
• Further, we have the view that a tight-fitting PAPR could be used as a loose-fitting PAPR provided that we accept the protection level is less than the PAPR with a user being clean-shaven and properly fit-tested.

To this end, European Standards are written more appropriately by having EN 12942 for tight-fitting PAPRs and EN 12941 for loose-fitting PAPRs, where EN 12942 needs to test in Power On and Off modes, which makes sense for tight-fitting PAPRs, and EN 12941 tests in Power On mode only, which makes sense for loose-fitting PAPRs.

The highest class in EN 12942 is TM3, and the highest class in EN 12941 is TH3, where TM3 is 4 times better protection than TH3, this also makes sense.

So the ultimate issue/bottleneck in Australia is whether or not AS/NZS1715 and AS/NZS 1716 can be updated to recognize facepieces can be loose-fitting, and the protection level differences between tight-fitting and loose-fitting PAPRs.

Before this can happen, organizations with many bearded workers or high turnover rates have to rely on open minds and sound judgment from decision-makers, in particular, occupational hygienists in qualifying more suitable respirators that are otherwise not permitted to use if following the current Australian Standards dogmatically.

As a respirator designer and manufacturer, Aimwell believes AYO WX Around-neck PAPR series can normally work as both tight-fitting and loose-fitting and are better suited for a wide range of worksites and conditions than loose-fitting only PAPRs due to AYO WX unique practicality and flexibility by design.

About the author:

Eric Fu, founder and managing director of Aimwell, has over 25 years of experience in breathing device design and manufacture.

There are many kinds of PAPRs on the market, and if we categorize them based on their structural styles, we could have the following categories:

• On-facepiece
• In-helmet
• Hose & Belt – Facepiece
• Hose & Belt – Helmet/Hood
• Around-neck

Here is a quick go-through of them.

On-facepiece

• Compact
• Heavy on the face
• Affect downward vision and work
• Difficult to use in confined spaces
• Difficult to implement on half facepiece

In-helmet

• Include head protection by design
• Heavy on the top – difficult for downward work
• Difficult to use in confined spaces
• Loose-fitting only – lower protection
• Not feasible to half-facepiece
• No choice but to wear the helmet even if you don’t want to

Hose & Belt + Facepiece

• Hose-on-face affects work and vision
• Hose affects mobility
• Difficult to use in confined spaces
• Troublesome to don and doff

Hose & Belt + Helmet/Hood

• Include head/eye protection
• Hose affects mobility
• Difficult to use in confined spaces
• Troublesome to don and doff
• Not feasible to half-facepiece
• Loose-fitting only
• No choice but to wear the helmet or hood even if you don’t want to

 Around-neck AYO WX PAPR Series

• Low profile on the face
• Good mobility
• Easy to don and doff
• Can work with half-facepiece and full-facepiece
• Flexible to add other PPE

It can be appreciated that the Around-neck AYO WX PAPR series is more practical and flexible than all other styles:

• With low-profile facepieces that matter most when doing challenging hard work including downward work and in confined spaces.
• No top-heavy helmet-mount PAPR that affects downward work.
• No hose & Belt that affect mobility and working in confined spaces.
• As it is around the neck, it is compatible with most common helmets, earmuffs, etc.
• It allows flexibility of half-facepiece, full-facepiece, with or without a helmet, use of common and non-integrated helmets, including common welding helmets, etc.

Equipped with a world-leading breath-responsive flow control technology, the AYO WX PAPR series is capable of producing over 200 L/min peak flow when needed, yet it can work efficiently for up to 16 hours with a much smaller and lighter battery than in those of constant flow PAPRs.

By using advanced and smart technologies, AYO WX can be fitted around the neck, which demonstrates the best location to fit a PAPR for doing a wide range of industrial works.

AYO WX Around-neck PAPR Series is proudly invented, designed, and optimized in Australia by Aimwell.                                                                                                                  

When it comes to half-face respiratory protection from dust, typically there are 3 options:

1. Disposable paper mask, commonly N95 paper mask or filtering facepiece respirator (FFR).
2. Elastomeric reusable non-powered air-purifying respirator (NAPR).
3. Powered air-purifying respirator (PAPR).

Option 1 is the most common type of respirator, where the ‘Cup’ shaped mask is made of non-woven filter media and thus functions both as a barrier and as an air filter.

It is simple, light, low-profile, and can be mass-produced efficiently; however, it has the following key drawbacks:

• The seal is prone to leak, as the facial contact is made from non-woven fiber that is not elastic with a low fit factor and cannot maintain a reliable seal with facial movement.
• Typically, P2 grade is most practical from a flow resistance point of view due to the limited effective usable area of the mask, and P3 grade media will likely make it too restrictive to breathe comfortably.
• The Assigned Protection Factor (APF) is only 10 for P2 FFR. For hazardous dust such as welding fumes, it is considered inadequate.
• It is a disposable type and is not designed for reuse. Outside dust tends to accumulate around the mask seal due to negative pressure inside the mask, making it dirty to reuse the next day. Your breath will also contaminate the filter media with moisture and smell, increasing flow resistance to breathe against, and allowing bacteria to grow. Depending on how dusty and physical exertion is, it may need to be replaced in a few hours or daily.
• You must be clean-shaven.

Option 2 improves some drawbacks of Option 1, where:

• The elastomeric cushion improves the fit factor and seal during use.
• The filter and the elastomeric mask are reusable, making it environmentally friendly and potentially saving costs for frequent use in dusty environments.

However, Option 2 still has the following drawbacks:

• Although the flow resistance of the filter of a NAPR can be made lower by making the filter cartridge bigger, being a negative pressure respirator, the APF is still at 10 regardless of whether a P3 grade filter is used.
• Being a negative pressure respirator, your lungs are still burdened by the flow resistance of the filter, making it not very suitable for high exertion work, as the flow resistance is proportional to the flow rate which is determined by the level of exertion of the work involved.
• You must be clean-shaven to ensure the expected protection, and you are also recommended to do annual fit testing to make sure the fit factor is still adequate.

Option 3 improves most of the drawbacks of Option 2, where:

• There is no flow resistance when the pressure inside the mask is positive, which is the case in normal and non-high exertion work where the flow rate from breathing is within the flow capacity of the PAPR.
• Higher APF can be achieved up to 1000.
• You may be able to keep a short and well-trimmed beard, provided you do fit testing at least once to make sure a fit factor of over 1000.

So based on the above comparison, PAPRs are the best option as far as protection is concerned.

However, not all PAPRs are equal:

• • They vary with APF levels, some are not significantly higher than a NAPR, such as a loose-fitting PAPR.
  • Other factors such as wearability, mobility, flow capability, and cost will affect whether a particular PAPR is suitable for a given work.

Here is a comparison of popular types of PAPRs on the market for dust protection:

From the table above, Aimwell AYO WX HFM Half-Face Mask PAPR System is a clear winner among common half-face mask PAPRs on the market in terms of overall performance for dust protection.

You may wonder why Aimwell AYO WX HFM PAPR System comes only at a fraction of the cost of most PAPRs while achieving the best overall performance on the market.

You can better appreciate it with our mission as a company: to make you breathe safer and better. We mean it by striving to innovate the technology, the design, and the manufacturing process to make the product work better and cost less.

In the case of Aimwell AYO WX HFM PAPR, firstly the technology used is unique and among the most advanced in the world, then we went a step further to make the overall product cost less by optimizing the design for a low-cost manufacturing process, and we went even further to make the running cost very low by providing an unconventional pleated pre-filter not seen in other respirators.

As a result, the running cost of Aimwell AYO WX HFM PAPR is so low, that within 12 months, its total cost after purchase will be less than that for a common NAPR.

In summary, Aimwell AYO WX HFM Half-Face mask PAPR System has the following properties:

• Best-in-class protection and lowest-in-class cost.
• Great wearability and mobility – can be worn just like a common NAPR.
• Comfortable to breathe – once you have used Aimwell AYO WX HFM PAPR, you will not want to go back to NAPR.
• Easy to clean and maintain – flush wash compatible.
• Less demanding on clean-shaven with a Loose-Fitting Face Seal as an Add-on option.
• Cheaper than using a NAPR.

So if you are looking for the best half-face respirator for dust protection, look no further than Aimwell AYO WX HFM PAPR.

Aimwell AYO WX HFM PAPR is ideal for protecting the following: Asbestos, silica dust, metalliferous dust, powder coating dust, coal dust, and sawdust.

Upgrade from NAPR to Aimwell AYO WX HFM Half-Face Mask PAPR System now for better protection, better comfort, and cost savings.