4
finding that the efficiency of the masks lowered as the
diameter of the hole increased [33].
Other Parameters
Other parameters, such as comfort, temperature, car-
bon dioxide concentration, noise, and ease of communica-
tion, have also been tested. According to one study, PAPRs
do not have a strong impact on the mobility of workers [17].
Tests were conducted in a confined space (ambulance) and
participants took between 3–5 more seconds to complete
four tasks when compared to performing the same tasks
with traditional equipment. However, workers reported
greater comfort while using the PAPRs [17]. Even though
the workers may experience a slightly higher temperature,
one study suggests that the temperature difference may
not be felt, as it is less than the minimum difference that
can be felt by the average person [34]. Noise has also been
studied, as PAPRs use a blower that produces noise during
operations. Noise levels can reach up to 56 dB, affecting
communications. Word discrimination can be reduced to
48% even if the ear is left uncovered [35 36]. Tests have
been carried out to prove the feasibility of implementing a
headset that facilitates
communication. Results are shown in Table 5. As can
be seen, the implementation of a headset causes a great dif-
ference when it comes to identifying words with similar
sounds (rhyme test). However, there is little to no improve-
ment in understanding the ideas in a sentence.
CONCLUSIONS
In the mining industry, workers could be exposed to dust
and other particles that may cause irreversible diseases, such
as CWP. PPE is the last barrier to safeguard a worker from
undesirable elements. In underground mining operations,
remedial measures such as ventilation airflow and dust
scrubbers alleviate the exposure of the miners to respirable
dust particles. However, the concentration of contaminants
is still high in some places, and workers need this last bar-
rier to ensure they are within a safe limit. The implementa-
tion of PAPRs in the mining industry could be a favorable
step toward the improvement of the health of the miners.
PAPRs are powerful tools for protecting workers against
contaminants. They use high- efficiency filters and other
additional mechanisms, such as positive pressure, to pre-
vent hazards from reaching the worker. Several models
(Figure 4) accommodate different needs and offer different
protection levels. Therefore, they are a better option than
most regular respirators currently used in various industries.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors acknowledge the National Institute for
Occupational Safety and Health for their funding of the
research ‘Reviewofindustrialpracticesandtheuseofcompulsory
PPE related to miners in areas of high risk: Airstream helmet/
powered air purifying respirator (PAPR) to minimize respi-
rable dust exposure’ through contract 75D30123C17277.
We also acknowledge Drs. Sekhar Bhattacharyya, William
Groves, and Raja V. Ramani.
REFERENCES
[1] H. Yu and I. Zahidi, “Environmental hazards posed
by mine dust, and monitoring method of mine dust
pollution using remote sensing technologies: An
overview,” Science of The Total Environment, vol.
864, p. 161135, 2023.
[2] S. Bhandari, “Fines and dust generation and con-
trol in rock fragmentation by blasting,” in Rock
Figure 4. PAPR airflow effect on the leakage Table 4. PFs
under different conditions
Condition PF Source
Recommended fit (rest) 787 [30]
Recommended fit (exercise) 445
Used with a knit (rest) 762
Used with a knit (exercise) 397
Used with a helmet (rest) 737
Used with a helmet (exercise) 469
Blower failure (low breathing flow) 8 [31]
Blower failure (high breathing flow) 9
Table 5. Ratings [%]from communication tests for the
HALO CleanSpace [25]
Test Without Headset With Headset
Rhyme Test 70 84
Word recognition 98 97
Meaning understanding 95 95
Figure 4. Assembled PAPRs. 3M Versaflo loose-fitting helmet
(left), CleanSpace EX tight-fitting (right)
finding that the efficiency of the masks lowered as the
diameter of the hole increased [33].
Other Parameters
Other parameters, such as comfort, temperature, car-
bon dioxide concentration, noise, and ease of communica-
tion, have also been tested. According to one study, PAPRs
do not have a strong impact on the mobility of workers [17].
Tests were conducted in a confined space (ambulance) and
participants took between 3–5 more seconds to complete
four tasks when compared to performing the same tasks
with traditional equipment. However, workers reported
greater comfort while using the PAPRs [17]. Even though
the workers may experience a slightly higher temperature,
one study suggests that the temperature difference may
not be felt, as it is less than the minimum difference that
can be felt by the average person [34]. Noise has also been
studied, as PAPRs use a blower that produces noise during
operations. Noise levels can reach up to 56 dB, affecting
communications. Word discrimination can be reduced to
48% even if the ear is left uncovered [35 36]. Tests have
been carried out to prove the feasibility of implementing a
headset that facilitates
communication. Results are shown in Table 5. As can
be seen, the implementation of a headset causes a great dif-
ference when it comes to identifying words with similar
sounds (rhyme test). However, there is little to no improve-
ment in understanding the ideas in a sentence.
CONCLUSIONS
In the mining industry, workers could be exposed to dust
and other particles that may cause irreversible diseases, such
as CWP. PPE is the last barrier to safeguard a worker from
undesirable elements. In underground mining operations,
remedial measures such as ventilation airflow and dust
scrubbers alleviate the exposure of the miners to respirable
dust particles. However, the concentration of contaminants
is still high in some places, and workers need this last bar-
rier to ensure they are within a safe limit. The implementa-
tion of PAPRs in the mining industry could be a favorable
step toward the improvement of the health of the miners.
PAPRs are powerful tools for protecting workers against
contaminants. They use high- efficiency filters and other
additional mechanisms, such as positive pressure, to pre-
vent hazards from reaching the worker. Several models
(Figure 4) accommodate different needs and offer different
protection levels. Therefore, they are a better option than
most regular respirators currently used in various industries.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors acknowledge the National Institute for
Occupational Safety and Health for their funding of the
research ‘Reviewofindustrialpracticesandtheuseofcompulsory
PPE related to miners in areas of high risk: Airstream helmet/
powered air purifying respirator (PAPR) to minimize respi-
rable dust exposure’ through contract 75D30123C17277.
We also acknowledge Drs. Sekhar Bhattacharyya, William
Groves, and Raja V. Ramani.
REFERENCES
[1] H. Yu and I. Zahidi, “Environmental hazards posed
by mine dust, and monitoring method of mine dust
pollution using remote sensing technologies: An
overview,” Science of The Total Environment, vol.
864, p. 161135, 2023.
[2] S. Bhandari, “Fines and dust generation and con-
trol in rock fragmentation by blasting,” in Rock
Figure 4. PAPR airflow effect on the leakage Table 4. PFs
under different conditions
Condition PF Source
Recommended fit (rest) 787 [30]
Recommended fit (exercise) 445
Used with a knit (rest) 762
Used with a knit (exercise) 397
Used with a helmet (rest) 737
Used with a helmet (exercise) 469
Blower failure (low breathing flow) 8 [31]
Blower failure (high breathing flow) 9
Table 5. Ratings [%]from communication tests for the
HALO CleanSpace [25]
Test Without Headset With Headset
Rhyme Test 70 84
Word recognition 98 97
Meaning understanding 95 95
Figure 4. Assembled PAPRs. 3M Versaflo loose-fitting helmet
(left), CleanSpace EX tight-fitting (right)