Highlights The cleaning effects of gas and vapor bubbles in ultrasound fields are compared. The cleaning effect is assessed in terms of adhesion strength and wettability. The substrates advantageously cleaned with gas or vapor bubbles are identified.

Dust masks are widely used to prevent the inhalation of particulate matter into the human respiratory organs in polluted air environments. The filter of a dust mask inherently obstructs the natural respiratory air flows, and this flow resistance is mainly responsible for the discomfort experienced when wearing a dust mask. In atmospheric conditions seriously contaminated with fine dust, it is recommended that common citizens wear a dust mask in their everyday lives, yet many people are reluctant to wear a dust mask owing to the discomfort experienced when wearing it for a long time. Understanding of physical reasons for the discomfort is thus crucial in designing a dust mask, but remains far from clear. This study presents a technique to quantify the wearing comfort of dust masks. By developing a respiration simulator to measure the pressure loss across a dust mask, we assessed the energy costs to overcome flow resistance when breathing through various types of dust masks. The energy cost for a single inhalation varies with the mask type in a range between 0 and 10 mJ. We compared the results with the survey results of 40 people about the wearing comfort of the dust masks, which revealed that the wearing comfort crucially depends on the energy cost required for air inhalation though the dust mask. Using the measured energy cost during inhalation as a parameter to quantify the wearing comfort, we present a comprehensive evaluation of the performance of dust masks in terms of not only the filtering performance but also the wearing comfort. Our study suggests some design principles for dust mask filters, auxiliary electric fans, and check valves.

No abstract

Aim To evaluate the efficacy of a novel ultrasonic irrigation device, remotely‐generated irrigation with a non‐invasive sound field enhancement (RINSE) system, in removing biofilm‐mimicking hydrogel from a simulated isthmus model and compare it with sonically‐ and ultrasonically‐activated irrigation systems. Methodology A polycarbonate root canal model containing two standardized root canals (apical diameter of 0.20 mm, 4% taper, 18 mm long with a coronal reservoir) connected by three isthmuses (0.40 mm deep, 2 mm high, 4 mm long) was used as the test model. The isthmuses were filled with a hydroxyapatite powder‐containing hydrogel. The canals were filled with irrigant, and the models were randomly assigned to the following activation groups (n = 15): EndoActivator (EA), ultrasonically activated irrigation (UAI), and RINSE system (RS). Syringe irrigation (SI) with a 30G needle served as the control. Standardized images of the isthmuses were taken before and after irrigation, and the amount of hydrogel removed was determined using image analysis software and compared across groups using anova (p < .05). Results Hydrogel removal was significantly higher with the RS (83.7%) than with UAI, EA, or SI (p ≤ .01). UAI (69.2%) removed significantly more hydrogel than SI and EA (p < .05), while there was no significant difference between SI (24.3%) and EA (25.7%) (p = .978). Conclusions RINSE system resulted in the most hydrogel removal, performing better than UAI or EA. The effect of RS was also not reliant on the insert or tip entering the pulp chamber or root canal, making it particularly useful in conservative endodontics.

No abstract