Cloth face mask fit and function for children part one: design exploration

Abstract

Commercially available children’s cloth masks range widely in material type and fabric structures, methods of construction, layering, and shape, and there is a lack of sizing systems, anthropometric data or guidelines specifically targeting the fit assessment and design of cloth face masks for children 4-6 years old. To better identify and understand the cloth face mask fit and functional needs of children ages 4-6 years old, the researchers embarked on interdisciplinary in-depth study to investigate commercial market offerings of children’s face masks, identify consumer perspectives, and explore mask design improvements through design research. By triangulating results from survey feedback, commercial market content analysis, and wear trial observations, the researchers were able to identify important design criteria that can be used in the improvement of children’s cloth face mask design: size, comfort, dexterity, movement, and thermal comfort. These criteria were used to iteratively develop new mask prototypes involving a 3D printed head form, traditional sewing and hand patternmaking skills, and the creation of multiple mask versions to explore the design criteria listed above. The designs were interpreted through Bye’s (2010) Problem-Based Design Research (PBDR) framework, which identifies common design research practices in the field on a spectrum and situates PBDR as a process centered on a problem as impetus for design through which artifacts are developed.

Cloth face mask fit and function for children part two: Material Selection

“…This bulkiness prevented the mask from conforming to the contours of the face, especially the nose bridge area. The poor fit led to considerable aerosol leakage, which is a safety issue as well as practical issue for users who wear glasses, as leakage out the top of the mask causes fogging (Du Puis et al, 2022 ). Because this element of the mask design was identified early in the design process, alternatives can be further explored in the next iterations.…”

“…A single-use procedure mask recommended for ages 4–12 (O&M Halyard, Inc.) was included as a positive control. Two face mask designs were included: (1) “Lobster Tail” prototype developed in the previous study (Du Puis et al, 2022 ) and (2) Mask F, which was determined as providing the best fit among the commercial face masks tested in Design Exploration (for images see Appendix ). The combinations of material and design for the constructed masks and the material specifications for the chosen fabrics are listed in Tables 2 and 3 , respectively.…”

“…Material choice is important in face mask design as it directly determines the breathability, particle capture, and comfort factors of the end-use product (Clase et al, 2020 ; Rogak et al, 2021 ). Particularly, discomfort was noted as a common reason for children to wear masks incorrectly in a survey conducted by Du Puis and colleagues (Du Puis et al, 2022 ). Limited research has been conducted on using commonly available fabrics in nonmedical face masks and included only adult breathing rates for testing parameters.…”

“…All fabrics were tested as flat textiles to isolate the material effect on filtration efficiency, air permeability, and aerosol capture. The potentially effective fabric combinations were further constructed into a mask design mimicking a commercial shaped mask and our prototype mask (Du Puis et al, 2022 ). These constructed masks alongside a single-use children’s procedure mask as a positive control were tested on a simulated breathing head form to assess the combination of material and design effects on filtration efficiency, air permeability, and aerosol capture.…”