@article {Solano2020.10.07.20208744, author = {Tomas Solano and Rajat Mittal and Kourosh Shoele}, title = {One size fits all?: Modeling face-mask fit on population-based faces}, elocation-id = {2020.10.07.20208744}, year = {2020}, doi = {10.1101/2020.10.07.20208744}, publisher = {Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press}, abstract = {The use of face masks by the general population during viral outbreaks such as the COVID-19 pandemic, although at times controversial, has been effective in slowing down the spread of the virus. The fit of simple cloth masks on the face as well as the resulting perimeter leakage and face mask efficacy are expected to be highly dependent on the type of mask and facial topology. However, this effect has to date, not been examined and quantified. Here, we study the leakage of a rectangular cloth mask on a large virtual population of subjects with diverse facial features, using computational mechanics modeling. The effect of weight, age, gender, and height on the leakage is studied. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommended mask size was used as a basis for comparison and was found not to be the most effective design for all subjects. Thin, feminine, and young faces benefit from mask sizes smaller than that recommended by the CDC. The results show that side-edge tuck-in of the masks could lead to a larger localized gap opening in many face categories, and is therefore not recommended for all. The perimeter leakage from the face mask worn by thin/feminine faces is mostly from the leakage area along the bottom edge of the mask and therefore, a tuck-in of the bottom edge of the mask or a mask smaller than the CDC recommended mask size are proposed as a more effective design. The leakage from the top edge of the mask is determined to be largely unaffected by mask size and tuck-in ratio, meaning that other mechanical alterations such as a nose wire strip are necessary to reduce the leakage at this site.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding Statementthe National Science Foundation XSEDE programAuthor DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The study is theoretical and exempt from IRB approvalAll necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesAll the required data is provided in the paper}, URL = {https://www.medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/10/12/2020.10.07.20208744}, eprint = {https://www.medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/10/12/2020.10.07.20208744.full.pdf}, journal = {medRxiv} }