Bandit's mask should help protect against coaler's cough

[shubla]

If the particles were large enough that a strip of cloth could prevent them, they wouldn't be too dangerous. Coalers cough wouldn't even be a thing RL or elsewhere.
But this is not the case.
Those coal particles are very very small in size, some cloth is not going to prevent them from getting in your lungs at all. The holes in the cloth are way too large.
Coal particles being small is the reason why they are so dangerous, they get deep in your tiny things at the lungs.
In other words: bad idea.

[jordancoles]

If the particles were large enough that a strip of cloth could prevent them, they wouldn't be too dangerous. Coalers cough wouldn't even be a thing RL or elsewhere.
But this is not the case.
Those coal particles are very very small in size, some cloth is not going to prevent them from getting in your lungs at all. The holes in the cloth are way too large.
Coal particles being small is the reason why they are so dangerous, they get deep in your tiny things at the lungs.
In other words: bad idea.

Fuck off Shubla

[Karede]

Key word is help protect, surely something is better than nothing? We can do craftable p99 masks if that'll help you cope

[Glorthan]

"The least expensive cloth masks removed just 39-65% of standard particles of 30-, 100-, and 500-nanometers, and 1- and 2.5-micrometers"
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2 ... 114227.htm

"The 65% total incombustible content required for intakes was based on the measured size of coal dust found in mines during the 1920’s and the amount of rock dust required to inert that size of coal in full-scale experimental mine tests (Nagy, 1981). The term “mine size coal” was adopted in about 1925 and refers to coal dust, all of which passes a U.S. Standard No.20 sieve (850 μm) and contains 20% minus 200-mesh (75 μm). The justification for adopting it is given in Bureau of Mines Technical Paper (TP) 464 (Rice and Greenwald, 1929). In the 1920’s, representative dust samples were collected from mine passageways that were not rock-dusted, and then they were sized using sieves. TP 464 states that these coal dust samples collected from the mine floors had 5% to 40% of the material less than 200 mesh. TP 464 further indicates says that the values were weighted as far as possible, and for 80% of the mines, the final values ranged from 15% to 25% through 200 mesh."
https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/mining/UserFi ... /cdpss.pdf

So cheap cloth masks are ~50% effective at blocking particles at under 2.5μm, and better as the size increases. 80% of particles under 850 μm are bigger than 75 μm.

A cloth mask blocking 90% of coal dust damage seems a very conservative estimate.

tl;dr: fuck off shubla, shitpost somewhere else.

[MagicManICT]

When it comes to coal mining, cloth masks are effective at reducing, but not long term prevention. Even modern coal miners who wear respirators still have issues. Still, if it only reduces the amount of damage taken from a Coaler's Cough wound, it's better than nothing.

[Undefined]

If the particles were large enough that a strip of cloth could prevent them, they wouldn't be too dangerous. Coalers cough wouldn't even be a thing RL or elsewhere.
But this is not the case.
Those coal particles are very very small in size, some cloth is not going to prevent them from getting in your lungs at all. The holes in the cloth are way too large.
Coal particles being small is the reason why they are so dangerous, they get deep in your tiny things at the lungs.
In other words: bad idea.

It's a game dude. If we want to go for the BUT ITS REALISTICALIER approach then 95% of the game makes no sense.

The mechanic just plain sucks from a gameplay perspective and is a giant kick in the nuts of fun, in previous worlds I played where you could just coal bug the smelters and use only 1 coal per load you could also strip mine coal with no negative effect, it feels to me like the whole coal situation now is the complete opposite and serves to limit the availability of coal... Something any large village can produce in the 1000s and in not such a long period of time will be a far higher quality than can be found, someone just trying to enjoy mining is completely "shafted" by it, this world I groan whenever I'm digging and hit coal, if I want to continue a passage through it I'm going to need to assess my current cough situation, let alone when I actually need to mine the good coal I found to smelt some metal.
Right now I literally can't run my smelters because I can't mine coal and I'm playing the game the way I enjoy it... If I want to continue running my smelters I'll need to start making pots, growing trees, sourcing dirt, sourcing water, waiting for growth, cycling, building tar kilns, running tar kilns, harvesting coal (With zero negative consequence).

I'm completely fine with having to source some sort of more readily available and actually useful healing method, but right now it's simply a case of, welp, no more mining coal for a week for me.

[Vigilance]

i for one love coalers cough and would actually encourage more mining related wounds.

((this is a good idea coles))

[shubla]

"The least expensive cloth masks removed just 39-65% of standard particles of 30-, 100-, and 500-nanometers, and 1- and 2.5-micrometers"
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2 ... 114227.htm

"The 65% total incombustible content required for intakes was based on the measured size of coal dust found in mines during the 1920’s and the amount of rock dust required to inert that size of coal in full-scale experimental mine tests (Nagy, 1981). The term “mine size coal” was adopted in about 1925 and refers to coal dust, all of which passes a U.S. Standard No.20 sieve (850 μm) and contains 20% minus 200-mesh (75 μm). The justification for adopting it is given in Bureau of Mines Technical Paper (TP) 464 (Rice and Greenwald, 1929). In the 1920’s, representative dust samples were collected from mine passageways that were not rock-dusted, and then they were sized using sieves. TP 464 states that these coal dust samples collected from the mine floors had 5% to 40% of the material less than 200 mesh. TP 464 further indicates says that the values were weighted as far as possible, and for 80% of the mines, the final values ranged from 15% to 25% through 200 mesh."
https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/mining/UserFi ... /cdpss.pdf

So cheap cloth masks are ~50% effective at blocking particles at under 2.5μm, and better as the size increases. 80% of particles under 850 μm are bigger than 75 μm.

A cloth mask blocking 90% of coal dust damage seems a very conservative estimate.

It is ironic that you are defending this idea by posting a paper which has in the title that cloth provides POOR PROTECTION.
"our results suggest that cloth masks are only marginally beneficial in protecting individuals from particles of 2.5 μm."
In addition, they don't really specify what these masks were, other than that they were bought from some random street vendors in Kathmandu.
These masks are probably industrially produced with cool modern mechanized looms, and something that hearthlings couldn't produce.
Cloth made by hearthlings is probably of lesser density and poorer quality, not giving as good protection.

And the second paper is related to modern mines with modern mining methods, and addresses the explosiveness and how particle size affect that. Which is not related to this issue at all.
Perhaps we should add chance for explosions while mining coal as well, is that what you are suggesting by linking this?

Black lung is caused by particles smaller than 5-10µm in size, <2.5µm being the most dangerous. Larger particle sizes than that won't get deep enough in your lungs without any mask anyway.

There are other problems with masks too. The larger dust builds up in the mask over time, making breathing difficult.
And wrapping the mask tightly while still not preventing the breathing too much is difficult, which is maybe one of the biggest reasons why your suggestion is bad.
Mining is hard work, you sweat, and it's very very moist in caves. Wearing even thin layer of cloth in front of your face is really not a good idea, you will soon faint and struggle to breath.

Your estimate of 90% is ridiculous, even the papers that you linked didn't claim prevention of that level.
If there was 90% prevention by using some simple piece of cloth, black lung as a disease wouldn't exist.
In addition your paper used some mannequin doll to do these experiments, which doesn't take into account how the mask leaks stuff because of how actual human face works.
https://oem.bmj.com/content/oemed/75/6/446.full.pdf In here, some actual 2.5µm filters were used, but what I want to point out in this is how much leakage there was with especially the more-primitive-looking masks when they used actual volunteers for testing.

If the bandit mask was to provide some protection, it would have to be very, very minor protection, like 0-10% at most. Even that is a bit questionable.

You may as well delete the whole wound instead of adding some shitty and 1000% unrealistic mechanic like this prevent it.

tldr: ur defending of this idea sucks, stop linking papers if you dont even read them

shitposter

Not agreeing with you = shitposting, nice logic

[Glorthan]

I know all about how relatively useless the masks chinese people wear at preventing pm2.5 particulate matter in air pollution. I was pointing out that a simple cloth mask can prevent down to very small particles, and the vast majority of particulate matter in coal dust tends to be far larger.

But black lung, like silicosis, isn't necessarily caused by super small particles. Larger than 2.5um still gets stuck in the lungs.

But by all means shubla, find better papers telling how effective cloth is at stopping black lung, not air pollution (a very different issue). It's not easy.

If the bandit mask was to provide some protection, it would have to be very, very minor protection, like 0-10% at most. Even that is a bit questionable.

Maybe for realism, after mining for 25 ingame years you have a 5-10% chance of contracting the disease?

A miner who has spent 25 years in underground coal mines has a 5–10% risk of contracting the disease.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coalworke ... moconiosis

[Undefined]

wall of text

I'm convinced, let's add uncurable and progressive lung cancer that eventually kills your character too, we want things to be realistic... I think while mining into my coal vein, picking up gemstones, avoiding boreworms and watching out for trolls while I single handidly throw up massive stone columns every 45 feet by smashing together 30 rocks and one of the solid bars of metal in my handy backpack, I should be watching out for particulate matter entering my lungs and giving me cancer.