Author Topic: COVID-19 related Engineering Data - FTLOG Data-Only Please!  (Read 749 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline pipe2nullTopic starter

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 154
  • Country: us
COVID-19 related Engineering Data - FTLOG Data-Only Please!
« on: March 31, 2020, 08:38:54 pm »
The intention of this thread is to post harder to find COVID-19 related data that might be useful from an engineering perspective.

This is a "Put data where your mouth is" kinda thing.   ;)   Please do not post project-specific discussion here, there is enough Jerry-Springer-Grade controversy in a multitude of other threads already.
I hope this topic might be respected as a Safe haven where tangible data reigns supreme.  So, please put data where your mouth is or troll elsewhere.  Seriously, no offense intended.
 
Please include a short excerpt and/or context when appropriate.

My contribution, for example:
Some medical professionals have used SARS-CoV as a model for COVID-19 since formal studies of the new virus were unavailable and AFAIK remain unavailable.  Attached is a professional study I found on ways to effectively kill the SARS virus that includes numbers and graphs that engineers might find useful.  If you have more up-to-date information or find a similar study, please post!  See attached PDF.

Excerpt:
2.3. UV light treatment
Ultraviolet light (UV) treatment was performed on 2 ml aliquots of virus (volume depth = 1 cm) in 24-well plates (Corning Inc., Corning, NY). The UV light source (Spectronics Corporation, Westbury, NY) was placed above the plate, at a distance of 3 cm from the bottom of the wells containing the virus samples. At 3 cm our UVC light source (254 nm) emitted 4016 μW/cm2 (where μW = 10−6 J/s)...
3.1. Effect of radiation on the infectivity of SARS-CoV
... Exposure of virus to UVC light resulted in partial inactivation at 1 min with increasing efficiency up to 6 min (Fig. 1A), resulting in a 400-fold decrease in infectious virus. No additional inactivation was observed from 6 to 10 min. After 15 min the virus was completely inactivated to the limit of detection of the assay, which is ≤1.0 TCID50 (log10) per ml.

2.5. Heat treatment of virus
We incubated 320μl aliquots of virus in 1.5 ml polypropylene cryotubes using a heating block to achieve three different temperatures (56, 65 and 75 ◦C).
3.2. Effect of heat treatment on the infectivity of SARS-CoV...
... At 65 ◦C, most of the virus was inactivated if incubated for longer than 4 min (Fig. 2B). Again, some infectious virus could still be detected close to the limit of detection for the assay, after 20 min at 65 ◦C. While virus was incompletely inactivated at 56 and 65 ◦C even at 60 min, it was completely inactivated at 75 ◦C in 45 min (Fig. 2C). Surprisingly, at both 56 and 65 ◦C the virus was inactivated at early time points but at 60 min a small amount of virus was detected.

Related project thread(s) if applicable:
(Will edit post later to link related discussion/project threads)

Related open questions not effectively answered in this specific study:
- What is the relationship between UVC intensity and required exposure time (for other intensity levels)?
- Is UVC more/less/same as effective on water/air/aerosol/surface dwelling viruses?
 

Offline profdc9

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 333
  • Country: us
Re: COVID-19 related Engineering Data - FTLOG Data-Only Please!
« Reply #1 on: April 01, 2020, 01:35:59 am »
Consult this document in progress

https://docs.google.com/document/d/193mt42jUR8PxuONUY4A6YZsyOOmy6Psg6BDme3rjai8/edit#heading=h.tcxzsexja88t

In particular,

Evaluation of Five Decontamination Methods for Filtering Facepiece Respirators by Viscusi et al
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2781738/

and

Inactivation of SARS Coronavirus by Means of Povidone-Iodine, Physical Conditions and Chemical Reagents by Kariwa et al
https://www.karger.com/Article/FullText/89211

but read over the document for the many references.





 
The following users thanked this post: pipe2null

Offline pipe2nullTopic starter

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 154
  • Country: us
Re: COVID-19 related Engineering Data - FTLOG Data-Only Please!
« Reply #2 on: April 01, 2020, 06:59:16 pm »
CDC and EPA recommended COVID-19 chemical disinfectants.  Also includes required disinfectant contact times for each chemical.

List N: Disinfectants for Use Against SARS-CoV-2
https://www.epa.gov/pesticide-registration/list-n-disinfectants-use-against-sars-cov-2

Warning:  Some of those chemicals are pretty nasty, so probably a good idea to read the directions first...   ;)
Attached is the complete list as of March 26, 2020.
 

Offline pipe2nullTopic starter

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 154
  • Country: us
Re: COVID-19 related Engineering Data - FTLOG Data-Only Please!
« Reply #3 on: April 01, 2020, 08:25:06 pm »
Study on using UVC and bright light to kill viruses including SARS-CoV in blood bags/platelets/plasma.  Might be useful if you are trying to use UVC to disinfect something but don't know required UVC source wattage or exposure time.

Excerpt:
"...In PCs, at half of the full UVC dose (0.1 J/cm2) SARS-CoV and CCHFV infectivity levels were below the [Limit Of Detection]"

UVC Light dose (cumulative)Bag1 log10 TCID50/mlBag1 log10 RFBag2 log10 TCID50/mlBag2 log10 RF
Original A05.8 +/- 0.36.0 +/- 0.2
0.05 J/cm22.7 +/- 0.33.13.0 +/- 0.43.0
0.1 J/cm2≤2.4≥3.4≤2.4≥3.4
RF = log10A0 – log10An
(R,reduction factor; A0, spiked total virus load before treatment; and An, total virus load after treatment)
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf