Industrial respiratory device in development
NASO-SHIELD
A prototype intranasal device with a reusable structure and replaceable filters. AYRO is developing it for industrial settings where conventional masks can be difficult to wear throughout a shift.
The adherence gap
A mask only protects while it is being worn.
Some full-face designs can compete for space with visors, helmets, or protective eyewear. Compatibility depends on the equipment combination.
The intranasal format is designed to leave the nasal bridge and face clear. Each PPE combination still needs evaluation.
Face coverings may hold heat and moisture against the skin, depending on design and working conditions.
The device leaves the face uncovered. Comfort and thermal performance need evaluation in intended work settings.
A face covering may affect speech audibility, particularly in noisy work areas.
The mouth remains uncovered by the device. Communication in real work environments still needs assessment.
Disposable masks are replaced after use or when damaged, soiled, or no longer suitable, following manufacturer guidance.
The chassis is designed for reuse with replaceable filters. Service life, handling, and waste impact remain to be validated.
Where we play
The Comfort Gap
Today’s PPE often forces a binary choice: more protection with less comfort, or more comfort with less protection. The open upper-right space is where NASO-SHIELD is designed to play.
- Full-face PPE: low comfort and high protection.
- Misuse of PPE: medium comfort and very low protection.
- Surgical mask: medium comfort and low protection.
- No protection: very high comfort and minimal protection.
- NASO-SHIELD: design target – high comfort, with protection performance still to be validated.
Illustrative positioning, not a scored or independently measured index. NASO-SHIELD’s position is a design target, not a measurement; its protection performance is not independently validated.
Validation methodology
We won’t publish a number we haven’t earned.
NASO-SHIELD is at prototype stage and its performance has not been independently validated. You will not find a filtration percentage on this page, because there is no accredited test report behind one yet. What we can show you is exactly how it will be proven – and that we have chosen the hardest way to prove it.
Challenge aerosol
Paraffin oil mist
Chosen as the worst case for electret media – oil degrades electrostatic filtration. A solid-particle NaCl reference (median ~0.4 µm) runs alongside it.
Method basis
ISO 16900-3
The canonical particle-penetration method for respiratory protective devices, implemented in the EU through EN 143 / EN 13274-7. Gas side follows EN 14387.
Worst-case rationale
MPPS & high flow
Most-penetrating particle size (<0.25 µm) combined with high flow rate sets the worst case. Testing anywhere easier would flatter the result.
Loading endpoint
Breathing resistance
Saturation and breakthrough are measured against the breathing-resistance method of ISO 16900-2 – the point at which a filter stops being wearable, not just the point it stops filtering.
Straight answers
The questions you were going to ask anyway.
If you are responsible for the respiratory safety of a workforce, you have a short list of hard questions. Here they are, answered without marketing.
Is NASO-SHIELD certified?
No. AYRO does not claim CE certification, EN 149 certification, or FFP2/FFP3 equivalence. NASO-SHIELD is being developed toward a Category III PPE pathway under Regulation (EU) 2016/425. EN 149-family methods are used as methodology references, not as a certification claim.
Is this a replacement for FFP2/FFP3 masks?
Not today, and not as a certified equivalent. The design objective is improved wearability: heat build-up, fogging, communication friction and incompatibility with helmets and eyewear are what drive removal. Protection and wear-time performance remain to be validated.
What is reusable, and what gets replaced?
The intranasal structure is reusable. The filter element is an interchangeable cartridge. You keep the part that is fitted to the worker and replace only the part that is consumed.
Replacement cadence depends on exposure and remains to be established through testing. We do not have a validated shift-hours figure.
What is it made of, and is it safe against skin?
It is designed in medical-grade silicone, TPE, or equivalent biocompatible materials. Biocompatibility assessment references the ISO 10993 series.
Being precise, because it matters: material selection is not frozen. This is a prototype-stage device, and the final material specification is part of what design freeze will close. We reference ISO 10993 as the assessment standard – we do not claim certification under it.
Does it work with a helmet, safety eyewear and ear defenders?
Compatibility with helmets, eyewear and hearing protection is a design goal. Conventional masks can create fit, fogging and communication friction when worn with other PPE.
The intranasal format aims to leave more of the face and mouth unobstructed. Fit and compatibility still need testing with workers and their equipment.
What stage is it at, and can we discuss a future evaluation?
Prototype stage. The design is not frozen.
You can contact AYRO to discuss product development and express interest in a possible future evaluation. No pilot supply or schedule is confirmed. The prototype is not a replacement for required certified PPE.