March 27th, 2020
Day 2 in our journey to figure out these face shields had us trying two of the PRUSA open source files and several different types of mask material.
Follow all of our posts at https://tencom.net/news.
The smaller frame that you see in the photo on the right is the RC1 and it relies on tension to keep the mask on the face. The main advantage of this frame is that you don't need a head band to hold it own, but it's also not snug to your face. There might also be a little too much tension on your temples after wearing all day.
The bigger frame is the PRUSA RC3 and it doesn't rely on tension. It is designed to be used with an elastic band. I made a trip out to Joanne's and HCI in search of this elusive material. Joanne's was out but HCI had a pre-made band for $7, that can be adjusted. They also had forty or fifty industrial face shields that make the ones we are making look like toys. So, the ones from HCI in Dyersburg, TN are a great option - while they last.
The geniuses over at PRUSA Printers designed these frames so that you could take a piece of acetate and punch it with a standard three-hole punch and then attach the acetate to the frame. I hear overhead transparencies work great, but we had some report covers and clear sheet protectors. The sheet protectors already had holes, so we just opened these up and cut down the middle. This gave us two shields. As for the report covers, we just punched these, then opened them up and cut down the middle. I am curious to try the overhead transparency sheets as I think they'll be clearer.
If you'd like to learn more about the awesome work that they folks at PRUSA have done, head on over to their blog at https://www.prusa3d.com/covid19/.
Thanks again for UT Martin and APSU for getting us started. Follow along as we try and figure this whole thing out. And thanks to The Mill Workspace, and all the grant funding partners, for use of the 3D printers and filament.