A quantitative analysis of 3D printed face shields and masks during COVID-19

James I Novak,Jennifer Loy

doi:10.35241/emeraldopenres.13815.1

Abstract

In response to shortages in personal protective equipment (PPE) during the COVID-19 pandemic, makers, community groups and manufacturers around the world utilised 3D printing to fabricate items, including face shields and face masks for healthcare workers and the broader community. In reaction to both local and global needs, numerous designs emerged and were shared online. In this paper, 37 face shields and 31 face masks suitable for fused filament fabrication were analysed from a fabrication perspective, documenting factors such as filament use, time to print and geometric qualities. 3D print times for similar designs varied by several hours, meaning some designs could be produced in higher volumes. Overall, the results show that face shields were approximately twice as fast to 3D print compared to face masks and used approximately half as much filament. Additionally, a face shield typically required 1.5 parts to be 3D printed, whereas face masks required 5 3D printed parts. However, by quantifying the print times, filament use, 3D printing costs, part dimensions, number of parts and total volume of each design, the wide variations within each product category could be tracked and evaluated. This data and objective analysis will help makers, manufacturers, regulatory bodies and researchers consolidate the 3D printing response to COVID-19 and optimise the ongoing strategy to combat supply chain shortages now and in future healthcare crises.

Highlights

The personal protective equipment (PPE) supply crisis caused by the COVID-19 pandemic (Livingston et al, 2020; Ranney et al, 2020) has provided the 3D printing
Manufacturers with 3D printing capabilities, as well as individual makers operating from their homes, or community groups working from makerspaces, began responding to local shortages even before the World Health Organisation (WHO) declared COVID-19 a pandemic on 11th March, 2020 (Novak & Loy, 2020a)
IC3D Budmen self-reported that 3,026,172 of their face shields had been 3D printed at the time of writing (Budmen, 2020), while 3D printer manufacturer Photocentric has been awarded a contract from The National Health Service (NHS) in the United Kingdom to 3D print over 7.6 million face shields in the coming months (Hanaphy, 2020)

Summary

Introduction

The personal protective equipment (PPE) supply crisis caused by the COVID-19 pandemic (Livingston et al, 2020; Ranney et al, 2020) has provided the 3D printing Manufacturers with 3D printing capabilities, as well as individual makers operating from their homes, or community groups working from makerspaces, began responding to local shortages even before the World Health Organisation (WHO) declared COVID-19 a pandemic on 11th March, 2020 (Novak & Loy, 2020a). In the face of the emergency, the conventional pathways for product development and regulatory approval for use in healthcare settings were contracted or overwhelmed as the community response outpaced the ability for medical product regulators, like the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in the United States or Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) in Australia, to respond. Several months into the pandemic, interim guidelines have been refined (Food and Drug Administration, 2020; Therapeutic Goods Administration, 2020); data shows that millions of 3D printed PPE products have been produced globally, extending beyond the capacity for regulators to manage. As traditional manufacturing and supply chains stabilise through the middle of 2020, researchers must provide governments, regulatory bodies and the broader 3D printing community with new insights that will guide proactive, long-term strategies to combat the long-term threat of COVID-19 and future health crises (Gates, 2020)

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion