The refillable main spool 🧵is the best option imo. It is cheaper, more environmentally friendly with the same quality. As a customer, I disagree about the bad customer experience premise and that customers are lazy especially those who are into 3D printing. They are all about DIY. I am afraid you are offering inferior product for the same price. I will not buy it but I wish you the best of luck and I appreciate your efforts to innovate.
And here is my counter argument: how do you transport the plastic? In today’s day and age, it doesn’t make sense to have filament stores. And filament doesn’t stay magically perfectly wound in a bag, ready to be put onto a spool. The spool is the packaging. Would it be practical for you to carry string loose? If you are at the point where you use so many spools that you think no spools is significantly better than this, then buy pellets directly and extrude them in-house onto your refillable spools. Refillable spools only work when they are wound with a machine that converts pellets to filament, not in any other case.
I can print a refillable spool for under $5. But I have not, because I have no where to fill it. It is not at all practical to ship just filament in a bag - free samples (only 200g) are notorious for tangling, can you imagine what 1-3 kgs can do? If my local micro center had a filament extruder that u brought ur spool to and it spools it from pellets (like those water bottle filling stations, but plastic), I would likely do it (it helps I live 3 miles from micro center). But, at this point, there is no where to fill up a reusable spool.
what happen when you vacuum seal the spool? will the cardboard walls just collapse by the pressure in the places where they are not supported by the filament?
I understand the motivations but I hate it. These aren't usable in drybox filament feeders where you typically need the rim to support the spool and roll on bearings. On the bright side these look like at least you might be able to rip them apart and move the filament to proper reusable spools without it all unravelling.
I agree with the problem and thanks for pointing it out. Those rigid cardboard spools take a lot of energy to make and they just get destroyed at the end. However I disagree with your solution. Manufacturers should just use reusable spools (even for their pre-spooled filament) and they should all sell refills primarily. But the creation of the spool, as you mentioned, shouldn't be the customer's burden. They should just make their regular injection molded spools reusable. Just two halves that screw together. Loading a refill onto a spool isn't a big deal. Swiss manufacturer Purefil actually recently started selling all their filaments on reusable spools and also sell them individually for like 3 bucks. I think this is the way to go. You get a rigid spool with all the features of existing spools but you don't have to make it yourself, it's cheap, and you can reuse it endlessly.
agree an master spool is the way to go, plus i already know anything i put into the recycle bin that’s not metal ends up in the landfill or burned. so using cardboard does not help reduce waste.
why is it octagonal? if it is important that the spool must not roll away on a shelf, a much more efficient use of cardboard would be hexagonal shape, since it tiles the plane without any gaps.
If you are going to ask filament manufacturers to switch something you should ask them to change their inner winding diameter. Then create a spool like bambu uses that snaps together. I am sure bambu wasn't the first to do that and i am not familiar with your previous attempts at spool creating one but that is the way it should be done. Then once you have a supply of the reusable spools you will only ever need to order refills. If all the filament manufactures could agree to use the same reusable spool and create refills that fit it that would be the best outcome. Its so easy to use those refills and it provides the best quality spool that will work whether you are on rollers or riding the inner core and you don't need to worry about spool recycling ever especially because the absolute best method of recycling is to create objects that don't need to be thrown away or recycled.
yes this is the future of spools. Sustainable reusable spools. But slant need money and want poeple believe that printing a spool core and trash it away is sustainable.
Exactly this, everyone or at least the majority of manufacturers need to get on the same page of core diameter. When that happens you can have snap together reusable spools made in any numbe of designs, manufacturing processes, and materials (see the aluminum spools used by vision miner) designed by different users or companies. Then everyone can use the one that meets their environment best be that larger or smaller outer diameters, hexagonal outer rings, lighter or heavier designs etc.
I gave up on manufacture spools and re-spool everything to 3d printed spools. Refills are the way to go. Made a tapered cone for re-spooling so different ID's don't matter. Re-spooling everything is annoying but not as bad as failed/stalled prints. This solution looks good for the manufacturer but won't change my workflow.
Im a consumer, so I want 500g or 1kg. Just curious, any good sources of PLA refills at under $15/kg? I currently buy pla at that price and i’d be happy to stop using spools and print my own spool once if the price is cheaper.
@Abhijeet Ghosh its not a refill but you can get filament from iiidmax for less than $12 per spool. The spools they use are pretty flimsy though and i will admit that they could do a better job winding. But the filament prints good and i have never had any cross over in the winding
The industry is evolving into multi-color and multi-material prints and you made an hexagonal spool that is completely incompatible with AMS systems....nice.
What are the tolerances like on the outside of the spool? If you can keep the outside dimensions consistent, then people can print their own adapters on the outside to make them work when they need to use a round brim. I personally have a filament dryer that has a hole so I can feed to the printer, and the dryer rests the spool on the outside, so it would be unusable without an adapter.
I have dehumifier cabinets that take 6 x 5kg spools...which then feed out via 6mm ptfe to clusters of 6 printers, all the spools top load so that any filament can be changed out during realtime without disturbing any in process. The drop in rollers accommodate 1, 3 and 5kg rolls dependent on requirements. My issue is that hexagon is a great idea but leaves out other systems that rely on round envelopes, also heavier eg 5kg weight bearing etc.
The majority of 3d printing spool accessories, wether user made or company made, rely on a round surface. From general spool holders, to filament heaters that rely on rollers to print from, to homemade dryboxes that are built using 608bearings, to storage shelves by Repkord, and to the biggest new printer company Bambu Lab’s AMS system that definitively would not work with this. I think this design is a little too late to the game to be truly adopted. 3-5 years ago, maybe. Storing, general usage, and moving around will make these flanges degrade way faster than my current round cardboard spools. The corner’s would get easily bent and eventually make storage a pain. I travel a lot with my spools too and this just wouldn’t work. That being said, it’s an interesting idea. I think if all those same manufacturers that made the plastic to cardboard switch would get onto a masterspool style system, this would ultimately be the best for everyone. Lighter, cheaper, and can transport more filament in the same space. After all printing your own spool is so what a 3D printer owner would do. Anyway, best of luck.
That is a very intuitive design! And a great way to reduce the total cost of filament manufacturing. My reservation lies in really helping to reduce the average price of a filament roll or make some companies charge premium for something that has the exact opposite intentions.I have to say it inspires me to implement a more cost effective master spool and something that can be designed and crafted at home for pennies. I always hated master spools so far. They need a ton of filament to print out and it makes the whole "plastic saving " effort moot. Your design hits a sweet spot! Polygonal sides...Why has no one thought this out yet for wider consumer use!
I'd rather use a master spool. If shipping a spool costs 5 bucks as you say, I'll save myself 5 bucks by doing the "tedious" assembly of a master spool. It's not that hard, consumers aren't that lazy. Most of us don't have a lot of money to spend so we'd probably trade a minute of spool assembly for cheaper filament. That and I don't see the perforated cardboard here holding up well for long term storage or just general abuse it might encounter in shipping or as the customer handles it. One dent or fold and now the windings can now slip down the side of the spool and tangle.
The octagonal spool design is strange. The octagon makes it simply incompatible with many spool holding setups I think the decision is because of the limitations of corrugated cardboard. If it were circular, normal corrugated cardboard doesn't roll nicely on outer-rim style spool holders anyway, and gets deformed by the vacuum seal. so octagons prevent users from even trying to roll it on the rim, and at least it does have the nice benefit of stacking sideways. I've seen people 3d print 'rims' for cardboard spools which make them stiffer and roll better on outer-rim spool holders. If you're already 3d printing cores for your spool holder you might as well add plastic rims to expand the list of potential customers. The rims could be clip-on and reusable. I understand it's mainly a cost cutting measure, and if it enables you to sell filament well below market prices, then by all means go for it Regardless, I appreciate the out of the box idea and willingness to try something nobody has done before.
If you are going to use this type of spool you should look into selling a reusable two part plastic exoskeleton for the spool so you don't have to exclude and use cases of the filament.
This is a joke, right? First off talking about how customers are lazy, then expecting them to buy the ugliest spool ever, with zero structural rigidity and disadvantages in many applications that reqire round spools (not just the AMS but also the Artillery Sidewinder and other printers where the spool is laying on rollers). People who 3D print are still mainly hobbyists and enthusiasts, who have no issue refilling there spools, if a manufacturer offers refills.
I appreciate the innovation, but I don't think this one is a winner. It's too cheap and I think it's going to lead to more problems than it solves. For example in my case I run a multi spool dry box that feeds multiple printers. I roll on the OD with bearings to minimize resistance to the extruders. So I need something with robust sides which these don't have. I think the reusable spool is a better idea personally. It's not hard to change the filament like you outlined in your old version. Not for me but I wish you luck with it.
Have you considered making the outside of the spool ever so slightly tapered? That way they can be stacked like plastic cups improving shipment density. It shouldn't affect the strength by much if you only taper by 5 degrees or something like that.
Is your spool core going to be available for download for individual makers to print and try? I think it would be a great way to up cycle used pizza box cardboard.
TBH it looks like 30 seconds of OpenSCAD and picking vase mode in the slicer. It'd be awesome if they share the design, but unnecessary for reproducing it.
I like the chain of thought here. Did you know that cardboard is compostable? And with this, all that's needed is to 3D print the core in PVA and you'll end up with the most environmentally friendly spool ever! I'm sure you already know this, but PVA is a biodegradable water-soluble plastic which is already available in filament and used as support material. Recycling would take more energy compared to composting, which is natural and easy. Lots of cities have composting infrastructure and you can actually do it at home!
After a quick search, also found that the water solubility potential could make it a potential dessicant. No more silica gel packs would be a bonus. The spool is the dessicant!
I'd rather just have a durable re-usable spool, but finding unspooled filament is a pain in the ass, and it's usually more expensive than spooled filament.
@@slant3d The problem is they are a niche market. Joe blow that is printing one thing a week doesn't really give a damn, and anybody running a print farm wants 3-5kg spools. My print volume is getting to the point where I may just purchase a 5kg spool, because I'm tired of constantly swapping filament.
Seams to me like a solution looking for a problem... No offense intended - but I fully understand, that as a service provider one needs to look into productizing one's services to fill gaps in the order books. So as a 3D printing service provider with a huge printer farm printing and selling filament spools "only costing the same like the competition" isn't a bad move at all. Many commenters here point out the obvious - if it's really about the customers and the environment there are already better solutions in operation like Bamboo labs refill spool. The proclaimed advantages for the environment seemingly came third after the first and second priority of business and profitability. Nothing bad with these but painting business green is a bad habit a lot of people can't stand anymore.
Would have been great to design a *composible* standard for filament spools. i.e. we should be able to join spools together from the end to the beginning at any time. So you just have a slit on the side that extends all the way up the flange that the filament slips through when you start the wind and you leave the end exposed. You can think through the correct wedge geometry so the filament always slides away from the spool with ease. Plus you need some simple latch to ensure the spools spin together.
The octagonal spools won't work with Bambu Labs AMS or most filament dryers like Sunlu S1 or S2. You have to have a filament dryer feeding filament for many types of filament such as TPU, PETG or PA-CF.
Im doing light engineering in my free time as a hobby and i have a qestion: If you design the inner core part as a hexagon-multigon from like 5-10 small pieces of cardboard wouldnt that work? I mean it in a way that you want to recreate the original "circle" shape of the core, but make it from pieces of cardboard glued or fastened together with like metal clips etc. That should be plenty strong and also give enough surface area for the filament to wrap around. If the edges are the problem then you can simply add some small piece of cardboard to make it more soft. I think this should work, or am i misaken for some reason? At least worth a try. Also a completely separate question, how viable would be to make any of these parts from CNC /laser cut sheets of something recyclable like wood? (Never used CNC so im not experienced in this field). If you could manage to put multiple sheets together from something very thin yet recyclable, and cut multiple layers at the same time it could be fast, and if you find cheap recyclable material that could become maybe a new standard for filament? :D Just pls make it 2-5 KG/ spool lol.
I'm a cnc machinist and programmer and cnc machining any of these parts would be very costly and simply not worth it in the end. with this having some experience with laser engravers as well, wood might be a good alternative for the sides of the spool and IMO simply look better than cardboard that they took scissors to lol. Laser engravers are also quite fast and can manufacture a ton of the spool sides if done properly.
Well ... I only have experience with the Polymaker cardboard spools and they just suck. All the edges are raw cardboard so whatever the spool mounting system you have - be it a center pin or a spool rolling one you'll get quite a lot of cardboard dust everywhere. Also they are very croocked so they do wander a lot. Jut not good. Over here in Czech Republic, some manufacturers do accept used spool and will give you either a spool of filament for a certain amount of spools or give you some credit you can use to buy more filament. I do understand that if you'd have to send the spools to other country or even a state, if you are in USA, this is probably overly expensive. Perhaps this should be addressed in a similar way as returnable bottles. Just unify all filaments on couple kinds of spools and have them collected in places like shopping malls or other places you regurarly go so that people don't have to ship "individual" spools...
Does a spool have to be round? How about a long oval? Or just a single 1 dimensional point? What IS a spool anyway? Who are we and what are we doing here?
I think it would be a better improvement over spools like the cardboard ones offered by Protopasta to simply use their design, but make the entire thing out of standard cardboard. For added support, modify the inner diameter to fit with a denser cardboard insert (or 3d print). You could include one of these denser bits every X spools, or not at all if customers already have or want to 3d print their own. You'll have a small percent of denser cardboard products, but I think that's still superior to having any plastic parts.
Completely, 100%, disagree with you. Many hobbyists ( that print widgets, gadgets, household tools or shop vacuum attachments, frames, gifts, whatever - my point is that they use their 3D printers a few times per week ) only use 1 or two spools for a given print ( different colors or materials ) or an occasional Mandalorian helmet, and would prefer printing a couple of Master Spools. It is obviously better for the manufacturer of filament ( if you want to get to $10/kg like you claim ) because you do not have to waste inventory shelf space for empty spools. You (filament maker) already have to put it in plastic vacuum bags. I will say that if you do not offer Master Spool I will not buy filament from Slant or Tangle or whatever. I ( as a hobbyist described above ) spent between $3000-5000 annually on filament and have been printing for just
I love the idea in principle some one needs to shake up the waste of spools. I would buy refills myself but they are typically not any cheaper despite not coming with a spool. In a throw away culture I would recommend you 3d print the inner core with water soluble biodegradable filament like PVA. Also you are adding hassle by not having round spools for a big portion of the market you should provide both spool options octagonal and round
just trades off disadvantages for others. master spool means users have to spend time to setup the spool. while yours cant be used with the best multi material system. the best pre-spooled ones ive seen are the spools used by 3dplastx, metal center and thin 2mm solid cardboard walls, i would not mind a masterspool system, a reusable product will be better than a recyclable product. a big problem is spools are usually black. black plastics are tricky to sort as theyll absorb a lot of light. which means to sort them it gets way more costly and time consuming.
Great idea! I think you can use these also in the BBL X-1 if you design an adapter so it can ride in the AMS. Similar to cardboard spools right now need.
Gotta second this. I know, us AMS users are not a majority (yet). BUT I think that you can pop off one cardboard side, put half a Bambu spool there, flip over, and do the other. Just watched a video from Timothy McFadden (Awesome Cardboard Spool Hack). Works great, might work here too!
@@bjmckenz Agreed, but I run either Sunlu S1 or S2 dryers on every machine and I use twenty 1kg rolls a day, so messing around with every roll to get it into dryers would be too painful.
@@bjmckenz I have a drying room, but unless you're in Arizona, PA-CF starts getting pretty wet in four hours. Quicker than most print times. PETG is not as bad, but still need it drying as it prints. Even ABS is better if kept really dry.
Make the plastic portion of type 1 or 2 plastic, it is recyclable, at least around here where recycling is not popular at least in mass. See if you can get polymaker or some comsumer filament mfgr to use it. I would love to try a spool or 2 (my catch is 2.85mm, pva or petg please)
Yeah, I'm not sure this is a particular improvement on the cardboard design. The core of Protopasta's cardboard spools may be a bit denser than standard cardboard, but it still beats using more plastic.
I would totally buy refills like they do for Bambu Labs and have a re-useable spool. I would rather do that than pay for a spool that just ends up in a landfill. I am not that lazy. I could see that if you have a print farm time is money, but If I could save the dollar to slide the refill on a reusable spool, I would be down for that. Maybe offer that on your $10 filaments, Even if you offered a refill version for $10 I would buy it.
This means ABS or PET. No PETG or PLA. With thin single wall like that, any material borderline for the temperatures will immediately fail in the dryer.
For all the nonsense BambuLab is doing right now, their reusable spool system is good. I doubt they invented it, but they're popularizing the design: inner cardboard core, which the filament is wrapped around, that you then lock a two-part plastic spool around. Obviously, this does nothing to solve the inherent shipping waste with round spools, but it's a nice end-user system.
A filament spool that costs the same as a plastic one and is objectively worse in user experience (looks, handling, reliability, compatibility) is a non-starter. Companies have to be able to market the spool, too, and solving for a couple problems (packing density, recyclability) while sacrificing many others is not going to work.
Nice idea but why not just use moulded pulp cores? Kinda thought you were going with an all cardboard spool anyways. EDIT: Lke a more advanced version of => ruclips.net/video/0ItPfhx3ulw/видео.html
@@slant3d I did watch the entire video. And I don't agree with Slant's solution as presented in this video. I like the design of the core, but not the use of 3d printed components. Isn't there something you can do using only folded cardboard?
Not a chance you're legitimately suggesting that simply creating less waste is better than creating nearly 0 waste, especially when there's already a solution available that does so. The master spool system will never get thrown away unless it breaks or degrades. It will get reused over and over. I'm willing to bet it'll get reused so many times that someone using your spools will have thrown away enough material to have wasted more than the master spool. On top of that, I printed my own spools and go through the effort of transferring Overture to reusable spools because cardboard spools suck. Respectfully, I wholeheartedly, unequivocally disagree with you. This is an effort to line your own pocket with the "going green" movement. I'm disappointed, frankly.
Yeah… anyone that uses a filament drier won’t be able to use this. So until we get 100% hydrophobic print materials that actively reject any and all additional moisture absorption. This will never work. I like that’s it’s easier to dispose of. And that’s it’s less cumbersome. But at some point you have to admit that injection molding the centers would be exponentially more scaleable. How long does it take to print a core? 5 minutes? 10 minutes? Do you have any idea how many THOUSANDS of those could be injection molded in that same amount of time?
@@slant3d So you are saying that you can print hundreds of these per hour on a single machine? Nice try... I work with injection molding of many types and this idea still has too many points of failure. You also would need to get to ALL the filament manufacturers to standardize on a single shape as well as all the printer manufacturers to choose a holder style, (Good Luck with THAT!) There *is* a couple ways to achieve the overall goal and still check most of the "boxes" that you seem to have issue with. Collapsible, reusable, easy to ship either way, fully protects the filament, withstands both the vacuum pack and the filament dryers, and easily mass produced.... The only "downside" is there would be some form of assembly/disassembly on either end, but a minor incentive program could even that out.
I disagree with some of the decisions you made here. A) consumers will never on a large scale separate out pieces of a disposable product that need to be recycled separately they will simply throw the whole thing in the trash B) I know it's just a prototype but the amount of wobbliness in those spools did not give me confidence in there being no tangles or issues printing with it. C) I personally use a rolling spool system right now so R.I.P. if I wanted to buy this. D) I think a fully cardboard spool is the way to go, you just make the flanges out of corrugated and the center spool from the high density stuff. In a disposable application I really disagree with the idea of throwing in pieces of plastic metal etc. It makes things unrecyclable at large scale. People will either put the whole thing in the recycling or the whole thing in the trash. Like you said, people are lazy.
@@claytonmcsweeney9499 will Jimmy Rizzo perform this year? It got rained out in 2020 when he was on the set list. Disappointed I won’t be able to make it this year, you two have a great time!!! When life gives you 🦃 Make ✅
Cardboard spools cause cardboard dust everywhere, getting into the prints. Especially if you use tons of it. I don't think this is a very viable idea either.
Hold on. So you’ve intentionally created a spool that cannot be used on the Bambu AMS or any roller-based filament holders and use very thin cardboard that won’t stand up being tossed around in shipping (back to a previous question about boxing), plus you’ve used non-recyclable plastic for the core rather than choosing a plastic core that is commonly recycled like HDPE or PET? Isn’t this video released about 18 days late? Seriously, this looks over engineering that solves very little and creates more issues than it solves.
Fantastic design. I agree that the Master Spool is a failed concept. It is a major pain in the ass to use. My only question on the new spool design is how the edge will hold up in shipping with no box. The edges could get bent in an maybe cause a snag? But I guess it's just cardboard so cut the bent part off!
I would never use this. Presentation screams cheap and some kid made in his garage. I want something I know is not going to give me issues and not Wobbling back and forth the whole time.
Making a spool that has next to zero material but want to charge the same as traditional spools? Nah, that's a money grab imo. Not helping anyone but your own pockets
Imo still sux. I hate cardboard spools. Also cardboard isnt good for environment. Its biodegradable, but it require 10x more energy to be processed. Refil filament in lower price + optional some fancy injected masterspool would be best option because of possibility having 10 filaments with 1 good spool. And for that, there are available multi usage zipties.
I think is April fools video. Because the entire goal it was to make $10 filament. When he says same price the competition have!!!????!!!!!mmm naaa is APRIL FOOL VIDEO.
We will see what happens. Kudos on charging the normal rate for a spool. Innovation costs money, and running a company means making a profit. Customers are lazy, and half the time the spool less filament cost more than the ones with a spool. I wouldn't mind changing my own filament on a master spool if it saved me 5 bucks a roll, but thats not life.
Ok... How is this better than masterspool? You talk so high about yourself as "problem solvers" but this is clear example of finding problem for your solution. Mastespool is far superior in every way. It solved the problem at its core. Manufacturer just need to ship refills and that is the end of story. You are exaggerating 2 seconds that it takes to open masterspool, put filament in it, close it and put in printer. And it looks soooo much more "professional" and "serious" than this... At any time you can tie remaining filament, open spool and change it. With your "spool" you are just creating more waste
so you're trying to sell a much lower quality product to manufacturers for the same cost as traditional spools? what manufacturer is going to buy 2 pieces of cardboard hotglued together. if that was a prototype - fine, but I cant see a switch for same cost. manufacturers care about money, not the environmental friendliness of a product that already sells well.
Definitly interested in the price of your filament after that message to filament manfufacurers. And i am kinda worried that the spool will feel pretty cheap, judging by the looks of it. While that is good for the enviroment, im not sure if all consumers are on board with that
@@slant3d Rational people buy in the margin. If the price is right people won't care what the spool looks like. Then again since when were people rational...
A filament spool that costs the same as a plastic one and is objectively worse in user experience (looks, handling, reliability, compatibility) is a non-starter. Companies have to be able to market the spool, too, and solving for a couple problems (packing density, recyclability) while sacrificing many others is not going to work.
The refillable main spool 🧵is the best option imo. It is cheaper, more environmentally friendly with the same quality. As a customer, I disagree about the bad customer experience premise and that customers are lazy especially those who are into 3D printing. They are all about DIY. I am afraid you are offering inferior product for the same price. I will not buy it but I wish you the best of luck and I appreciate your efforts to innovate.
Yeah big deal, just cut some zip ties and twist the spool to unlock and lock
When / if you ever run a farm.. you will change your opinion
The refill spools are same price or more than one with spool so it doesn't make much Sense IMO
And here is my counter argument: how do you transport the plastic? In today’s day and age, it doesn’t make sense to have filament stores. And filament doesn’t stay magically perfectly wound in a bag, ready to be put onto a spool. The spool is the packaging. Would it be practical for you to carry string loose? If you are at the point where you use so many spools that you think no spools is significantly better than this, then buy pellets directly and extrude them in-house onto your refillable spools. Refillable spools only work when they are wound with a machine that converts pellets to filament, not in any other case.
I can print a refillable spool for under $5. But I have not, because I have no where to fill it. It is not at all practical to ship just filament in a bag - free samples (only 200g) are notorious for tangling, can you imagine what 1-3 kgs can do? If my local micro center had a filament extruder that u brought ur spool to and it spools it from pellets (like those water bottle filling stations, but plastic), I would likely do it (it helps I live 3 miles from micro center). But, at this point, there is no where to fill up a reusable spool.
what happen when you vacuum seal the spool? will the cardboard walls just collapse by the pressure in the places where they are not supported by the filament?
I understand the motivations but I hate it. These aren't usable in drybox filament feeders where you typically need the rim to support the spool and roll on bearings. On the bright side these look like at least you might be able to rip them apart and move the filament to proper reusable spools without it all unravelling.
You should really watch the full video
@@slant3d I did. I understand who it's for, but these just aren't usable for those of us with proper drybox setups.
I agree with the problem and thanks for pointing it out. Those rigid cardboard spools take a lot of energy to make and they just get destroyed at the end. However I disagree with your solution. Manufacturers should just use reusable spools (even for their pre-spooled filament) and they should all sell refills primarily. But the creation of the spool, as you mentioned, shouldn't be the customer's burden. They should just make their regular injection molded spools reusable. Just two halves that screw together. Loading a refill onto a spool isn't a big deal. Swiss manufacturer Purefil actually recently started selling all their filaments on reusable spools and also sell them individually for like 3 bucks. I think this is the way to go. You get a rigid spool with all the features of existing spools but you don't have to make it yourself, it's cheap, and you can reuse it endlessly.
agree an master spool is the way to go, plus i already know anything i put into the recycle bin that’s not metal ends up in the landfill or burned. so using cardboard does not help reduce waste.
why is it octagonal? if it is important that the spool must not roll away on a shelf, a much more efficient use of cardboard would be hexagonal shape, since it tiles the plane without any gaps.
It can be cut out with less waste than a circle
Master spool is fine
If you are going to ask filament manufacturers to switch something you should ask them to change their inner winding diameter. Then create a spool like bambu uses that snaps together. I am sure bambu wasn't the first to do that and i am not familiar with your previous attempts at spool creating one but that is the way it should be done. Then once you have a supply of the reusable spools you will only ever need to order refills. If all the filament manufactures could agree to use the same reusable spool and create refills that fit it that would be the best outcome. Its so easy to use those refills and it provides the best quality spool that will work whether you are on rollers or riding the inner core and you don't need to worry about spool recycling ever especially because the absolute best method of recycling is to create objects that don't need to be thrown away or recycled.
yes this is the future of spools. Sustainable reusable spools. But slant need money and want poeple believe that printing a spool core and trash it away is sustainable.
Exactly this, everyone or at least the majority of manufacturers need to get on the same page of core diameter. When that happens you can have snap together reusable spools made in any numbe of designs, manufacturing processes, and materials (see the aluminum spools used by vision miner) designed by different users or companies. Then everyone can use the one that meets their environment best be that larger or smaller outer diameters, hexagonal outer rings, lighter or heavier designs etc.
I gave up on manufacture spools and re-spool everything to 3d printed spools. Refills are the way to go. Made a tapered cone for re-spooling so different ID's don't matter.
Re-spooling everything is annoying but not as bad as failed/stalled prints. This solution looks good for the manufacturer but won't change my workflow.
Im a consumer, so I want 500g or 1kg. Just curious, any good sources of PLA refills at under $15/kg? I currently buy pla at that price and i’d be happy to stop using spools and print my own spool once if the price is cheaper.
@Abhijeet Ghosh its not a refill but you can get filament from iiidmax for less than $12 per spool. The spools they use are pretty flimsy though and i will admit that they could do a better job winding. But the filament prints good and i have never had any cross over in the winding
I wish the industry adopted filament pellets. Imagine not having to use spools at all, no tangles, you could mix colours all you want...
The industry is evolving into multi-color and multi-material prints and you made an hexagonal spool that is completely incompatible with AMS systems....nice.
What are the tolerances like on the outside of the spool? If you can keep the outside dimensions consistent, then people can print their own adapters on the outside to make them work when they need to use a round brim. I personally have a filament dryer that has a hole so I can feed to the printer, and the dryer rests the spool on the outside, so it would be unusable without an adapter.
I have dehumifier cabinets that take 6 x 5kg spools...which then feed out via 6mm ptfe to clusters of 6 printers, all the spools top load so that any filament can be changed out during realtime without disturbing any in process. The drop in rollers accommodate 1, 3 and 5kg rolls dependent on requirements. My issue is that hexagon is a great idea but leaves out other systems that rely on round envelopes, also heavier eg 5kg weight bearing etc.
The majority of 3d printing spool accessories, wether user made or company made, rely on a round surface. From general spool holders, to filament heaters that rely on rollers to print from, to homemade dryboxes that are built using 608bearings, to storage shelves by Repkord, and to the biggest new printer company Bambu Lab’s AMS system that definitively would not work with this. I think this design is a little too late to the game to be truly adopted. 3-5 years ago, maybe. Storing, general usage, and moving around will make these flanges degrade way faster than my current round cardboard spools. The corner’s would get easily bent and eventually make storage a pain. I travel a lot with my spools too and this just wouldn’t work. That being said, it’s an interesting idea. I think if all those same manufacturers that made the plastic to cardboard switch would get onto a masterspool style system, this would ultimately be the best for everyone. Lighter, cheaper, and can transport more filament in the same space. After all printing your own spool is so what a 3D printer owner would do. Anyway, best of luck.
That is a very intuitive design! And a great way to reduce the total cost of filament manufacturing. My reservation lies in really helping to reduce the average price of a filament roll or make some companies charge premium for something that has the exact opposite intentions.I have to say it inspires me to implement a more cost effective master spool and something that can be designed and crafted at home for pennies. I always hated master spools so far. They need a ton of filament to print out and it makes the whole "plastic saving " effort moot. Your design hits a sweet spot! Polygonal sides...Why has no one thought this out yet for wider consumer use!
What is the best pla that you would recommend
Yes. But the wavy bit could be made of cardboard and still work. Also would be nice to have a way to cut some tabs if you want it to be round.
I'd rather use a master spool. If shipping a spool costs 5 bucks as you say, I'll save myself 5 bucks by doing the "tedious" assembly of a master spool. It's not that hard, consumers aren't that lazy. Most of us don't have a lot of money to spend so we'd probably trade a minute of spool assembly for cheaper filament. That and I don't see the perforated cardboard here holding up well for long term storage or just general abuse it might encounter in shipping or as the customer handles it. One dent or fold and now the windings can now slip down the side of the spool and tangle.
The octagonal spool design is strange. The octagon makes it simply incompatible with many spool holding setups
I think the decision is because of the limitations of corrugated cardboard. If it were circular, normal corrugated cardboard doesn't roll nicely on outer-rim style spool holders anyway, and gets deformed by the vacuum seal. so octagons prevent users from even trying to roll it on the rim, and at least it does have the nice benefit of stacking sideways.
I've seen people 3d print 'rims' for cardboard spools which make them stiffer and roll better on outer-rim spool holders. If you're already 3d printing cores for your spool holder you might as well add plastic rims to expand the list of potential customers. The rims could be clip-on and reusable.
I understand it's mainly a cost cutting measure, and if it enables you to sell filament well below market prices, then by all means go for it
Regardless, I appreciate the out of the box idea and willingness to try something nobody has done before.
If you are going to use this type of spool you should look into selling a reusable two part plastic exoskeleton for the spool so you don't have to exclude and use cases of the filament.
That is an interesting idea
This is a joke, right? First off talking about how customers are lazy, then expecting them to buy the ugliest spool ever, with zero structural rigidity and disadvantages in many applications that reqire round spools (not just the AMS but also the Artillery Sidewinder and other printers where the spool is laying on rollers). People who 3D print are still mainly hobbyists and enthusiasts, who have no issue refilling there spools, if a manufacturer offers refills.
I appreciate the innovation, but I don't think this one is a winner. It's too cheap and I think it's going to lead to more problems than it solves. For example in my case I run a multi spool dry box that feeds multiple printers. I roll on the OD with bearings to minimize resistance to the extruders. So I need something with robust sides which these don't have.
I think the reusable spool is a better idea personally. It's not hard to change the filament like you outlined in your old version.
Not for me but I wish you luck with it.
Have you considered making the outside of the spool ever so slightly tapered? That way they can be stacked like plastic cups improving shipment density.
It shouldn't affect the strength by much if you only taper by 5 degrees or something like that.
Why not make the cardboard in a hexagonal shape? This way you have no waste when cutting it (expect the outer edge)
Manufacturability
How does this spool pack more densely?
You don't expect your customers to assemble them themselves, right?
Is your spool core going to be available for download for individual makers to print and try? I think it would be a great way to up cycle used pizza box cardboard.
TBH it looks like 30 seconds of OpenSCAD and picking vase mode in the slicer. It'd be awesome if they share the design, but unnecessary for reproducing it.
I like the chain of thought here. Did you know that cardboard is compostable? And with this, all that's needed is to 3D print the core in PVA and you'll end up with the most environmentally friendly spool ever!
I'm sure you already know this, but PVA is a biodegradable water-soluble plastic which is already available in filament and used as support material.
Recycling would take more energy compared to composting, which is natural and easy. Lots of cities have composting infrastructure and you can actually do it at home!
After a quick search, also found that the water solubility potential could make it a potential dessicant. No more silica gel packs would be a bonus. The spool is the dessicant!
When we stopped using incinerators for trash, we really gave up a lot of useful energy. Why compost the cardboard when you could burn it for heat?
I'd rather just have a durable re-usable spool, but finding unspooled filament is a pain in the ass, and it's usually more expensive than spooled filament.
Exactly. Masterspools are kind of a failed product.
@@slant3d The problem is they are a niche market. Joe blow that is printing one thing a week doesn't really give a damn, and anybody running a print farm wants 3-5kg spools. My print volume is getting to the point where I may just purchase a 5kg spool, because I'm tired of constantly swapping filament.
Bravo! nice design.... Oh please do post a .step of the first slant spool for those of us who use master-spool.
Seams to me like a solution looking for a problem... No offense intended - but I fully understand, that as a service provider one needs to look into productizing one's services to fill gaps in the order books. So as a 3D printing service provider with a huge printer farm printing and selling filament spools "only costing the same like the competition" isn't a bad move at all. Many commenters here point out the obvious - if it's really about the customers and the environment there are already better solutions in operation like Bamboo labs refill spool. The proclaimed advantages for the environment seemingly came third after the first and second priority of business and profitability. Nothing bad with these but painting business green is a bad habit a lot of people can't stand anymore.
Would have been great to design a *composible* standard for filament spools. i.e. we should be able to join spools together from the end to the beginning at any time. So you just have a slit on the side that extends all the way up the flange that the filament slips through when you start the wind and you leave the end exposed. You can think through the correct wedge geometry so the filament always slides away from the spool with ease. Plus you need some simple latch to ensure the spools spin together.
That's a bold strategy! I look forward to trying one.
Thanks
The octagonal spools won't work with Bambu Labs AMS or most filament dryers like Sunlu S1 or S2. You have to have a filament dryer feeding filament for many types of filament such as TPU, PETG or PA-CF.
I love your design! Do you sell your own filament that would be on those spools?
Im doing light engineering in my free time as a hobby and i have a qestion:
If you design the inner core part as a hexagon-multigon from like 5-10 small pieces of cardboard wouldnt that work?
I mean it in a way that you want to recreate the original "circle" shape of the core, but make it from pieces of cardboard glued or fastened together with like metal clips etc.
That should be plenty strong and also give enough surface area for the filament to wrap around. If the edges are the problem then you can simply add some small piece of cardboard to make it more soft. I think this should work, or am i misaken for some reason? At least worth a try.
Also a completely separate question, how viable would be to make any of these parts from CNC /laser cut sheets of something recyclable like wood? (Never used CNC so im not experienced in this field). If you could manage to put multiple sheets together from something very thin yet recyclable, and cut multiple layers at the same time it could be fast, and if you find cheap recyclable material that could become maybe a new standard for filament? :D Just pls make it 2-5 KG/ spool lol.
I'm a cnc machinist and programmer and cnc machining any of these parts would be very costly and simply not worth it in the end. with this having some experience with laser engravers as well, wood might be a good alternative for the sides of the spool and IMO simply look better than cardboard that they took scissors to lol. Laser engravers are also quite fast and can manufacture a ton of the spool sides if done properly.
Well ... I only have experience with the Polymaker cardboard spools and they just suck. All the edges are raw cardboard so whatever the spool mounting system you have - be it a center pin or a spool rolling one you'll get quite a lot of cardboard dust everywhere. Also they are very croocked so they do wander a lot. Jut not good. Over here in Czech Republic, some manufacturers do accept used spool and will give you either a spool of filament for a certain amount of spools or give you some credit you can use to buy more filament. I do understand that if you'd have to send the spools to other country or even a state, if you are in USA, this is probably overly expensive. Perhaps this should be addressed in a similar way as returnable bottles. Just unify all filaments on couple kinds of spools and have them collected in places like shopping malls or other places you regurarly go so that people don't have to ship "individual" spools...
Please don't address it the way the USA addressed returnable bottles. :-)
Does a spool have to be round? How about a long oval? Or just a single 1 dimensional point? What IS a spool anyway? Who are we and what are we doing here?
I think it would be a better improvement over spools like the cardboard ones offered by Protopasta to simply use their design, but make the entire thing out of standard cardboard. For added support, modify the inner diameter to fit with a denser cardboard insert (or 3d print).
You could include one of these denser bits every X spools, or not at all if customers already have or want to 3d print their own. You'll have a small percent of denser cardboard products, but I think that's still superior to having any plastic parts.
Completely, 100%, disagree with you. Many hobbyists ( that print widgets, gadgets, household tools or shop vacuum attachments, frames, gifts, whatever - my point is that they use their 3D printers a few times per week ) only use 1 or two spools for a given print ( different colors or materials ) or an occasional Mandalorian helmet, and would prefer printing a couple of Master Spools. It is obviously better for the manufacturer of filament ( if you want to get to $10/kg like you claim ) because you do not have to waste inventory shelf space for empty spools. You (filament maker) already have to put it in plastic vacuum bags. I will say that if you do not offer Master Spool I will not buy filament from Slant or Tangle or whatever. I ( as a hobbyist described above ) spent between $3000-5000 annually on filament and have been printing for just
I love the idea in principle some one needs to shake up the waste of spools. I would buy refills myself but they are typically not any cheaper despite not coming with a spool. In a throw away culture I would recommend you 3d print the inner core with water soluble biodegradable filament like PVA. Also you are adding hassle by not having round spools for a big portion of the market you should provide both spool options octagonal and round
just trades off disadvantages for others. master spool means users have to spend time to setup the spool. while yours cant be used with the best multi material system. the best pre-spooled ones ive seen are the spools used by 3dplastx, metal center and thin 2mm solid cardboard walls, i would not mind a masterspool system, a reusable product will be better than a recyclable product.
a big problem is spools are usually black. black plastics are tricky to sort as theyll absorb a lot of light. which means to sort them it gets way more costly and time consuming.
I just want every manufacturer to sell their filament in a refill option so I can just print my own spool and reuse it for a very long time.
dang, you guys have a sick design team for sure
Thanks. They are pretty good.
Great idea! I think you can use these also in the BBL X-1 if you design an adapter so it can ride in the AMS. Similar to cardboard spools right now need.
It appears that the outer diameter of the octagon will be too large to fit into the AMS. Adding an adaptor wouldn't make the outer diameter smaller.
Gotta second this. I know, us AMS users are not a majority (yet). BUT I think that you can pop off one cardboard side, put half a Bambu spool there, flip over, and do the other. Just watched a video from Timothy McFadden (Awesome Cardboard Spool Hack). Works great, might work here too!
@@bjmckenz Agreed, but I run either Sunlu S1 or S2 dryers on every machine and I use twenty 1kg rolls a day, so messing around with every roll to get it into dryers would be too painful.
@@stevenmitchell7830 Interesting! I'm surprised you haven't made a Big Dry Box :-)
@@bjmckenz I have a drying room, but unless you're in Arizona, PA-CF starts getting pretty wet in four hours. Quicker than most print times. PETG is not as bad, but still need it drying as it prints. Even ABS is better if kept really dry.
Make the plastic portion of type 1 or 2 plastic, it is recyclable, at least around here where recycling is not popular at least in mass.
See if you can get polymaker or some comsumer filament mfgr to use it. I would love to try a spool or 2 (my catch is 2.85mm, pva or petg please)
The core will be mass produced in our print farms
Protopasta already have fully recyclable cardboard spools and they work well.
Yeah, I'm not sure this is a particular improvement on the cardboard design. The core of Protopasta's cardboard spools may be a bit denser than standard cardboard, but it still beats using more plastic.
I would totally buy refills like they do for Bambu Labs and have a re-useable spool. I would rather do that than pay for a spool that just ends up in a landfill. I am not that lazy. I could see that if you have a print farm time is money, but If I could save the dollar to slide the refill on a reusable spool, I would be down for that. Maybe offer that on your $10 filaments, Even if you offered a refill version for $10 I would buy it.
If the filament is hygroscopic, the spool must withstand the temperature at which it needs to be dried.
Yep.
This means ABS or PET. No PETG or PLA. With thin single wall like that, any material borderline for the temperatures will immediately fail in the dryer.
For all the nonsense BambuLab is doing right now, their reusable spool system is good. I doubt they invented it, but they're popularizing the design: inner cardboard core, which the filament is wrapped around, that you then lock a two-part plastic spool around. Obviously, this does nothing to solve the inherent shipping waste with round spools, but it's a nice end-user system.
why not a cardboard tube for the core
fr just use a toilet paper roll at this point lol.
Good stuff. Thought went into this. Thanks
A filament spool that costs the same as a plastic one and is objectively worse in user experience (looks, handling, reliability, compatibility) is a non-starter. Companies have to be able to market the spool, too, and solving for a couple problems (packing density, recyclability) while sacrificing many others is not going to work.
master spool is fine. and i already know anything i put into the recycle bin other then metal is sent to the land fill or burned.
Nice idea but why not just use moulded pulp cores? Kinda thought you were going with an all cardboard spool anyways. EDIT: Lke a more advanced version of => ruclips.net/video/0ItPfhx3ulw/видео.html
You should watch the full video. Pulp is a deadend
@@slant3d I did watch the entire video. And I don't agree with Slant's solution as presented in this video. I like the design of the core, but not the use of 3d printed components. Isn't there something you can do using only folded cardboard?
Not a chance you're legitimately suggesting that simply creating less waste is better than creating nearly 0 waste, especially when there's already a solution available that does so. The master spool system will never get thrown away unless it breaks or degrades. It will get reused over and over. I'm willing to bet it'll get reused so many times that someone using your spools will have thrown away enough material to have wasted more than the master spool.
On top of that, I printed my own spools and go through the effort of transferring Overture to reusable spools because cardboard spools suck.
Respectfully, I wholeheartedly, unequivocally disagree with you. This is an effort to line your own pocket with the "going green" movement. I'm disappointed, frankly.
Yeah… anyone that uses a filament drier won’t be able to use this. So until we get 100% hydrophobic print materials that actively reject any and all additional moisture absorption. This will never work.
I like that’s it’s easier to dispose of. And that’s it’s less cumbersome. But at some point you have to admit that injection molding the centers would be exponentially more scaleable. How long does it take to print a core? 5 minutes? 10 minutes? Do you have any idea how many THOUSANDS of those could be injection molded in that same amount of time?
We can produce the cores at the same cost and speed as molding. So it would be dumb to use that process.
@@slant3d So you are saying that you can print hundreds of these per hour on a single machine? Nice try... I work with injection molding of many types and this idea still has too many points of failure. You also would need to get to ALL the filament manufacturers to standardize on a single shape as well as all the printer manufacturers to choose a holder style, (Good Luck with THAT!) There *is* a couple ways to achieve the overall goal and still check most of the "boxes" that you seem to have issue with. Collapsible, reusable, easy to ship either way, fully protects the filament, withstands both the vacuum pack and the filament dryers, and easily mass produced.... The only "downside" is there would be some form of assembly/disassembly on either end, but a minor incentive program could even that out.
I disagree with some of the decisions you made here. A) consumers will never on a large scale separate out pieces of a disposable product that need to be recycled separately they will simply throw the whole thing in the trash B) I know it's just a prototype but the amount of wobbliness in those spools did not give me confidence in there being no tangles or issues printing with it. C) I personally use a rolling spool system right now so R.I.P. if I wanted to buy this. D) I think a fully cardboard spool is the way to go, you just make the flanges out of corrugated and the center spool from the high density stuff. In a disposable application I really disagree with the idea of throwing in pieces of plastic metal etc. It makes things unrecyclable at large scale. People will either put the whole thing in the recycling or the whole thing in the trash. Like you said, people are lazy.
i want a filament spool made of filament that consumes itself after it's empty
Peaka Shrew Village 🎉🎊
Thanks
Your invited!
@@claytonmcsweeney9499 will Jimmy Rizzo perform this year? It got rained out in 2020 when he was on the set list. Disappointed I won’t be able to make it this year, you two have a great time!!!
When life gives you 🦃
Make ✅
;) looks like second 1 April this year, or meybe the face expression of op is that way ;)
I think protopasta is/was doing a simple cardboard spool
Cardboard spools cause cardboard dust everywhere, getting into the prints. Especially if you use tons of it. I don't think this is a very viable idea either.
Hold on. So you’ve intentionally created a spool that cannot be used on the Bambu AMS or any roller-based filament holders and use very thin cardboard that won’t stand up being tossed around in shipping (back to a previous question about boxing), plus you’ve used non-recyclable plastic for the core rather than choosing a plastic core that is commonly recycled like HDPE or PET? Isn’t this video released about 18 days late?
Seriously, this looks over engineering that solves very little and creates more issues than it solves.
Fantastic design. I agree that the Master Spool is a failed concept. It is a major pain in the ass to use. My only question on the new spool design is how the edge will hold up in shipping with no box. The edges could get bent in an maybe cause a snag? But I guess it's just cardboard so cut the bent part off!
I would never use this. Presentation screams cheap and some kid made in his garage. I want something I know is not going to give me issues and not Wobbling back and forth the whole time.
Hex shaped spool useless to bambuu and filament dryers/ boxes.
New business model : crappy octogonal spools. Slant going down
Making a spool that has next to zero material but want to charge the same as traditional spools? Nah, that's a money grab imo. Not helping anyone but your own pockets
Imo still sux. I hate cardboard spools. Also cardboard isnt good for environment. Its biodegradable, but it require 10x more energy to be processed.
Refil filament in lower price + optional some fancy injected masterspool would be best option because of possibility having 10 filaments with 1 good spool. And for that, there are available multi usage zipties.
I think is April fools video. Because the entire goal it was to make $10 filament. When he says same price the competition have!!!????!!!!!mmm naaa is APRIL FOOL VIDEO.
spool is different from filament
Y don't u use them like there supposed to be? Just buy no spool filament??
Terrible idea
We will see what happens. Kudos on charging the normal rate for a spool. Innovation costs money, and running a company means making a profit. Customers are lazy, and half the time the spool less filament cost more than the ones with a spool. I wouldn't mind changing my own filament on a master spool if it saved me 5 bucks a roll, but thats not life.
Why not just make a refill coil? 3 strips of plastic and the vacuum bag. You're talking to 3d printing people ^^ every one can print a reusable spool
Ok... How is this better than masterspool? You talk so high about yourself as "problem solvers" but this is clear example of finding problem for your solution. Mastespool is far superior in every way. It solved the problem at its core. Manufacturer just need to ship refills and that is the end of story. You are exaggerating 2 seconds that it takes to open masterspool, put filament in it, close it and put in printer. And it looks soooo much more "professional" and "serious" than this... At any time you can tie remaining filament, open spool and change it. With your "spool" you are just creating more waste
so you're trying to sell a much lower quality product to manufacturers for the same cost as traditional spools? what manufacturer is going to buy 2 pieces of cardboard hotglued together.
if that was a prototype - fine, but I cant see a switch for same cost. manufacturers care about money, not the environmental friendliness of a product that already sells well.
Cool
Thanks
Who is "we" at at Slant 3d? It seems to me every video "we" implying multiple people work at Slant 3D and it always just you.
Just burn the cardboard spools
You should patent that instantly. That is how america works. We dont provide things we make them into monopolies to make easy money off it.
Definitly interested in the price of your filament after that message to filament manfufacurers. And i am kinda worried that the spool will feel pretty cheap, judging by the looks of it. While that is good for the enviroment, im not sure if all consumers are on board with that
"People don't know what they want until you show it to them"
@@slant3d Rational people buy in the margin. If the price is right people won't care what the spool looks like.
Then again since when were people rational...
That's the wrong quote.
A filament spool that costs the same as a plastic one and is objectively worse in user experience (looks, handling, reliability, compatibility) is a non-starter. Companies have to be able to market the spool, too, and solving for a couple problems (packing density, recyclability) while sacrificing many others is not going to work.