u/jcollasius

Panda Knomi support for the A2L quietly landed in a firmware update just a few days ago. I happened to spot it on GitHub, tested it, and it works. Naturally, the next step was opening OpenSCAD and making a proper A2L X motor cover for it.

A few (dozen) prototypes later, it is finished and already running on my A2L. As far as I could find, this is the first dedicated Panda Knomi X motor cover available for the A2L.

Model is up on MakerWorld now.

A2L Panda Knomi X Motor Cover ⧸ First of Its Kind
https://makerworld.com/models/3159068-a2l-panda-knomi-x-motor-cover-first-of-its-kind

I've been printing a lot of ASA lately, and the BIQU CryoGrip Pro Glacier has honestly become my favorite build plate. Adhesion is excellent, parts release easily after cooling, and I've had consistently great results.

The only thing that kept annoying me were the supplied ArUco stickers. I tried aligning them with almost surgical precision, but detection was still a coin toss.

So I designed a clip on replacement that mechanically aligns itself with the Glacier's honeycomb pattern. Instead of trying to eyeball a sticker, it simply snaps into place and stays there.

The marker has been tested in PETG and ASA. Out of curiosity I even printed one in PLA and used it while printing ASA in a 65°C chamber. Surprisingly, it survived for several weeks before I replaced it with a PETG version.

I'm curious if anyone else had the same experience with the stock ArUco stickers, or if I was just particularly unlucky.

MakerWorld:

BIQU CryoGrip Pro Glacier ArUco Marker ⧸ P2S X2D
BIQU CryoGrip Pro Glacier ArUco Marker ⧸ H2D H2S
BIQU CryoGrip Pro Glacier ArUco Marker ⧸ H2C

Most filament clips use the same basic principle: the printed geometry itself acts as the spring. It's an elegant solution, but I wanted to see if a completely different approach could solve some of its inherent limitations.

Instead of making the printed part flex, I designed a completely new mechanism around a small steel compression spring.

The spring generates both clamping forces. It secures the clip on the spool and simultaneously holds the filament in place. The printed parts don't act as a spring at all. They simply guide the movement.

I haven't come across another filament clip using this approach, although I'd be happy to be proven wrong.

The design focuses on solving three common problems:

- No plastic fatigue.
- No unnecessary stress on the filament.
- No increased tangle risk by attaching the filament to the wound filament.

The clip also snaps together without screws, glue or tools. It is designed for inexpensive standard compression springs, but many common ballpoint pen springs should work just as well.

What do you think? Would you rather choose a fully printed compliant mechanism, or spend a few cents (or sacrifice a couple of old ballpoint pens) for a real spring if it meant eliminating plastic fatigue altogether?

MakerWorld link in the first comment.

I have been using the "Flex Filament Clip" for quite a while and really liked the concept. After printing dozens of them I started wondering how I would build it today, so I designed my own version completely from scratch in OpenSCAD.

The biggest change is the flex mechanism. Since the bending is almost entirely carried by the perimeters, the infill contributes very little to the compliance of the flex arm. Separating the walls into two independently deforming sections creates a more compliant mechanism, allowing the deformation to be distributed across multiple flex zones instead of a single continuous spring.

I also increased the height for a more comfortable grip and refined the internal filament path for a secure friction fit. The current standard version fits most common spools including Bambu Lab, SUNLU and many cardboard spools.

Why I prefer this style of filament clip

One thing that was important to me was avoiding any attachment method that secures the filament end to the wound filament itself, since this can increase the risk of accidental tangles.

Instead, the filament is secured close to the spool core without introducing unnecessary bending stress. This also helps prevent brittle filament from breaking after long term storage, something that is often seen with PLA when the filament is threaded through the spool rim or secured with rim mounted clips.

Mounting the clip between the spool flanges provides another practical benefit. The spool remains free to rotate during filament drying, and multiple spools can be stacked for storage without the clip getting in the way.

The MakerWorld link is in the first comment.

About a year ago I released a Bambu spool desiccant holder called Wiry v1. I used it daily and kept running into small things I wanted to improve. Better airflow. Better fit. Better click. Better handling. Better printability.

One redesign turned into a much longer chain of iterations:

Wiry v1 -> NoSpill HT -> Tuff v1 -> NoSpill Sturdy -> MaxFlow -> Wiry v2 -> MaxFlow² -> Ball Spring -> MaxFlowᴾ -> MaxFlow³.

Each release explored a different idea. Some focused on refill handling, some on retention, some on airflow, some on printability. A lot of concepts carried over and gradually evolved into newer versions.

The latest version now uses flexible preload fins, airflow focused mesh geometry, click lock closure and two front styles, one clean mesh version and one Bambu Lab label version.

I probably spent an unreasonable amount of time and filament on this so you do not have to.

What remained after a year of redesigns:

• Using less filament is not better. Saving a few grams means very little if the container becomes weaker, more fragile or simply less reliable. Better print 30 minutes longer but remain usable for years, not month.
• The closure has to just work. Simple does not only mean easy to use, it also means predictable and reliable. A lid should close the same way every time.
• Threads mostly rely on friction and friction eventually becomes guesswork. Without that certain click, Click, CLICK feeling, there is always that tiny voice asking if it actually locked.
• Using slicer tricks to create airflow through infill patterns in lids and bottoms is clever, but also fragile and difficult to control. My Tri-Mesh geometry eventually replaced all of that.
• Wall holes alone do not help much if the walls sit directly against the spool core. That is why the flexible fins create a gap around the container, allowing airflow from every direction while also locking the model securely in place.

At some point every project turns into a rabbit hole. Am I done now? Probably not. All my existing spools currently run MaxFlow² while every new spool gets MaxFlow³. I have a feeling it will not stop here, but right now I genuinely cannot think of anything left to improve. Can you? Maybe the journey actually ended here. Maybe.

If you want not only the look, but also the satisfying click, Click, CLICK feel, here is the model:
https://makerworld.com/models/2798690-bambu-lab-silica-desiccant-core-drybox-maxflow3