Hey guys! I recently printed @AdamL's Scrubbler to replace my P1P's wiper. His instructions said to put the original wiper on the 3D printed wiper. Sadly, the way the model is designed, it raised the original wiper up to the height that it would hit the nozzle. Thankfully, I caught it before it hit. I did some tests to figure out which one is better. I tried to add a .pdf, but I don't know if there is a way that I didn't see or if you can't put a .pdf atall. Anyways, my report is down below. (sorry if it is hard to read). If you have any questions, comments, or suggestions, leave them in the comment section down below. Thanks!   Scrubbler vs. OG nozzle wiper This experiment is to show which nozzle wiper cleans better: the Scrubbler (remixed by @AdamL), or the OG nozzle wiper (by Bambu Lab). This will walk you through what I did when testing this, with a results table at the end. The Materials:Bambu Lab PLAExtra scrubbing pads from the A1TimeEffort The Process: I first found this model here. Then, I printed it out in the PLA that Bambu Lab sent me when I bought my P1P. After I installed it, I ran the following tests: LoadingThe Bambu Lab PLA was already loaded in the printer.I clicked “Load” which heated up the nozzle, extruded filament, then wiped the nozzle. This was done with both the OG and the Scrubbler.After a), with the filament loaded, I then ran the printer through the unloading sequence:Heating up the nozzle, cutting the filament, extruding a little filament, then retracting the filament. This process was done with both wiperThen, I did a print test with both wipers:I printed a benchy, which ran the printer through the pre-printing process,(e.g. Heating the nozzle and buildplate, vibration compensation, etc.), and let it print a few layers before stopping it. Result Table:Note: the result table shows, when the nozzle was wiped, which was cleaner.Nozzle wiperOG wiperScrubblerLoading✔️❌Unloading❌✔️Printing❔❔ Result Table Notes:(cont. on next page)Loading: The OG wiper was cleaner because the debris merged with the purged filament, taking all debris away. Unloading: The Scrubbler was cleaner because, when using the OG wiper, the OG wiper flung bits of excess filament on the buildplate. Although, a little bit of filament from the purged filament got caught in the nubs. But then again, it is self-resolving, due to the multiple passes of the nozzle pushing it off of the wiper. Printing: I can’t really say which is better for printing. My advice and theory is, if you have a dirty object, would you rather use an abrasive object to clean off the dirt and debris, or would you rather use a smooth surface to clean off the dirt and debris? Going off of experience, the abrasive would work better than the smooth object. Conclusion: Going off of this experiment, the Scrubbler works better than the OG nozzle wiper. Now, there are flaws with it, such as you can’t install both wipers at the time, due to the Scrubbler raising the OG wiper up just enough that it is taller than the nozzle. (Thankfully, I caught it before the nozzle hit).

Calibrating your filament shouldn't take hours—or a full spool. Whether you're an experienced maker, a filament enthusiast, or a beginner trying to fine-tune your printer settings, having a reliable and quick test is essential. That’s where the Super Tiny Filament Test v2 comes in.🚀 Why It MattersModern FDM 3D printing involves a wide range of materials—each with unique behavior. Bridging, stringing, overhang stability, and extrusion consistency all vary depending on the filament type, quality, and environmental conditions. Traditional tests often take 30 minutes or more, and use significant material just to gather basic print feedback.But what if you could evaluate core behaviors across multiple filaments in just minutes, using less than 0.5 grams per test?That’s exactly what this model does.🔄 What’s New in Version 2?This updated version builds on the original minimalist test by adding a powerful new feature: ✅ Embossed labels for filament types.These labels are designed into the bottom base of each test, so when you print several at once—using different materials—you can immediately tell them apart. No need to write down names or guess which test used what filament. This makes the model ideal for comparisons, documentation, and long-term filament logging.🧵 What It TestsEach test includes:Bridging: A sequence of parallel bridges across two points, exposing filament sag and tension behavior.Overhangs: Steep-angle walls to evaluate cooling, support-free print quality, and extrusion flow control.Stringing: Open vertical posts at close distances to reveal stringing tendencies and retraction tuning needs.First-layer quality: A flat base surface to evaluate bed adhesion and extrusion consistency at the bottom layer.All of this is packed into a model the size of a business card—and yet it’s visually and technically detailed enough to extract real performance data.🛠️ Ideal Use CasesThis test is perfect for:Filament resellers or makers testing many colors/materials.Makers who frequently switch filaments and want fast tuning.Creating a filament performance board with printed samples.Benchmarking filaments for stringing or bridging sensitivity.Quick sanity checks after installing new nozzles or extruders.Teaching print settings in maker spaces, classrooms, or workshops.🧪 Filaments Supported (Embossed Tags Included)The model includes built-in labels for the following materials:PLAPLA+PLA SILKPLA-HF (High-Flow)PLA-GF (Glass Fiber)PLA-CF (Carbon Fiber)PLA GLOWPLA MATEPETGPETG-CFPETG-HFPETG TRANSLUCENTPETG-GFABSASAPC (Polycarbonate)PA (Nylon)TPU (Flexible)R-PETEach label appears clearly in the base for easy viewing after printing.

If you've ever dealt with annoying little webs between printed parts, you know how frustrating stringing can be. Whether you’re printing miniatures, organic models, or functional pieces, stringing can ruin detail and waste time.That’s why I designed this Micro Stringing Test — a tiny, ultra-fast calibration model made to help you dial in retraction, temperature, and travel settings with minimal filament and time.⚙️ Why a Micro Test?Most stringing tests are tall towers or full grids. They work, but they take 20+ minutes and use a lot of material. This version does the same job in under 5 minutes, with less than 0.5 grams of filament.You can print several in a row while tweaking just one setting — and immediately see the results.This is perfect for:Testing new filamentsVerifying drying resultsCalibrating retraction distance and speedFinding ideal hotend temperaturesOptimizing travel moves🧪 How It WorksThe test consists of several vertical posts with deliberate gaps between them, forcing the printer to move in open air — ideal for revealing stringing problems.You simply:Load the modelPrint it at your base settingsObserve the resultAdjust retraction, temp, or travelRepeat if neededIt’s a minimal effort, high-feedback tool for any 3D printing workflow.🛠️ Recommended SettingsLayer Height: 0.2 mmNozzle: 0.4 mmMaterial: PLA, PETG, ABS, TPUSupports: NoneInfill: Low or 0%Walls: 2Print Time: ~3–5 minutesFilament Used: ~0.3–0.5 gBed Adhesion: StandardOrientation: Upright, flat base✅ What to Check ForStrings or thin webs between towersBlobs or zits near the top of the postsSmudging or incomplete movesClean snap-back between travel movesThis model shows all of that clearly — making it easy to tune and forget.📢 Share and SupportIf this helped improve your print quality, please consider leaving a make, a comment, or a boost 💬 I’d love to hear what settings worked best for your material, printer, and slicer.Let’s keep sharing tools that save time and filament — and lead to cleaner, sharper prints 🧡