This special AMS unit I built two years ago changed 3D printing for me because basically every filament I put in there ended up perfectly dry after a week or two, giving me always perfect prints and all of that without any heat. Instead, it uses a painfully expensive active drying element that continuously pulls moisture out of the chamber and over time out of the filament itself. And I honestly couldn't understand why nobody had commercialized something like this because it's just such a convenient system. But the wait might be finally over. Sunlu just announced the i10, a $180 cabinet for 10 spools with a self-regenerating desiccant system in the back that keeps the air inside extremely dry. For the last 6 weeks, I've rigorously tested it, collected hundreds of data points, and printed dozens of samples.
[00:01:01] Stefan (CNC Kitchen) discloses Sunlu sponsored the video but no affiliate links are used. Explains the four-step test program: humidity/drying speed, power consumption/noise, print-quality comparison, and residual-moisture check via heat dryer.
[00:02:01]-[00:04:01] Background on why dry filament matters: hygroscopic polymers, moisture causes steam bubbles + stringing (visible defect) and hydrolysis (invisible, embrittles material, lowers viscosity). Heated dryers work but are energy-inefficient, can degrade polymer with repeated cycling, and filament reabsorbs moisture once loaded unless printed from a dry box.
[00:05:01]-[00:07:01] Storage alternatives: vacuum bags/desiccant boxes require maintenance (desiccant must be regenerated). References his solid-state-dehumidifier AMS mod (electrolyzing membrane) — great results but expensive (~€200 membrane), slow (days), and membranes can wear out/fail (~2yr from VOCs).
[00:07:01]-[00:10:01] i10 mechanism: injection-molded cabinet, 10x 1kg spool capacity (5+5), molecular sieve desiccant regenerated via shutters + PTC heater + external vent (stays under ~30°C). Simple controls: target humidity 10-50%. Two internal fans. No filament outlets/lighting — storage only, not a print-through unit.
[00:10:01]-[00:11:00] Dry run (no filament): humidity drops below 20% quickly, settles ~15-16% (logger has ±5pt uncertainty at low humidity). Recovers fast after door opening.
[00:11:00]-[00:13:00] Sponge/water test: i10 removed ~50g moisture/day vs ~9g for his solid-state AMS (at high-humidity conditions, not directly comparable to normal use).
[00:13:00]-[00:17:02] Main 12-day test, 10 spools (PLA, PETG, ASA, TPU, 2x nylon): took ~1 day to reach steady ~16% RH with regeneration-cycle humidity spikes (suspected shutter seal leakage — flagged as an improvement point). Highest weight loss surprisingly from cardboard-spool materials (Snapmaker PLA >1%) — cardboard itself traps significant moisture. After ~1 week, weight stabilized for most materials except the two nylons and Bambu TPU, which kept losing weight. Total: >60g moisture removed across 10 spools over 12 days. Power use: ~1kWh over 12 days; regen cycle ~40min, up to 450W initial draw settling to ~60W (PTC heater self-limiting); idle draw 1-2W. Realistic estimate: ~100Wh/day, ~35kWh/year, ~$10-15/year energy cost.
[00:18:01]-[00:23:01] Print comparisons (i10-stored vs stored-in-open filament): PLA — minimal 3D-bench difference, less stringing in stringing test. PETG (3 variants incl. CF) — dramatic improvement, smoother surface, far less stringing/foaming. ASA and Prusament PC/PC-CF — similarly better surface quality. Nylon — still visibly wet/bubbly after 12 days (some improvement in faster-printed sections only); confirmed by continued weight loss in tracking data. TPU — modest surface improvement but stringing persisted; separately heat-dried TPU showed no real improvement either, so root cause was likely suboptimal print settings, not moisture.
[00:23:01]-[00:24:00] Residual moisture test: transferred spools to heated dryer afterward. PLA/PETG had ~0.1% additional weight loss — i10 had already removed ~70-80% of removable moisture, sufficient for good prints (diminishing returns beyond that). Nylon lost another ~2% weight (~20g) under heat — more than the i10 removed in 12 days — showing nylon needs heat, not just dry air, to fully dry.
[00:24:00]-[00:25:00] Post-heat-dry storage test: reloaded fully-dried spools into i10. PLA/PETG held moisture level well. TPU gained slightly then stabilized. Nylon continued absorbing moisture even at ~10% RH inside the cabinet, still absorbing after a full week — visible bubble reappearance in a nylon reprint.
[00:25:00]-[00:31:01] Verdict: i10 is more than storage — actively dries PLA/PETG/ASA/PC to a meaningfully better print-quality state. Not sufficient alone for nylon/PPS/PA/PEEK-class hygroscopic materials — still need heat drying for those, though i10 storage slows reabsorption and shortens the next dry cycle. Personal take: convenient, maintenance-free, will buy 2 more units. Compared to well-maintained desiccant boxes: not necessarily better/cheaper IF you diligently maintain desiccant, but most people don't. $180/10-spool price deemed reasonable for non-hobby users. Listed criticisms (explicitly kept in per agreement with sponsor): hygrometer reads slightly optimistic vs true achievable humidity; regeneration-cycle humidity spikes hurt efficiency; door hinge is right-opening only (inconvenient for right-handed users, can't be switched due to display cabling); no built-in print-through capability (seen as an acceptable tradeoff, not a flaw, to keep cost/leak-paths down). Expects DIY mods for spool holders/outlets. Speculates competitors will copy the self-regenerating desiccant approach, hopes to see it miniaturized into AMS-style units.