43mm trays that stack on 39mm trays and fit in bird cages (1 Viewer)

[BGinGA]

Injection molding:

I priced out injection molding. It is a little over $5k to setup (some quoted $20k). Then it would cost around $8 each to make. I don't know the market for this type of tray but if I could sell 1000 then break even would be about $13 each ($8 + $5k/1000). That isn't so bad. However, I don't want to gear up to sell 1000 of these, if worldwide demand is even that high. I could get the per unit cost down to $6 at quantity 5000. But then I would end up with 4900 in my garage.

There is also a technical problem that makes injection molding tricky. Most trays have a rounded bottom that mirrors the top. This tray has a flat bottom so that it will sit on a rack with four OR five rows of chips. That flatness causes a thick area in the mold that is likely to contract when cooling and ejected from the mold causing a concavity on the bottom right where the middle row of a normal 39mm x 100 tray would sit. It would still work but might wobble. Also, that contraction would cause a much higher failure rate than normal due to twisting and distorting the rest of the tray. Of course, this could be BS told to me by an injection molding company I contacted. A second company also mention part thickness as a concern without all the details. So, I didn't want to take a $5k risk to make a version of something I already had in my hand.

Injection-molding is much cheaper in China. Not sure on the set-up costs (I'd guess about half), but they can produce acrylic racks for less than $1 each shipped in large quantities.

 

[Ken]

Injection-molding is much cheaper in China. Not sure on the set-up costs (I'd guess about half), but they can produce acrylic racks for less than $1 each shipped in large quantities.

I am not interested in doing this commercially so I am not willing to invest several thousand dollars getting large quantities made that still might not be that good.

The acrylic racks I have seen on the cheap end are not very good quality. I worry about that.

What do you think "large quantities" would be? Is there demand for that number of these weird racks? I don't know.

 

[BGinGA]

Joe @PGI has done this with several different designs. We just need to convince him that a stackable four-barrel 43mm tray design will sell enough to make it worth his time/effort/expenses.

 

[DJ Mack]

Joe @PGI has done this with several different designs. We just need to convince him that a stackable four-barrel 43mm tray design will sell enough to make it worth his time/effort/expenses.

And we have to agree on what exactly a 43mm tray is. Should they be for Paulsons only, or should they be slightly bigger to accommodate CPC? You can find five barrel racks that fit 43mm Paulsons quite well. But you can't find anything that fits CPC, four or five barrel. Point being figuring out the demand is a little more nuanced than "how many people have oversized chips and would want racks?"

 

[BGinGA]

I would wager huge sums of money that the volume of ASM/CPC 44mm chips is miniscule compared to the number of Paulson, Sun-Fly, and other 'standardized' 43mm chips in the hands of chip hobbyists. I don't think alienating the vast majority of the market segment to appease a very small percentage is a wise choice.

 

[Blaster]

If the China factory includes 4 small clear plastic chip 'spacers' with ea rack, that would add essentially $00.00 to the cost & work for everything

 

[DJ Mack]

No doubt you're right on comparative volume, but as I said there are already commercial offerings for 43mm Paulsons in five barrel format. How many people want to go down to four barrels to put them in bird cages? Yes, we know there are some as that's the whole point of this thread. I would, however, wager it's far less than 100% of 43mm owners.

As an example, my bird cages never leave the house. When I transport chips the racks get placed in a crate. I have two racks of 43mm Paulsons. They get displayed openly in front of my bird cages on my shelf. When I want to use them, well I have two hands and two racks so it works perfectly. Thus a four barrel 43mm Paulson-only rack is of no use to me. On the other hand I'd pay a premium for a plastic rack that holds CPCs.

And what would the average person buy? I've bought 39mm racks by the case. My two 43mm racks came one at a time. So again, figuring out demand is not as simple as there's lots of people out there with 43mm Paulsons, ergo they all want lots of these things, hit it Joe!

 

[Ken]

Thank you all for your kind words and encouragement.

I have successfully printed three trays in the last four attempts. So, I will assume with that little data that my failure rate will be 25% in the long run.

A roll of the cheaper filament which worked for the last two costs about $26. I get four attempts per roll so will likely get three good ones (hopefully four) so each averages $8.67 of filament per success. Add $6.45 for a flat rate small box shipping and we are up to $15.12 total for shipping in the US.

Let’s say $16 then rounding up for one of these trays shipped to the US. Add actual shipping difference for delivery elsewhere.

As this isn’t my full time job I will only be able to make a few per week. So, delivery will be kinda slow. You have waited this long so that probably doesn’t bother you.

I will do this to give back to the forum that has provided me much information and entertainment. Thank you.

DM me and I will be in touch with color options and ETA if you want to go this route.
- Edit: removed form, asked to DM me as that gives me notification immediately (kinda) vs. looking to see if the form updated.

No obligation, of course

 

[chkmte]

Wow. This is something else. I'm not sure what to make of it. I have no oversized chips but I suppose the possibilities with this printer are basically limitless. What an interesting technology.

 

[Riomaa]

I hate to revive old threads on forums but I think this might be useful if anybody else prints trays in the future.

Supports are the bane of all 3D prints. I think you should be able to print this tray completely upside down without supports. This can cause rougher surfaces (primarily at the highest point) depending on printer capability and settings but shouldn't be more than a 30-60 second sand job at most. You should also be able to print this sideways with sparser supports but a support interface. This would reduce sanding even further if not completely eliminate the need for it.

If you want to cut the print, cut a side panel off instead of cutting it in half. Put grooves in the side panel if you want it to be sturdier and easier to put together.

A quarter spool of filament per print is a lot. From the uploaded images, infill looks like about 80% which I think is the default setting in a lot of printing software. I'm betting infill could be reduced to 50% without significant structural integrity loss. And if any of the above suggestions work, you should be able to print without a raft since I think it's only being done because of the angled print?

Resin printers are also semi-affordable now. Printing this should be much cleaner and I think easier if you happen to have one.

 

[Ken]

Supports are the bane of all 3D prints. I think you should be able to print this tray completely upside down without supports. This can cause rougher surfaces (primarily at the highest point) depending on printer capability and settings but shouldn't be more than a 30-60 second sand job at most. You should also be able to print this sideways with sparser supports but a support interface. This would reduce sanding even further if not completely eliminate the need for it.

If you want to cut the print, cut a side panel off instead of cutting it in half. Put grooves in the side panel if you want it to be sturdier and easier to put together.

A quarter spool of filament per print is a lot. From the uploaded images, infill looks like about 80% which I think is the default setting in a lot of printing software. I'm betting infill could be reduced to 50% without significant structural integrity loss. And if any of the above suggestions work, you should be able to print without a raft since I think it's only being done because of the angled print?

Resin printers are also semi-affordable now. Printing this should be much cleaner and I think easier if you happen to have one.

This post is over two years old and I have changed my methods a bit. There are other posts with some details elsewhere.

Supports: I have minimized support impact on the print quality by printing it face up at a 45 degree angle. This only puts supports on the bottom where the finish doesn't matter.

Orientation: It CAN be printed upside down but I found the tunnel where the chips sit to be esthetically nasty. Sanding makes it worse as all the gloss is removed from the print. It is functionally fine but it looks bad. So I have decided after trying all the variations to print it at the face up 45 degree angle. The tunnels are nicer and need no sanding. The supports kinda just snap off leaving little to no marks. I usually run over the bottom corners with a deburring tool and that is all the finish I do. The 45 degree angle also makes for the best tunnel surface result.

Infill: I printed almost all of the trays I have made between 20% and 40% infill. I like 40% best for weight. It ways about the same as an injection molded tray of the same geometry. I mostly do 25% now for a tradeoff in printing speed and finish quality, sacrificing a little bit on weight parity with injected molded racks. I also don't use a raft, ever, anymore. I have solved bed adhesion issues in other ways.

Partial prints: If you want to do a rack the fastest and don't care about visual quality, print it in two pieces with the sides against the bed, no supports, 20% infill, and glue them together. It works. I have done it. If you do it with two different colors it looks good as well since there is an obvious color change rather than gross seam. You need to clean up the glued edges a little bit before gluing them together for a better fit and cleaner finished product. I have even done it with four parts for a striped look. I like it quite a bit and am deciding if I want to make more for myself this way.

Resin printers: There are no inexpensive resin printers that will print something this size, yet. There are a few commercially available ones but they are quite expensive. Also, resin isn't quite as indestructible as PLA or PETG but is catching up if you use some of the more expensive resins. Resin will get there but isn't there yet.

 

[Amish Rabbi]

I was thinking why. Or just print them 39mm side down, who cares about that finish but then realized that when stacking them you don’t want a crappy finish on the chips below.

I would how efficient/cheap a wood tray would be, cnc with a 44mm and 39mm ball cutter and then add sides wouldn’t be to much work and conceivably Chanman or someone is 90% setup for it already

 

[Ken]

I was thinking why. Or just print them 39mm side down, who cares about that finish but then realized that when stacking them you don’t want a crappy finish on the chips below.

I would how efficient/cheap a wood tray would be, cnc with a 44mm and 39mm ball cutter and then add sides wouldn’t be to much work and conceivably Chanman or someone is 90% setup for it already

Chanman has posted really good looking wood trays. I have played with making wood trays using a CNC as well but don't have any completed yet. In fact, I tried CNC in wood and acrylic before 3d printing and got into 3d printing only as a way to rapid prototype designs and sizes but ended up using it as my manufacturing method.

 

[Riomaa]

Resin printers: There are no inexpensive resin printers that will print something this size, yet. There are a few commercially available ones but they are quite expensive. Also, resin isn't quite as indestructible as PLA or PETG but is catching up if you use some of the more expensive resins. Resin will get there but isn't there yet.

Hmmm...I misjudged the length of a rack and the build volume of the current non-commercial resin printers. There is resin that is barely more expensive than what's commonly found but is strong enough to print suppressors with.

Your updates on printing methods sound great. It's been a while since I've thought about printing and prototyping.

 

[Amish Rabbi]

Chanman has posted really good looking wood trays. I have played with making wood trays using a CNC as well but don't have any completed yet. In fact, I tried CNC in wood and acrylic before 3d printing and got into 3d printing only as a way to rapid prototype designs and sizes but ended up using it as my manufacturing method.

I want to make some wood and acrylic combo trays but haven’t had the time to spend in the shop lately

 

[ekricket]

Why don’t you guys make trays out of wood or plastic or printed or whatever out of three pieces that glue together?
The two sides should be universal but print the tube pieces in longer pieces so they can then be trimmed to custom lengths for whatever chips you have, accounting for manufacturer or wear, and then the sides glued on? Then they would fit perfect for whatever chips you had.

 

[Amish Rabbi]

Personally I’m lazy so if I can have a machine do the work then that seems like a win to me lol

 

[ekricket]

I would do ten minutes a tray assembly to get perfect fitting trays at an affordable price. You don’t have to do it that many times. Crap tons less time than I spend cleaning a rack of chips.

 

[T_Chan]

Milling the trays is a huge part of the job. The 2nd most time consuming part is the glue up. Getting clamps on and wiping off the excess glue squeeze out is a pain. Any glue that squeezes out into the barrel has to be cleaned up otherwise the chips at the end won't seat properly. Whether it's wood on wood, or 3D printed parts on wood, it can be very time consuming to make trays. I can see why they're almost always injection molded.

 

[Ken]

Why don’t you guys make trays out of wood or plastic or printed or whatever out of three pieces that glue together?
The two sides should be universal but print the tube pieces in longer pieces so they can then be trimmed to custom lengths for whatever chips you have, accounting for manufacturer or wear, and then the sides glued on? Then they would fit perfect for whatever chips you had.

Actually, that is exactly the split rack approach. I have done with with plastic to success. However, I am super picky on quality and really don't like that seam.

The fact that you can buy injected molded racks "close enough" for $3 or less means that it doesn't pay to figure out a cheaper way to make it as material cost for low volume will exceed the cost to just buy one. At first I was only making sizes that didn't exist elsewhere. Once I got that right I made normal sizes for all of my personal collection to match the chips (black chips in black rack, yellow chips in yellow rack, etc. All with my logo on them.)

I have now kinda run out of steam working on them and moved on to other projects.

 

[Ken]

Milling the trays is a huge part of the job. The 2nd most time consuming part is the glue up. Getting clamps on and wiping off the excess glue squeeze out is a pain. Any glue that squeezes out into the barrel has to be cleaned up otherwise the chips at the end won't seat properly. Whether it's wood on wood, or 3D printed parts on wood, it can be very time consuming to make trays. I can see why they're almost always injection molded.

And, racks are SMALL compared to gluing up boxes or furniture. Everything has to line up perfectly. There isn't enough material to just sand off 1mm to get the surface flush or the chips will just fall out. I 3d printed a jig to hold wood parts in just the right way to glue them together.

I was working on using an internal mortice to keep all the glue away from the surface. But, wow, this becomes a LOT of labor just to replace a $3 part. I still have not made a wood rack that I would use over inexpensive commercially available racks.

 

[JScott]

I know this is a really old thread, but I can’t find the stl for the original design. Does that exist? Looking to print one for my 80 IHC’s