TechyMagThings

Although usually nylon (generally PA6) filament is pretty cheap, there are some more exotic variants out there, such as the PA12-based Lyten 3D graphene filament that comes in at a cool $150 for a 1 kg spool. Worse for [Dr. Igor Gaspar] here was that the company doesn’t ship to the EU, and didn’t respond to emails about obtaining a sample for testing. Fortunately he got a spool via a different route, so that he could test whether this is the strongest nylon filament or not.

The full name for this filament is PA1205, though it’s not certain what the ’05’ part stands for. PA12 is a less moisture-sensitive version of PA6, however. Among the manufacturer’s claims are that it’s the strongest nylon filament, as well as very lightweight and heat-resistant. Interestingly the datasheet recommends printing with an 0.6 mm nozzle, which is the only major deviation from typical nylon FDM filaments. Of course, printing with an 0.4 mm nozzle had to be tried.

With a standard PA-CF preset in Bambu Lab’s slicer the printing of test parts worked without issues, which was promising. With load testing the filament made a good showing compared to average PA filaments, though as with most fiber reinforced filaments it’s more brittle than the pure material. Compared to PA-CF this PA1205 was much less brittle than PA-CF, however. Overall it’s not a bad filament, but for the asking price it’s a tough ask.

Most carpenters and woodworkers find themselves with the problem of disposing of all the sawdust they create when performing their craft. There are lots of creative solutions to this problem, such as adding it compost, using it as groundcover in a garden, adding it as filler in a composting toilet, or pressing it into bricks to burn in a stove. All of these have their uses, but involve either transporting the sawdust somewhere or performing some intermediate step to process it. [Greenhill Forge] wanted to make more direct use of it so he built this stove which can burn the sawdust directly and which provides enough heat for his woodshop.

The design is based on one which is somewhat common in Japan and involves building a vessel with a central tube for airflow, with the sawdust packed around it. The tube is made from a hardware cloth or screen to allow air to reach the sawdust. The fire is lit from the top, closed, and then allowed to burn through the stack. [Greenhill Forge] welded the entire stove from various pieces of sheet metal and bar stock, with a glass plate at the top of the stove to close off the fire and a baffle to control the airflow and rate of burn.

Initially, [Greenhill Forge] thought that the fire would burn from the top down, but this turned out to create a smoldery, messy fire instead of a hot, clean burn. Eventually, though, an ember fell down to the bottom and let the stack burn from the top up, and then it started generating serious heat. He estimates that with around 5 kg of sawdust burning for three hours that it’s about equivalent to a 6 kW stove. While a woodworker might not have enough sawdust to run this stove every day, it could be good to have on hand to use once every few weeks when the sawdust builds up enough. [Greenhill Forge] has been hard at work building unique wood burning stoves lately, like this one we recently featured which generates and then uses charcoal as fuel.

The US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is tasked with regulating both wired and wireless communications, which also includes a national security component. This is how previously the FCC tossed networking gear made by Huawei and foreign-manufactured drones onto its Covered List, effectively banning it from sale in the US. Now foreign-made consumer routers have been added to this list, barring explicit conditional approval on said list that would exempt them during a ‘transition phase’.

As per the FCC fact sheet, this follows after determination by an interagency body that such routers “pose unacceptable risks to the national security of the United States [..]”. This document points us to the National Security Determination PDF, which attempts to lay out the reasoning. In it is noted that routers are an integral part of every day life, and compromised routers are a major risk factor, ergo it follows that only US-manufactured routers are to be trusted.

These – so far fictional – US-manufactured consumer routers would have to feature ‘trusted supply chains’, which would seem to imply onshoring a large industrial base, though without specifying how deep this would have to go it’s hard to say what would be involved. The ‘supporting evidence’ section also only talks about firmware-related vulnerabilities, which would imply that US firmware developers do not produce CVEs.

Currently there do not appear to be any specific details on what router manufacturers are supposed to do about this whole issue, though they can continue to sell previously FCC-approved routers in the US.

Although hardware backdoors are definitely a possibility, this requires a fair bit of effort within the supply chain that should generally also fairly easily to detect. Yet after for example Bloomberg claimed in 2018 that Supermicro gear had been infested with hardware backdoors, this started a years-long controversy.

Meanwhile actually verified issues with Supermicro hardware are boringly due to software CVEs. In that particular issue from 2024 two CVEs were discovered involving a lack of validation of a newly uploaded firmware image.

All of which is reminiscent of an early 2024 White House ‘memory safety appeal’ that smelled very strongly of red herring. Although it’s easy to point at compromised hardware with scary backdoors and sneaky software backdoors hidden deep inside firmware of servers and networking devices, the truth of the matter is that sloppy input validation is still by far the #1 cause of fresh CVEs each year, especially if you look at the CVEs that are actually being actively exploited.

As for this de-facto ban on new routers being sold in the US, this will correspondingly not change much here. The best defense against issues with networking equipment is still to practice network hygiene by keeping tabs on what is being sent on the LAN and WAN sides, while a government could e.g. force consumer routers to pass a strict independent hardware and software audit paid for by the manufacturer.

Speaking as someone who used to run DIY routers for the longest time built around FreeSCO and Smoothwall Linux, there’s also always the option of turning any old PC into a router by putting a bunch of NICs and WNICs into it and run SmoothWall, OpenWRT, etc.. A router is after all just a specialized computer, regardless of what the government feels that it identifies as.

Creating PCBs at home is quite easy these days (vias not withstanding), but even the best DIY methods usually can’t match the resolution offered by commercial PCB production lines. Large traces are easy enough to carve out of copper-backed FR1 or FR4 with even a mill, what if you need something more like 100 µm sized traces with similar clearance? This is what [Giangix] has been experimenting with, using both a fiber laser and chemical etching to see what approach gives the best results.

The thin copper clad boards are put on the 20 Watt fiber laser and held in place with the vacuum table that [Giangix] previously made, using the power of suction to make sure the board doesn’t move. The used laser specifies a minimum line width of 0.01 mm, so that’s clearly fine enough to engrave away the chemical resist layer that is sprayed on top of the copper layer.

After some experimentation, it was found that increasing the trace clearance between the 0.1 mm traces to a hair above 0.1 mm was necessary for the subsequent chemical etching step to work the best, as otherwise some copper was still likely to remain. The chemical etching bath mixture consists of hydrochloric acid and hydrogen peroxide, in a ratio of 2 mL water to 2 mL 30% HCl and 2 drops of 35% H2O2. This is agitated for 90 s to get a pretty good result.

Although the final resistance measurements on the traces is a bit higher than theoretical, comments suggest that maybe some of the copper got removed along with the removal of the resist layer. Perhaps the most interesting question here is whether directly ablating the copper using the fiber laser would give even better results and bypass the etching chemicals.

Supercapacitors rely mostly on double-layer capacitance to bridge the divide between chemical batteries and traditional capacitors, but they come with a number of weaknesses. Paramount among these are their relatively low voltage of around 2.7 V before their electrolyte begins to decompose, as well as their relatively high rates of self-discharge. Here a new design using lignin-derived porous carbon electrodes and a fluorinated diluent was demonstrated by [Shichao Zhang] et al., as published in Carbon Research, that seems to address these issues.

Most notable are the relatively high voltage of 4 V, an energy density of 77 Wh/kg and a self-discharge rate that’s much slower than that of conventional supercapacitors. In comparison with these supercapacitors, these demonstrated versions are also superior in terms of recharge cycles with 90% of capacity remaining after 10,000 cycles, which together with their much higher energy density should prove to be quite useful.

This feat is accomplished by using lignin as the base for the carbon electrodes to make a highly porous surface, along with the new electrolyte formulation consisting of alithium salt (LiBF₄) dissolved in sulfolane with TTE as a non-solvating diluent. The idea of using lignin-derived carbon for such a purpose has previously been pitched by [Jia Liu] et al. in 2022 and [Zhihao Ding] in 2025, with this seemingly one of the first major applications we may be seeing.

Although the path towards commercialization from a lab-assembled prototype is a rough one, we may be seeing some of these improvements come to supercapacitors near you sooner rather than later.

The Z80 has been gone a couple of years now, but it’s very much not forgotten. Still, the day when new-old-stock and salvaged DIP-40 packaged Z80s will be hard to come by is slowly approaching, and [eaw] is going to be ready with the picoZ80 project.

You can probably guess where this is going: an RP2350B on a DIP-40 sized PCB can easily sit on the bus and emulate a Z80. It can do so with only one core, without breaking a sweat. That left [eaw] a second core to play with, allowing the picoZ80 to act as a heck of an accelerator, memory expander, USB host, disk emulator– you name it. He even tossed in an ESP32 co-processor to act as a WiFi, Bluetooth, and SD-card controller to use as a virtual, wirelessly accessible disk drive.

The onboard ram that comes with an RP2350B would be generous by 1980s standards, but [eaw] bumped that up with an 8 MB SPRAM chip–accessed in 64 pages of 64 kB each, naturally. If more RAM than a very pricey hard drive wasn’t luxury enough, there’s also 16 MB of flash memory available. That’s configured to store ROM images that are transferred to the RAM at boot– the virtual Z80 isn’t grabbing from the flash at runtime in [eaw]’s architecture, because apparently there are limits to how much he wants to boost his retro machines.

There are already drivers to use in certain Z80 systems. You can of course configure it as a bare Z80 with no machine-specific emulation, or set up the picoZ80 with the “persona” of a classic Z80 machine. So far [eaw] has tried this on an RC2014 homebrew computer, as well as Sharp MZ-80A– which we’ve seen here before, in miniature–and Sharp MZ-700. The Sharp drivers are still works in progress, after which the Amstrad PCW8256/Tatung TC01 is apparently next. We’ve seen Amstrad PCWs here a time or two as well, come to think of it.

If somehow you missed it, the venerable Z80 only hit EOL in 2024, so supplies won’t be drying up any time soon. This hack is really more about the quality-of-life addons this allows. Come back in a decade, and we’ll see if the RP2350 lasts longer than the stack of NOS Z80s.

We don’t usually speculate on the true identity of the hackers behind these projects, but when [TN666]’s accoustic drone-detector crossed our desk with the name “Batear”, we couldn’t help but wonder– is that you, Bruce? On the other hand, with a BOM consisting entirely of one ESP32-S3 and an ICS-43434 I2S microphone, this isn’t exactly going to require the Wayne fortune to pull off. Indeed, [TN666] estimates a project cost of only 15 USD, which really democratizes drone detection.

The key is what you might call ‘retrovation’– innovation by looking backwards. Most drone detection schema are looking to the ways we search for larger aircraft, and use RADAR. Before RADAR there were acoustic detectors, like the famous Japanese “war tubas” that went viral many years ago. RADAR modules aren’t cheap, but MEMS microphones are– and drones, especially quad-copters, aren’t exactly quiet. [TN666] thus made the choice to use acoustic detection in order to democratize drone detection.

Of course that’s not much good if the ESP32 is phoning home to some Azure or AWS server to get the acoustic data processed by some giant machine learning model.  That would be the easy thing to do with an ESP32, but if you’re under drone attack or surveillance it’s not likely you want to rely on the cloud. There are always privacy concerns with using other people’s hardware, too. [TN666] again reached backwards to a more traditional algorithmic approach– specifically Goertzel filters to detect the acoustic frequencies used by drones. For analyzing specific frequency buckets, the Goertzel algorithm is as light as they come– which means everything can run local on the ESP32. They call that “edge computing” these days, but we just call it common sense.

The downside is that, since we’re just listening at specific frequencies, environmental noise can be an issue. Calibration for a given environment is suggested, as is a foam sock on the microphone to avoid false positives due to wind noise. It occurs to us the sort physical amplifier used in those ‘war tubas’ would both shelter the microphone from wind, as well as increase range and directionality.

[TN] does intend to explore machine learning models for this hardware as well; he seems to think that an ESP32-NN or small TensorFlow Lite model might outdo the Goertzel algorithm. He might be onto something, but we’re cheering for Goertzel on that one, simply on the basis that it’s a more elegant solution, one we’ve dived into before. It even works on the ATtiny85, which isn’t something you can say about even the lightest TensorFlow model.

Thanks to [TN] for the tip. Playboy billionaire or not, you can send your projects into the tips line to see them some bat-time on this bat-channel.