view the rest of the comments
3DPrinting
3DPrinting is a place where makers of all skill levels and walks of life can learn about and discuss 3D printing and development of 3D printed parts and devices.
The r/functionalprint community is now located at: or !functionalprint@fedia.io
There are CAD communities available at: !cad@lemmy.world or !freecad@lemmy.ml
Rules
-
No bigotry - including racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, or xenophobia. Code of Conduct.
-
Be respectful, especially when disagreeing. Everyone should feel welcome here.
-
No porn (NSFW prints are acceptable but must be marked NSFW)
-
No Ads / Spamming / Guerrilla Marketing
-
Do not create links to reddit
-
If you see an issue please flag it
-
No guns
-
No injury gore posts
If you need an easy way to host pictures, https://catbox.moe/ may be an option. Be ethical about what you post and donate if you are able or use this a lot. It is just an individual hosting content, not a company. The image embedding syntax for Lemmy is ![]()
Moderation policy: Light, mostly invisible
No I'm saying the gap between lines on layer 2 and 3 is the same throughout the entirety of both layers without change (also on walls), but not present at all on layer 4 and onwards.
Partially complete layer 2
This seems to be unrelated to Z-offset, as it's happens regardless of print placement and orientation but follows infill direction with the more squished part being towards the end of the layer and the slightly less squished part being the beginning.
The entire bed is within 0.18mm from lowest to highest point, with 0.07mm between highest and lowest corners. According to the probed mesh at least when I probe the entire bed.
This is also following infill direction actually, now that I think of it. It starts out almost ok, but gaps occur to a greater extent as solid infill progresses (regardless of print orientation and infill direction)
I honestly can't remember...maybe?
Yes
8 months or so
55°C, heat soaked. It uses KAMP so it's a new mesh every print.
Yeah this is what I was describing. If the nozzle is too far from the bed the line will not be properly squished down, meaning that the line will be too narrow (gaps seen on print) and too tall across the whole layer, which means the next layer gets put down higher than it should and is also too tall but slightly closer to the nozzle. Rinse and repeat, eventually a future layer is at the correct height to get squished and every layer past that is correct.
Still really feeling like this is a z-offset issue, which could be calibration, or an unlevel or uneven bed, or tramming.
This should not be the case. You shouldn't have too much material at the end of a layer and too little at the start (or vise versa). Does the result look the exact same no matter where on the bed you put it? Like it looks the same centered vs put in corners but keeping the same orientation and print order.
If it happens anywhere on the bed in the exact same way then I don't think it is a bed mesh problem and wondering if there is some sort of e-step problem that is compounding over the course of the layer, but resets on a layer change. Maybe try relative positions vs absolute positions in the gcode settings to see if it changes anything?
However, if moving the print to a different part of the bed moved the "problem areas" then there is either a motion system issue or bed mesh issue. Something could be out of square, or a z-axis lead screw is out of shape, or even I've seen printer firmware just tossing out the bed meshes - they will still scan them, but then just tosses it out at the beginning of a print (could be problematic "beginning gcode" in the slicer doing that too).