While I acknowledge the expectations Ellis tries to set, all the youtubers out there have me chasing a dragon looking for better and better layer aliment on my z-axis. I suspect (at least) one of you will come out of the woodwork and say your printer has better aligned layers than mine too 😭 I’m certainly not alone, but even in that thread you can find some people claiming that not everyone experiences the issue

So far, I’ve been through three iterations on my CW2:

Results below with me hand holding my cellphone and moving a Pixar style desk lamp to be at a progressively steeper angle to the face of the cubes. Left = FYSTEC Pom (I also used Orcaslicer), middle = BMG IDGA, right = ‘normal’ BMGs. Note that the cubes are upside down.

Vanity shot with very soft and indirect light

Direct light, 90 degrees to the face of the cubes (basically perpendicular)

Direct light, ~45 degrees to the face of the cubes

Direct light, ~5 degrees to the face of the cubes (basically parallel)

At this point, I am going to shrug, give up, and print with fuzz (or avoid harsh light).

    • IMALlama@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      8 months ago

      This makes me sad. The center and left cube are pretty solid in person until you get direct overhead light on them.

      I just added another photo to the OP with a more diffused light sourced. It makes all three parts look pretty good.

      I do kind of wonder if this is a compromised based on speed. I wouldn’t say I’m going fast, but I am running 110 perimeters and 3k accelerations. Maybe I should print a slower cube.

      Other ideas are welcome :)

      • seathru@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        8 months ago

        It may be a trick of the lighting. The picture you added looks much better. But I wouldn’t think you would be able to see that kind of errors just from light.

        I’ll dig out some old prints tomorrow and see what they look like under a direct harsh light source. I say old because as soon as I started modding my printer, the quality went to shit. I may be able to print TPU and ABS now, but it definitely doesn’t look as good as before I started messing with it.

        • IMALlama@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          8 months ago

          Haha, sounds like fun. This is a Voron 2.4 350, so it has the (dis)advantages of being big/having long belts and having a hot end that’s biased toward speed. I’ve run a spool of TPU through it somewhat recently and at this point I basically daily ASA. PETG parts look better, but I have not tried a PETG cube yet. Maybe I should.

          Thanks for digging around for pics! I appreciate the reference.

      • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        You sure this isn’t some sort of flow issue? The z-axis should be judged based on measurements of the cube if I’m not mistaken (20mm cube = 20mm) while the look of the print is dependent on speed/flow/layer height/plastic quality. The extrusion looks pretty inconsistent, and I see a ton of ringing even without anything immediately nearby to cause it (you can see it across the entire width below the little slashes from corner to corner).

        I dunno what firmware you’re using, but with klipper, resonance compensation and input shaping can help eliminate things like this.

        • IMALlama@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          It might be a flow issue. I recently discovered that my hot end was coming apart, which was leading to some print inconsistencies. This is my first print after fixing that, and swapping extruder gears while I was in there. I’ll have to check my belts and take another pass through Ellis’s tuning guide.

          I am running klipper, and even have an accelerometer mounted to my tool head, but haven’t taken the time to put some temporary wiring in place to test/tune it. I’ll also have to do that. I do see some fine/faint ringing in the parts.

          As for these prints, they were printed fairly quickly on a 0.4mm nozzle with 0.2mm layer height in Polymaker ASA.

  • B0rax@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    8 months ago

    Are you sure you are looking at the right things to improve? Did you check all the screws on the gantry and toolhead? Is your tap (if you use it) solid?

    • IMALlama@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      Not at all, that’s part of the reason for this post. I did give all the screws a once over and everything is nice and tight. The tool head was completely rebuilt between the first and second cubes. I’m on team kicky and it’s been pretty reliable/repeatable.

      • B0rax@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        8 months ago

        Does your x-axis have any play at all? Try to pull forward/backward on your (cold!!) nozzle lightly and see if it moves, it should not.

        • IMALlama@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          8 months ago

          It did somewhere along the lines due to my hot end shaking itself apart, but I fixed that before attempting the cube on the left. There’s maybe a small reduction in ringing, but homing is a whole lot more consistent now.

            • IMALlama@lemmy.worldOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              It was truly the hot end. The hot part of the hot end was starting to fall off the heat break due to the three screws that held them together loosening. Fixing involved disassembly, some clean up, and reassembly.

    • IMALlama@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      What do you mean? The quality of the cubes themselves or the surface finish? There is a bit of skin defect going on and it looks like OrcaSlicer introduced some corner rounding about 1/3 of the way up the blue cube. I still need to run input shaper, but the prints don’t seem that bad? Maybe my standards are low s because of the absolutely appalling quality of my old I3 clone.

      This is also intentionally pretty harsh lighting. I just added the OP to add a photo with more diffuse lighting and all three prints look way more like what you’ll find on the web.

      • HootinNHollerin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        The inserts are poorly inserted and into oblongated & incorrect ID (too big) holes, and the print quality looks poor (just low quality printer likely). Doubt those shafts are perpendicular or located accurately. But I’m not looking at this from a hobbyist perspective, but from a mechanical engineer, machine designer perspective.

        Cheap printers are a waste of time IMO, but a good engineering learning experience

        • IMALlama@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          8 months ago

          Thank you for the more detailed reply. The part in question is is a Voron Design Cube. I printed it on my 350mm Voron 2.4. The print does match the source STL fairly well, but it does look like OrcaSlicer’s result (blue) has more corner rounding than the SuperSlicer results. There’s a 45 degree chamfer on both the lower and upper face of the Z, which might contribute to what you’re seeing. The parts themselves are also physically not that large, so you might be seeing a bit of the impact of the nozzle being round too.