A350 @ 80mm/s - High Speed & Acceleration Tests

I finally performed a Linear Advance Calibration on my A350, which comes stock with the calibration set to 0.22. The calibration for may A350 is 0.11, so I printed a few calibration cubes. A long story short, and using PrusaSlicer 2.3.1 with a custom profile, I am currently able to print PLA with a better quality, and faster, than the Luban Normal profile.

I’m using PrusaSlicer 2.3.1 with custom profiles at 80mm/s for perimeters, and 120mm/s infill. I currently have the acceleration at 1,000mm/s^2, and I’m pretty sure that I can at least double that, which would drop the total print time by a few more minutes. I’ll take some pictures tomorrow, but the cube is virtually perfect.

Time for bed. Looks like we can push the Snapmaker 2.0 even further than I ever thought that we could.


Here are the pictures that I promised. They were printed with the following settings:

PrusaSlicer screenshots:

Printer Settings:

Filament Settings:


Print Settings:


The yellow color of this OVERTURE PLA isn’t what I expected. I was hoping that it would be an opaque power yellow, but it is semi-translucent and doesn’t photograph all that well. For reference, what looks like opaque yellow vertical columns is actually the most semi-transparent parts of the print, but the camera isn’t able to pick it up correctly. I have a few spools of the gray, which looks exactly as you would expect, so I’ll use it for future prints.


Ok, 2,000mm/s^2 may be a little too high acceleration, so I’m dropping it back to 1,000mm/s^2 like my first tests. All of the other settings are same as in my previous message, only the acceleration was changed. Here are the 2,000mm/s^2 results:

calicat print time: 42 minutes
xyzCalibration Cube print time: 24 minutes

This biggest problem was cooling. It was printing so fast that the filament wasn’t fully cooling in the corners. They were slightly curling up during printing.

1,000mm/s^2 came out much better at 80mm/s, but still has cooling issues. I’d either need to add an additional fan, or slow it down to 60mm/s. I’ll probably do the latter, as I was just doing this as a POC. If you don’t have overhangs > 60°, and only have simple geometry (rectangles and circles), 80mm/s will work rather well. Here is the calicat that I just printed:

The simple geometry is perfect. The overhangs need more cooling. I’ll give it a try at 60mm/s, and I’m sure that that will be perfect all around. With much more cooling, we can go even faster, but I don’t like to add cooling to the print head. I may experiment in the future though. Till then…

I’m a VERY happy camper!

1 Like

Good info.

In my testing I noticed a subtle increase in ringing as I went from 750mm/s^2 put to 1000. I chose to leave it at 750. 1000 would be acceptable for prototyping or even better depending on your tolerance of ringing.

I may have missed it above but did you find 80mm/s to be the limit? I have printed PLA on my delta upwards of 150mm/s. I tested the max extrusion flow on this machine and with a .4mm nozzle it can exceed 80mm/s easily, provided another weakness is not exposed

I haven’t seen any ringing on my Snapmaker while using PrusaSlicer, even at 2,000mm/s^2. However, when using Cura, I see ringing on every print that it slices, across all printers. On my Ender 5 Plus, I am seeing very minimal ringing at 1,000mm/s^2 (PrusaSlicer), but I’m pretty sure that is due to the fact that the main board is not able to support Linear Advance. I have a new BIGTREETECH board, but I have to create mounts for it and the 7" display, before I can use it.

I haven’t yet tried anything above 80mm/s, as I was only trying to see how fast I could print and get a high quality print from it. For simple geometries, 80mm/s would be the max, and would produce very nice functional prints. For complex geometries, 60mm/s would be the max. I’m pretty sure that you use Cura, correct? That ringing that you are seeing is why I made the switch to PrusaSlicer a few months back.

For draft modeling, I’ll probably try 100mm/s and maybe even 120mm/s in the future. I think that they may be the maximum, but who knows. It’s freaking incredible watching the print head zip around this fast, and seeing the table shake. BTW, PrusaSlicer does have a hidden speed limiter that is a part of the filament setting, which is why I showed my settings for the filament as well.

Very useful information! I’m a mixed house with a Snapmaker A350 and a Prusa Mini. I’d really prefer to use the Prusa Slicer over Luban or Cura, so I was hoping you could maybe add a little procedure for how you added the profil. When I try to add a profile I just get an empty configuration that can’t access the filament library…

I use S3D and Cura. Cura has the ability to override default acceleration - is that turned on for you? If so that would explain why you never saw it change.

The ringing test I ran was from teaching tech with a pattern designed to be worst case to trigger ringing.

When you create a new profile for an unknown/unlisted printer, it creates you am empty profile that is dependent upon the default printer profile. It does this for each of the profile types, Printer, Filament, and Print. New Filament and Print profiles are dependent on the default profiles and are available to all printers, but each Filament and Print profile can target a specific printer(s) and will only be available to those printer(s). If you go to the Dependencies tab of the profile, you can view/change which printer(s) a profile is available for.

The System profiles can be changed, but you can’t save them back to their original name. You need to save them under a different name. Also, I break the inheritance from the default profiles, as I don’t want my profiles to be changed by updates. I know that I can export profiles, but I haven’t tried it yet, I’ve only looked at it. I do need to export the profiles on this computer, so that I can use them on my laptop. If I have time tonight, I might look into it further.

1 Like

I created my own profiles, which have the default acceleration at 1,000mm/s^2, I think. So no, I don’t have the checkbox checked. If I check it, it populates all of the settings with the defaults for the profile. I’ve chatted with several people, who all have different printers, and they have all said that they’ve seen same thing. Something that Cura does in their slicing, adds an oscillation pattern to the vertical face of prints. People refer to it as ringing, but it’s not true ringing. Ringing is defined as an oscillation that decays. These oscillations do not decay, and are constant across the vertical face of prints.

Oh, ok. I set it in the firmware and don’t use the slicer to override the machine’s acceleration at all. Just a matter of preference.

That’s…bizarre. Never heard of that before. Sorry if this takes this post off topic, but it’s calibration and machine capability related at least…

A true wave pattern would have to either be present in the gcode to produce such an effect, right? Is the oscillation you describe as “constant across the vertical face” present in gcode moving purely along a native machine axis (X, for instance) or only along a virtual axis requiring multiple machine axes (X and Y, for instance) to move simultaneously?

I’m assuming you have determined this is a Cura issue because it’s not present PrusaSlicer - would you mind sharing the gcode of an object sliced with similar settings between the two softwares? I am curious how the external perimeters could differ to cause such an issue - I can think of a few mechanisms in the firmware that could be responsible through slight misinterpretation of gcode commands (1 long line gcode vs 3 or 10 shorter line gcodes that are not being seamlessly stitched back together, for example - possibly acceleration related as this could prevent the planner from smoothly interpolating motion triggering linear advance changes and with it small ‘blobs’ or ‘pits’ along a wall at regular intervals).

I don’t believe that it is movement codes that are producing the oscillation on what should be a smooth surface (flat or curved), but I stopped looking into it when I tried to compare the slicing between the 2 and found that they don’t slice in the same manner at all. Even though I had identical settings for each, they sliced differently. I think the Cura file had more lines of code per layer, but I could be wrong.

I may look into it again sometime, but I don’t really have any reason to, as I like the UI and Workflow of PrusaSlicer better. If I did, I’d need to make sure that the cube was placed in the exact same location and orientation, in both slicers, to see why there is a difference. I stopped using Cura in January, maybe December, so I don’t have any of the G-code from back then.

Off the top of my head, my first thought is that Cura is breaking up perimeters, when it shouldn’t be, but I never looked into it. I tried to file an issue, but I don’t think I was allowed to. That was too long ago.

That was my thought as well. I’ve never had that cause waves in finished prints, but I also do not have Cura attach any acceleration data in the gcode file. I suspect if Cura is having the machine update acceleration between line segments then the planner section of the firmware will not be able to properly link them together smoothly.

Fair enough - I’m comfortable with the takeaway being ‘don’t use acceleration control from within Cura lest artifacts find their way into the print.’

I exported everything, removed the profiles for my Ender 5 Plus, and ZIP’d it up, so this should be good for a Snapmaker 2.0. If you Import it, it should create the Print, Filament, and Printer profiles for you. If I had known it was this easy, I would have done it a long time ago…LOL It’s a freakin’ PITA to import/export in Cura, and neither were working the last time that I tried.

PrusaSlicer_config_bundle (Snapmaker 2.0 A350).ini.zip (3.6 KB)

CHANGE: Corrected some of the names in the configurations, and some settings that I was testing.


Thanks! All this discussion is confirming my desire to stick with the Prusa Slicer for the moment…

1 Like

@WilliamBosacker do you mind if I add your profiles to GitHub - nivekmai/snapmaker-prusa: Profiles for Prusa slicer which are designed for the Snapmaker 2.0? I’ll be sure to credit you, just trying to gather everything in a single place.

Sure. They might need a tiny bit of tweaking, but I’ve been using them for about 5 months.

@nivekmai I did a little cleanup, and corrected some of the names as well. Here is the new bundle file:

PrusaSlicer_config_bundle (Snapmaker 2.0 A350).ini.zip (3.6 KB)