After years in the lab I really don’t want to smell up the apartment with a smelly chemical, which is why I stopped using the resin printer. Tried it once and even with an outside vent going and a window open it was too much.
raise the z-offset, try by +0.05 first - its a function of the bed being too high or nozzle too low at that point
now ABL should cope with that, but patently it doesn’t for many snapmaker owners…
To be clear this is a smooth to the touch as anything i have ever produced - if you are expecting optical uniformity without visible layers that is not going to happen, best you can do is hide it via chemicals (heating doesn’t resolve it, usually just results in a puddle - i saw a video of that, lol).
And to give you an idea of my sensitivity of touch, when i lightly rub two fingers together i can feel the whorls of my fingerprints.
also you might wan to try flipping ‘avoid cross perimeter / outline’ - on mine i had this enabled and head travel stayed within model and that caused a snag on infill one time.
I saw a reference that for folks with ooze issues this can cause marks on edge if disabled unclear if that what caused your strange marks that looked like runes.
also, not sure what layer heights you are using, consider increasing them to at least 2mm
one last suggestion, print 5 perimeter walls so there is no infill
(you object is so thin…)
I personally think that most of the imperfections in your print can be related to a bumpy print bed, like many Snapmaker users report and I also have. It causes the first layer to be too close to the print bed in places, where the nozzle then may damage the first layer or press it so hard on the sheet that you may even have difficulties to remove it, while in other places it does not stick well enough, so when the nozzle makes a sharp turn, it pulls parts of the filament away from the bed, and also there may be small gaps between the lines of layed down filament. Inbetween it’s perfect. So if that bothers you, I think you either need to get your print bed as flat as possible, or go for a glass sheet to print on (which has its own challanges).
I’d also recommend to try a different slicer. I am getting more and more frustrated by Cura - it does strange things sometimes, and you really have to inspect the slicing in preview closely to find all these strange things and then find out which parameter to tweak to resolve the issue…
1 Like
I ran a Cura bed level check on it. This a single layer print consisting of 9 squares with connections running around the plate. Of the 9 squares, only 2 didn’t show defects (6 & 9). 1 showed some defects (5) , the other 4 show major defects (1,2,3,4,7 & 8). Pictures are terrible, but SnapMaker Logo is towards the front of the machine.
I’ve done a print or two with Prusa, but I’m rapidly coming to the conclusion that this isn’t something that can be fixed.
The pictures don’t really do justice to the defects.
Here are closeups in no particular order.
@gwfami your offset is way too close. You are the only one I’ve seen have it that close, it probably has started a clog. This isn’t a fault of the machine.
1 Like
Yeah just want to say that’s pretty easy to fix. It also looks like the bed the leveling is less than ideal.
Yup agree, bed leveling is less than ideal. Hopefully there is nothing else mechanical at play here.
If you take it off the bed and use a monitor as a light box (see some of my mega threads on first layer issues) you can better show the issues. Have you also tried washing the build surface with dish soap? It’s all I use. Also try a manual calibration, oh and check your surface sensor is at correct height.
Thanks all. I’ve washed it down with dish soap, placed it back into the machine then wiped it down again with IPA, doesn’t seem to make a difference.
I’m going to check the surface sensor and see if that makes any difference.
I have not applied any Z offset to the machine itself.
1 Like
why did you put IPA back on it?
I am not sure it matters, but i don’t think IPA in and of itself does anything to help adhesion (other than break up the oils from filament - which you just washed off with dishsoap.)
This is what my machine produces (it matches the levelling symptoms i have posted previously - where the distance of the head varies across the bed and shouldn’t. One way to ‘fix’ for me is to lower the z offset by increments of -0.05 until it fixed the center area (and to be clear the patter of under extrusion bears little correlation with my levelling mesh or actual bed deformation.
If you print from the touch pad to print its very easy to lower the z offset (note if you adjust for one print job it will adjust for all - so be careful and make sure you dont crash the head into the bed… or have it too close that it welds filament into the surface.
and thanks forum for telling me i monopolize conversations
1 Like
um, IPA (isopropyl alcohol) is used to remove any residual oils from my grubby fingers. I pour some on then wipe it off until it’s mostly gone, then allow it to evaporate.
Why do you have wavy lines in the picture?
I’m currently running a 10X10 leveling matrix and I’m going to use that to produce a diagram of where the bed is having issues.
I haven’t checked the sensor yet, but it appears to be at the correct level.
A small correction to my layer test print pictures. The 2 that appeared to be good were the biggest PIB to scrape off. They actually were almost completely fused to the bed and had very little thickness. So much for my eyesight.
And the bean counters are really putting the screws to you scyto. Kind of ridiculous.
No clogs… 
Just an FYI, an even number of probing points means that the center of the build surface will not be probed. For the best results always use an odd number of probing points.
Here’s the results of a 10X10 auto level. Not level at all.
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 4.518 | 4.489 | 4.485 | 4.474 | 4.435 | 4.409 | 4.405 | 4.339 | 4.295 | 4.276 |
| 2 | 4.491 | 4.468 | 4.463 | 4.446 | 4.423 | 4.394 | 4.375 | 4.331 | 4.29 | 4.251 |
| 3 | 4.453 | 4.434 | 4.434 | 4.439 | 4.401 | 4.376 | 4.374 | 4.313 | 4.283 | 4.263 |
| 4 | 4.424 | 4.395 | 4.391 | 4.385 | 4.37 | 4.344 | 4.33 | 4.291 | 4.251 | 4.223 |
| 5 | 4.368 | 4.356 | 4.356 | 4.365 | 4.326 | 4.304 | 4.304 | 4.256 | 4.223 | 4.211 |
| 6 | 4.336 | 4.326 | 4.336 | 4.323 | 4.295 | 4.28 | 4.273 | 4.246 | 4.224 | 4.199 |
| 7 | 4.313 | 4.295 | 4.291 | 4.295 | 4.256 | 4.234 | 4.243 | 4.209 | 4.186 | 4.193 |
| 8 | 4.304 | 4.304 | 4.293 | 4.275 | 4.253 | 4.244 | 4.226 | 4.216 | 4.21 | 4.2 |
| 9 | 4.298 | 4.273 | 4.261 | 4.268 | 4.235 | 4.209 | 4.233 | 4.213 | 4.198 | 4.203 |
| 10 | 4.303 | 4.27 | 4.281 | 4.258 | 4.243 | 4.243 | 4.248 | 4.241 | 4.244 | 4.22 |
For those of you who are into stats
| Descriptive Statistics | |
|---|---|
| Height | |
| Mean | 4.319066667 |
| Standard Error | 0.008800462 |
| Median | 4.3035 |
| Mode | 4.304 |
| Standard Deviation | 0.083488518 |
| Sample Variance | 0.006970333 |
| Kurtosis | -0.703039292 |
| Skewness | 0.526694451 |
| Range | 0.325 |
| Maximum | 4.518 |
| Minimum | 4.193 |
| Sum | 388.716 |
| Count | 90 |
| Geometric Mean | 4.318273746 |
| Harmonic Mean | 4.317485902 |
| AAD | 0.069853333 |
| MAD | 0.0605 |
| IQR | 0.12425 |
So, theoretically I could do a 21 X 21 leveling matrix and get a better surface result?
The Snapmaker 2.0 only supports up to 11x11, which is what I’ve been using.
1 Like
Ok, thanks. I’ll do an 11X11 matrix. I did print a Cura leveling for the 10X10, and it came out much better. I discovered that if I do the final z offset when leveling according the the instructions, that when I pull out the leveling card, the head drops a tiny bit. So I brought it back to the setting just before that and used that as the Z offset.
