poor print quality  

Re: poor print quality

just chiming in i'm not happy with the print quality of my MK3 either. ringing and moire patterns.

i changed out my X axis parts with the new revised ones hoping for a change but there was no improvement other then the belt doesn't twist like it used it. running newest firmware and slicer. lots of bugs and problems with the live Z and collision detection.

my year old MK2S runs much better then my bran new mk3 which is sad.

Re: poor print quality

Ok i am about to sell my mk2s to buy the mk3. Should I not do this now that I am reading these posts?

Re: poor print quality

By measuring the distance, the pattern distance is approx. 0.64 mm. This doesn't match the GT2 belt distance, so it is not very likely to have something to do with the belt itself. However, taking the pulley (16 teeth GT2) which has a diameter of 10.2 mm (as datasheets in the net state...), you get a circumference of 64.08 mm (=10.2 * Pi * 2). With a resolution of the stepper of 200 steps per revolution, one step should be equal to 64.08 mm / 200 = 0.32 mm (!!!). This is half the size of the ghosting pattern... while the ghosting pattern was measured from maximum to maximum in the linescan, i. e. the distance between a maximum and a minimum equals 0.32 mm

A diameter of 10.2mm will give you a circumference of 32.04mm . . . rather than a circumference of 64.08mm.

Re: poor print quality

It may look like a good quality print but in fact is a disaster, the overhangs on a slopy walls of the midle element is horible in fact this printer cannot print overhanges, because of this failure internal elements was fused together, I managed to free them but this is not a solution

How to print overhangs I tried everything and always was a disaster ?

Second problem are the artefacts on the sides WTF ?

Why this printer cannot print right 👿 Firmware and Slic3r is up to date, settings are default

I also had, hmmmm I still have problem with benchy, problem with overhangs and the benchy are related, I used default cooling nozzle and https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:2842948 but the effect is the same

Re: poor print quality

Right was printed on mk2, left mk3, using the same mk2 gcode file by prusa but tweaked for the mk3 (left) with 95% flow via addition of "M221 S95" like Slic3r PE MK3 does.

If I still had some of the gold left I would have used it to keep the filament variable constant but I don't think the observed differences can be blamed on that given the noticed print surface quality difference seems to apply to all (of at least my) mk3 prints regardless of material.

I've rebuilt this mk3 a few times now, even printed some replacement parts. No change.

If it weren't for the significant downgrade in print surface quality (and the insanely hot extruder motor) vs my experience with the mk2, I'd be really pleased with this mk3.

I've ordered some more of that gold pla. Will reprint when it arrives next week.

Re: poor print quality

welcome to the mk3 beta testers club

man i wish i did not sell my mk2

Re: poor print quality

I realy can´t comprehend all those problems.
EVERY problem with any of the more than 300 prints i already did with the MK3 kit was my fault.
Except a warped heatbed.
But that was perfectly resolved by the support.

Re: poor print quality

I realy can´t comprehend all those problems.

Those that have this particular issue believe that every Mk3 has it, but who knows how they have come to this conclusion.

Also, I have looked at a number of similar shaped prints that have been done on a Mk2s and I can see the same "artifacts" that many have trotted out as an issue with the Mk3. Not saying all, but a lot. Especially when the incident lighting is hitting them at an angle. I know the expectation is that the Mk3 should produce "higher quality" prints than the Mk2s, so is that the real issue for many people here?

Re: poor print quality

*SNIP**

The inconsistency on the horizontal lines, MAY have a "fix" in the pipe.

Apparently the Z axis didn't have enough power, and was missing steps/microsteps/something.

Re: poor print quality

Those that have this particular issue believe that every Mk3 has it, but who knows how they have come to this conclusion.

I'm happy to accept that not everyone has this issue if so. The problem is I've seen too many prints with the issue to believe that is likely the case and there are very few who claim not to have the issue that are willing to perform the same tests as those of us that have the issue and then provide quality photographs of said tests to demonstrate they don't have the issue if so. If it shows that they have it, great, another data point to support theory X. If they don't? Also great, disproves theory X. Either way, gets those of us with the issue closer to trying to figure out why we are having it and hopefully resolving it, whether it is an isolated issue affected just to us or not.

Re: poor print quality

Also, I have looked at a number of similar shaped prints that have been done on a Mk2s and I can see the same "artifacts" that many have trotted out as an issue with the Mk3. Not saying all, but a lot. Especially when the incident lighting is hitting them at an angle. I know the expectation is that the Mk3 should produce "higher quality" prints than the Mk2s, so is that the real issue for many people here?

This is true. I have seen some forwarded photos of mk2s prints that look like they maybe suffering the same problem. It would be interesting if those with said issues partake in this discussion too if so. But if I'm not mistaken, so far there haven't been any interested in doing so. What I can say is that my mk2 printed very well compared to my mk3 (as you can see in the picture) and I observe the problem in many other peoples mk3 prints also which makes me think it's unlikely me that's the root cause (though I do not rule it out the possibility still).

Re: poor print quality

The inconsistency on the horizontal lines, MAY have a "fix" in the pipe.

Apparently the Z axis didn't have enough power, and was missing steps/microsteps/something.

Ah, yes. The "M911 X16 Y20 Z35 E26" change coming to the next firmware. Others in the github 602 thread have said they've found no change but I guess I could try that.

Re: poor print quality

... which makes me think it's unlikely me the cause (though I do not rule it out still).

I'm certainly not suggesting that people are making up or causing all the issues, although it is easy for a "me too" type scenario to occur when all *most* do is post a few pics. While trying not to state the obvious, artifacts in prints, at least from what I have noticed, are quite common and very difficult to track down. They are dependent on so many variables with these types of printers, making fault finding really difficult.

I just wonder whether the expectation bar was set just a little too high with some people regarding the Mk3. Some of the artifacts (minor surface defects) are just not worth worrying about imo and really aren't an issue, for me at least. Perhaps all Prusa printers suffer from these issues but many people's expectations are not so high (like mine). I guess time will tell.

Re: poor print quality

I'm certainly not suggesting that people are making up or causing all the issues, although it is easy for a "me too" type scenario to occur when all *most* do is post a few pics. While trying not to state the obvious, artifacts in prints, at least from what I have noticed, are quite common and very difficult to track down. They are dependent on so many variables with these types of printers, making fault finding really difficult.

I just wonder whether the expectation bar was set just a little too high with some people regarding the Mk3. Some of the artifacts (minor surface defects) are just not worth worrying about imo and really aren't an issue, for me at least. Perhaps all Prusa printers suffer from these issues but many people's expectations are not so high (like mine). I guess time will tell.

Did/Do you have an Mk2/2s?

Re: poor print quality

I'm certainly not suggesting that people are making up or causing all the issues, although it is easy for a "me too" type scenario to occur when all *most* do is post a few pics. While trying not to state the obvious, artifacts in prints, at least from what I have noticed, are quite common and very difficult to track down. They are dependent on so many variables with these types of printers, making fault finding really difficult.

I just wonder whether the expectation bar was set just a little too high with some people regarding the Mk3. Some of the artifacts (minor surface defects) are just not worth worrying about imo and really aren't an issue, for me at least. Perhaps all Prusa printers suffer from these issues but many people's expectations are not so high (like mine). I guess time will tell.

Did/Do you have an Mk2/2s?

Yes, I still have a Mk2s. Only thing I have changed are nozzles, amazing how many issues go away with a new nozzle. I don't think enough emphasis is placed on how a worn nozzle can mess up a print (even the first layer), but that's another story.

If I can get a dimensionally accurate print from PLA, PETG, PC and CF then I'm happy. 🙂

Re: poor print quality

Did/Do you have an Mk2/2s?

Yes, I still have a Mk2s. Only thing I have changed are nozzles, amazing how many issues go away with a new nozzle. I don't think enough emphasis is placed on how a worn nozzle can mess up a print (even the first layer), but that's another story.

If I can get a dimensionally accurate print from PLA, PETG, PC and CF then I'm happy. 🙂

And you also have an MK3 and find the print surface quality comparable?

Re: poor print quality

Did/Do you have an Mk2/2s?

Yes, I still have a Mk2s. Only thing I have changed are nozzles, amazing how many issues go away with a new nozzle. I don't think enough emphasis is placed on how a worn nozzle can mess up a print (even the first layer), but that's another story.

If I can get a dimensionally accurate print from PLA, PETG, PC and CF then I'm happy. 🙂

And you also have an MK3 and find the print surface quality comparable?

Pretty much, to my eye at least. I haven't done a forensic comparison between the two but I think there are some style of print where quality is perhaps a little better, but the Mk3 is performing a specific task most times, so difficult to tell.

Re: poor print quality

Made this to test my surface quality: https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:2884669

My culprit seems to be the start after a retraction, i havent had time to try the new FW yet so perhaps LA could do something about this.

Re: poor print quality

Why does every 4th line show a "problem"?

I also notice on first layer calibration, that every 4th line in the square at the end is a little longer than the others. Is that the best sign of a possible firmware bug?

Re: poor print quality

I had the seam set to "nearest", i think thats why, i made one set to "aligned"