3
$\begingroup$

I'm having a very odd problem where my part is not sticking to the raft.

I'm using support material, with a very large overhang angle (70°). However I don't think this is the cause, as the side of the wheel that is on the build plate is several mm wide, and flat at that end. I need the 70° for a weird tread pattern that I have that only needs to be supported on the very first one.

I'm using PLA, with a nozzle temperature of 200 °C and a bed temperature of 50 °C.

I've checked that the part is snapping to the build plate, so there isn't a gap between the part and the raft, at least not modeled to be. Looking at the slicer (Cura) it seems as though there's a 2 layer gap between my part and the first layer of my wheel, but I'm not sure why it's there? or how to remove that gap

Layer 5 Layer 5

Layer 6 Layer 6

Layer 7 Layer 7

My assumption is that, if I can remove this, everything will work?? The part as it's being printed right now is looking like this, for the first layer of the part. As you can see here, my wheel is very not round.

First layer of part

$\endgroup$
3
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ What printer did you use? What build plate material do you use? Do you use heat or tape, etc. These should be inserted in the question by edit. If you cannot print PLA well without a raft, you have a problem with the initial gap size or your bed surface (adhesion), rafts are not necessary unless you print materials that shrink a lot. $\endgroup$
    – 0scar
    Nov 2 '21 at 7:50
  • $\begingroup$ The problem has to do with the slicer, not the raft. I've removed the raft tag from the question. Rafts ARE necessary when you have a small area that is in contact with the build plate and want to reduce the risk of a part coming loose on a 15-20+ hour print. You're focused on the wrong aspect of what is going wrong. I get that you don't like rafts, but that isn't the problem $\endgroup$
    – Diesel
    Nov 2 '21 at 15:21
  • $\begingroup$ @0scar The printer used, is irrelevant to the question. The build plate material is irrelevant to the question, heat used is in the original question and use of tape is irrelevant to the question. $\endgroup$
    – Diesel
    Nov 4 '21 at 18:22
1
$\begingroup$

I reviewed the G-Code and there was a Z-layer command that was larger than what was supposed to be. The Z-layer change shifted the nozzle up by 3x the distance it was supposed to (0.84 mm instead of 0.28 mm). I changed it to be just the layer distance and the print worked. I have NO idea why this happened, but a solution is a solution.

Interestingly though layers 6 and 7 in the images above were both at the same layer height, but the post-processing viewer identified them as two different layers. They were both at the same Z-value but were called out as different layers even though there was no change in the Z-value in the G-Code.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.