Haven’t got even one good print so far.
all come out like this.
Wow… such a bad print.
I am looking at buying a printer and am surprised that you have not had your post answered.
Is this the right printer for me I wonder.
I could also show many pictures of failed prints.
The Moai 200 has successfully printed the ring and moai head. As the prints get bigger, they usually fail.
I’m still a novice but in my case when I take off at the points of contact is because it is not well healed and is released by suction, I solve it by raising the power of the laser, try it to me has gone well
In the present condition, I can advise anyone not to buy the Moai 200.
There are two major weak points on Moai 200:
The inaccuracy in the corners is very high (see Measurement and correction of accuracy)
The detachment forces from the FEP film are way too big (see peeling forces )
The first point could be compensated by software.
The second is due to a design flaw of the FEP vat plate, which can only be eliminated by replacement.
for big models, you will have to pay much more attention to PM motor speed, temperature and your supports
increasing the tip size and the density of the supports gives you much higher chance of success.
share with us your settings:
System Setting is default per Peopoly recommendation? (Yes/No)
Build plate type: (Standard 1-piece / easy to level)
Vat: (Silicon vat / FEP vat)
Cura Version and Profiles:
PM Motor Speed:
Z Follow Speed:
What type Vat: (Peopoly Original vat, Recoated Peopoly vat, custom vat made by user)
What type of resin:
A, B, C, D (example 10.9mm)
Any user customization?:
My printing was done with standard settings and the resin “Nex clear Pro”, heating and a perfect leveling. After some attempts with much lower PM engine speed, which did not improve much, I gave up playing with the parameters.
Currently, I am making changes to the FEP vat to work on the cause of the high peel forces. When I get the first positive results, I share them.
one of the biggest update to Asura 2.2.2 (the latest update), is the new parameters and individual base. it reduces likelihood of support breaking which is the most likely cause for print failure. Try not to use raft style and use individual base style as it reduces peel force and save you some resins too
Thanks for the answer Mark!
Asura 2.2.2 I like very much in principle. It is quite easy to operate.
Do I have a possibility not to set public editing parameters?
How can the geometric shape of the base affect the peel forces of the following planes?
The base has an extremely good adhesion to the building board, no matter what size. The weak point is the tips (default settings) from which the object was torn (see failed print). Objects without support were printed, but with extreme peel forces (see peel process).
PS: I have found some bugs (crashes, etc.) in Asura for Windows and change requests, how do I share this with you?
please do share, best here and via email too.
the most common breaking point is not the tip for us (once we used 1.2mm)
it is the connection between support and base. the 90 degree to the raft is not as strong as what we have in the individual base now.