<p>Now that little more information is being made available (though it is a G-code file), with credits to SE user <a href="https://3dprinting.stackexchange.com/users/45931/velvet">Velvet</a> has posted a <a href="https://3dprinting.stackexchange.com/questions/23674/print-keeps-failing-at-same-spot#comment42593_23674">reverse engineered view</a> of the print object based on the available G-code file:</p>
<p><a href="https://i.sstatic.net/Jpu9H3U2.png" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/Jpu9H3U2.png" alt="reverse engineered view" /></a></p>
<p>With the recently added image of the object (referred to as the saddle from now on) in Ultimaker Cura to the question, it becomes clear that the object (saddle) has been sliced unfavorably because of at least 3 reasons:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>For aesthetic reasons; printing these curved like objects in this orientation, when approaching the top of the saddle the steepness of the outer surface reduces to zero, creating a rough top of your saddle. You see this commonly when you print spheres for instance, the lower part and upper parts are usually very rough.</p>
</li>
<li><p>For structural reasons; there appear to be attachment slots in the saddle.</p>
</li>
<li><p>Economical reasons; the current slicing orientation allows for the generation of many support material, this is a waste of resources and a waste of time.</p>
</li>
</ol>
<p>Looking at the sliced file I'd tilt the saddle -90° over the X-axis, this would significantly generate less supports and will produce a more aesthetic print. You always need to try to orientate the print that you minimize the amount of supports, unless e.g. this is structurally required. Supports are always a hazard in printing parts; sometimes these get knocked over, or collect oozed material from the nozzle causing shifts, it is best to reduce these hazards, especially on big, long prints.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-10-11T23:01:29.353Z
2024-10-11T23:01:29.353Z
0scar
<p>If this is the image you are printing in Oscar's answer.   I would do what he said and print with the side away on the bed.  If it is not perfectly flat when it sits on the bed, then either lower it or draw in a support block to be removed later.
I have three of these printers and have have many problems with them trying to print larger objects then fail as the &quot;Y&quot; motor cannot deal with the &quot;normal&quot; speed of the Anycubic slicer.   The weight will cause the bed to slip at nearly each layer.  The motor does not have enough magnetic strength to stop the motor when driven to the extreme fore and aft.  It can't stop it on the correct position when the weight is over 1 KG.  The momentum of the part just causes it to overshoot and the prints are all bad.<br />
So anything that causes this has to be eliminated.  The number one is to SLOW the print down and stop wasting filament when working beyond the limits of the motor.<br />
Second is the X axis belt will also slip when the head is moving fast and hits anything in the way.  This indicates a need to raise the head at least 1 mm when travelling.  Anything that can cause the X axis belt to slip is a problem.<br />
I also have three of the regular Anycubic Kobra Max and they don't have this problem printing with 0.8 nozzle and 100 mm per second.<br />
When I get time to fix this issue, I will put a MUCH larger motor on the Y Axis and use a belt drive to insure it has enough stopping power to print at high speeds.  It needs to just STOP at the forward and back limits of the print.
You should be able to print this without any supports at all if you use a SLOW down on any parts that extrude outward.  Slow down to 25mm per sec only on any overhangs and lower the temperature a bit.  For high speed printing you need to use about 220, and for normal speeds about 200 with PLA.<br />
I much prefer the normal speeds and precision of the slower Kobra Max. I did make upgrades to all of the print heads with bimetal heat breaks and different internal PTFE tubing.
Printing a dome on top always looks bad.  As the stacking of the filament makes for a jagged surface.  This is why printing it &quot;vertical&quot; is best.  and without all those supports.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-10-19T21:44:54.177Z
2024-10-19T21:44:54.177Z
GoodScience
<p>I'm trying to print <a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/16wtpZ2JCr8pLCkQNelX83AVLaOeanvsV/view?usp=drivesdk" rel="nofollow noreferrer">this</a>.</p>
<p><a href="https://i.sstatic.net/oJOdhfGA.png" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/oJOdhfGA.png" alt="picture of desired print" /></a></p>
<p>I have a brand new Anycubic Kobra 2 Max. And it gets to the same spot with this print and fails. I'm new to printing so I'm kinda at a loss where to go with this.
I've searched and tried a few things online, but no help.</p>
<p><a href="https://i.sstatic.net/V4q5NOth.jpg" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/V4q5NOth.jpg" alt="failed print" /></a></p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-10-10T13:06:49.583Z
An image of what you are trying to print would help. For instance, if you were using the Cura slicer an image of what the print would like like including any supports on the build platform (the preview) would help us a lot. Otherwise, we're flying blind. So, flying blind and guessing, maybe you need to add supports. Maybe you need to rotate your print to mitigate the possibility of failure... The list of guesses can be very long. BTW, include in your question what you are printing with (PLA, GPET, ect). And, perhaps, where you are printing (warm inside, cool basement or cold garage).
st2000
CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-10-10T13:08:09.873Z
Oh, when you found this mess, was it still securely attached to the build plat? Or was it sliding around freely not attached to the build plate?
st2000
CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-10-10T13:10:31.857Z
Yes, a clear image of the object you want to print or a link to it would be helping. Without such information, the best guess is that it is caused by the supports, since it looks like the object itself looks as if it is firmly attached to the bed, this is frequently the cause of the problem. A different print orientation, splitting the peint could work.
0scar
CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-10-10T16:31:43.877Z
When i get home I will provide you with all you have asked.
Fullmetalobiwan
CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-10-11T02:23:31.753Z
I have added a picture of what the print should be and it's supports. I found the failed print not connected to the bed as if it was knocked off. I have it on the floor in a room about 72 degree F. I clean the bed and put glue on it to help with adhesion.
Fullmetalobiwan
CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-10-11T09:02:03.260Z
Would you upload your model, so we can check it for ourselves?
Velvet
CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-10-11T16:09:03.997Z
I have added the file I'm trying to print.
Fullmetalobiwan
CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-10-11T17:05:51.193Z
Instead of linking the G-code, please link to the STL file. Looking at the sliced file I'd put the object -90° over the X-axis, way less supports. You always need to try orientate the print that you minimize the amount of supports, unless e.g. this is structurally required.
0scar
CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-10-11T17:48:22.633Z
This model has some funky floating regions (https://i.sstatic.net/CLoZSMrk.png). Unless the [G-code converter](https://fabconvert.com/convert/gcode) messed it up. That's why STL/STEP would be preferred.
Velvet
<anycubic-kobra-max>
Print keeps failing at same spot
Fullmetalobiwan
# Print keeps failing at same spot

(Asked by: username_0 on 2024-10-10)

I'm trying to print [this](https://drive.google.com/file/d/16wtpZ2JCr8pLCkQNelX83AVLaOeanvsV/view?usp=drivesdk).

[![picture of desired print](https://i.sstatic.net/oJOdhfGA.png)](https://i.sstatic.net/oJOdhfGA.png)

I have a brand new Anycubic Kobra 2 Max. And it gets to the same spot with this print and fails. I'm new to printing so I'm kinda at a loss where to go with this.
I've searched and tried a few things online, but no help.

[![failed print](https://i.sstatic.net/V4q5NOth.jpg)](https://i.sstatic.net/V4q5NOth.jpg)

**Tags:** anycubic-kobra-max

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: An image of what you are trying to print would help. For instance, if you were using the Cura slicer an image of what the print would like like including any supports on the build platform (the preview) would help us a lot. Otherwise, we're flying blind. So, flying blind and guessing, maybe you need to add supports. Maybe you need to rotate your print to mitigate the possibility of failure... The list of guesses can be very long. BTW, include in your question what you are printing with (PLA, GPET, ect). And, perhaps, where you are printing (warm inside, cool basement or cold garage).  
> **username_1**: Oh, when you found this mess, was it still securely attached to the build plat? Or was it sliding around freely not attached to the build plate?  
> **username_2**: Yes, a clear image of the object you want to print or a link to it would be helping. Without such information, the best guess is that it is caused by the supports, since it looks like the object itself looks as if it is firmly attached to the bed, this is frequently the cause of the problem. A different print orientation, splitting the peint could work.  
> **username_0**: When i get home I will provide you with all you have asked.  
> **username_0**: I have added a picture of what the print should be and it's supports. I found the failed print not connected to the bed as if it was knocked off. I have it on the floor in a room about 72 degree F. I clean the bed and put glue on it to help with adhesion.  
> **username_3**: Would you upload your model, so we can check it for ourselves?  
> **username_0**: I have added the file I'm trying to print.  
> **username_2**: Instead of linking the G-code, please link to the STL file. Looking at the sliced file I'd put the object -90° over the X-axis, way less supports. You always need to try orientate the print that you minimize the amount of supports, unless e.g. this is structurally required.  
> **username_3**: This model has some funky floating regions (https://i.sstatic.net/CLoZSMrk.png). Unless the [G-code converter](https://fabconvert.com/convert/gcode) messed it up. That's why STL/STEP would be preferred.  

---

## 2 answers

### Answer by username_2 on 2024-10-11. Score: 1

Now that little more information is being made available (though it is a G-code file), with credits to SE user [username_3](https://3dprinting.stackexchange.com/users/45931/username_3) has posted a [reverse engineered view](https://3dprinting.stackexchange.com/questions/23674/print-keeps-failing-at-same-spot#comment42593_23674) of the print object based on the available G-code file:

[![reverse engineered view](https://i.sstatic.net/Jpu9H3U2.png)](https://i.sstatic.net/Jpu9H3U2.png)

With the recently added image of the object (referred to as the saddle from now on) in Ultimaker Cura to the question, it becomes clear that the object (saddle) has been sliced unfavorably because of at least 3 reasons:

1. For aesthetic reasons; printing these curved like objects in this orientation, when approaching the top of the saddle the steepness of the outer surface reduces to zero, creating a rough top of your saddle. You see this commonly when you print spheres for instance, the lower part and upper parts are usually very rough.
2. For structural reasons; there appear to be attachment slots in the saddle.
3. Economical reasons; the current slicing orientation allows for the generation of many support material, this is a waste of resources and a waste of time.

Looking at the sliced file I'd tilt the saddle -90° over the X-axis, this would significantly generate less supports and will produce a more aesthetic print. You always need to try to orientate the print that you minimize the amount of supports, unless e.g. this is structurally required. Supports are always a hazard in printing parts; sometimes these get knocked over, or collect oozed material from the nozzle causing shifts, it is best to reduce these hazards, especially on big, long prints.


---

### Answer by username_4 on 2024-10-19. Score: 0

If this is the image you are printing in Oscar's answer. I would do what he said and print with the side away on the bed. If it is not perfectly flat when it sits on the bed, then either lower it or draw in a support block to be removed later.
I have three of these printers and have have many problems with them trying to print larger objects then fail as the "Y" motor cannot deal with the "normal" speed of the Anycubic slicer. The weight will cause the bed to slip at nearly each layer. The motor does not have enough magnetic strength to stop the motor when driven to the extreme fore and aft. It can't stop it on the correct position when the weight is over 1 KG. The momentum of the part just causes it to overshoot and the prints are all bad.  
So anything that causes this has to be eliminated. The number one is to SLOW the print down and stop wasting filament when working beyond the limits of the motor.  
Second is the X axis belt will also slip when the head is moving fast and hits anything in the way. This indicates a need to raise the head at least 1 mm when travelling. Anything that can cause the X axis belt to slip is a problem.  
I also have three of the regular Anycubic Kobra Max and they don't have this problem printing with 0.8 nozzle and 100 mm per second.  
When I get time to fix this issue, I will put a MUCH larger motor on the Y Axis and use a belt drive to insure it has enough stopping power to print at high speeds. It needs to just STOP at the forward and back limits of the print.
You should be able to print this without any supports at all if you use a SLOW down on any parts that extrude outward. Slow down to 25mm per sec only on any overhangs and lower the temperature a bit. For high speed printing you need to use about 220, and for normal speeds about 200 with PLA.  
I much prefer the normal speeds and precision of the slower Kobra Max. I did make upgrades to all of the print heads with bimetal heat breaks and different internal PTFE tubing.
Printing a dome on top always looks bad. As the stacking of the filament makes for a jagged surface. This is why printing it "vertical" is best. and without all those supports.


---

