@iPeel Yes, that length Bowden tube will always cause issues. I'm still surprised that you needed much, if any, pressure compensation with 0.8mm nozzle.

How do you know you get missed missed steps with high extruder jerk? Especially when using an 0.8mm nozzle. Have you run M122 and if so, what was the result? I'm somewhat mystified because as I said before, extruder jerk never gets applied unless it is silly low.

@linuxinstalled said in BLTouch Not Responding:

Instead, my continuity testing was done on the exposed metal parts of the pins just on the back of the connector.

You've learned a valuable less about crimps and how they can malfunction.

If you can add to your collection of tools PC board mating connectors for the connectors that you crimp then it is easier to test the cable "end to end".

Glad to hear you got it sorted.

Frederick

I have it printing! Nice and sweet...

I created a macro (PrintInCopyMode)

M563 P2 D0:1 H1:2 X0:3 F1:1 ; tool 2 uses both extruders and hot end heaters, maps X to both X and U, and uses both print cooling fans G10 P2 X0 Y0 U-150 S0 R0 ; set tool offsets and temperatures for tool 2 M567 P2 E1:1 ; set mix ratio 100% on both extruders

I have Tool 0, 1 and then the new one here... Is it possible to delete T0 and 1 before? So i could switch between both modes...

Edit:
Found it:
M563 P0 D-1 H-1
M563 P1 D-1 H-1

So a Macro with:

M563 P0 D-1 H-1 M563 P1 D-1 H-1 M563 P0 D0:1 H1:2 X0:3 F1:1 S"CopyMode"; tool 2 uses both extruders and hot end heaters, maps X to both X and U, and uses both print cooling fans G10 P0 X0 Y0 U-150 S0 R0 ; set tool offsets and temperatures for tool 2 M567 P0 E1:1 ; set mix ratio 100% on both extruders

would create just the CopyTool with a click on this macro... Vice Versa from CopyMode to normal...

M563 P0 D-1 H-1 M563 P1 D-1 H-1 M563 P2 D-1 H-1 M563 P3 D-1 H-1 M563 P0 D1 H1 F0 S"E1" ; Tool0 uses Extruder0, Heater1 and Fan0 M563 P1 D0 H2 X0 F2 S"E2" ; Tool1 uses Extruder1, Heater2 and Fan2. X-axis is mapped to U G10 P0 X0 Y0 Z0 R0 S0 ; Set Tool0 axis offsets and temperatures G10 P1 X0 Y0 Z0 R0 S0 ; Set Tool1 axis offsets and temperatures

Works as it should... Nice!

@JKonopacki said in Height map has a substantial Z offset error with mesh:

The mesh values are generated by using the "built in" mesh compensation routine P0.

Are you talking about the symbol below the P0?

There is no built-in routine - that symbol just executes a G32 command which in turn invokes bed.g.

The intended purpose of bed.g is to implement one of the bed leveling features.

Somehow a lot of folks end up using it for mesh bed compensation which is something else entirely.

If it behaves differently it has something to do with your code.

Frederick

Backlash compensator post-processor

I appreciate this is an old topic, but that backlash on direction change was my issue no matter how much I fine tuned my 1000mmx1000mm WorkBee OX running on Duet3D RepRap, and I couldn't find an acceptable software solution. I also had a couple of issues with post-processor that were available for RepRap CNC, so I made (and will continue to improve) this Fusion 360 Ultimate Post-Processor for RepRap!
Get it here from GitHub: https://github.com/BruceRoyce/UltimateRepRapPost/blob/main/UltimateRRPost.cps

When posting check "Apply Backlash Compensation" on the side panel, under Linear Backlash Compensation options and input 2 measured backlash on each axis (the offset for 1mm motion on direction change and for 10mm motion on each axis. Input 0 if none, see image below) and let it take care of backlashes by adjusting movements.
This in no way is a replacement for adjusting your config.g parameters and/or tuning the hardware to the best of your capability. It's only a final resort to overcome backlash.

It also takes care of manual tool change, corner or Z-probing, beeps when operator attention is required, fixes WCS issues and more.

df0f7d32-5a0e-4227-8f5c-911f09fa4ec5-image.png

Important note: I made this for my own use, so please exercise caution! Obviously I won't be responsible for anything related to the use of this post-processor! Use own your own risk

@deckingman I did not intend to take you out of context.

After figuring out what I did wrong, I was able to run this script.
I had changed M84 (idle timeout) to 10 seconds because the motors make a little noise. Once I put that back to something reasonable, I had the necessary time to adjust nozzle to the bed height and then continue the script without the errors. 🙂
Now we'll see if I can make use of this to have a good offset for the nozzle when printing.

@Adamfilip said in PID Hotend Autotune - How Long?:

Its been going on for almost an hour now.. I see the temp graph change, up and down.. but how long does this usually take?

Watched the other day a video by Voron's Nero, he was using RRF on a non duet board and complained about the PID time.

https://youtu.be/x5AenlmrqFI?t=1599

@CCS86 said in Running Pressure Advance on Perimeters Only:

@zapta said in Running Pressure Advance on Perimeters Only:

Saleae

No doubt. But, there is no way I could justify $400 for diagnostic stepper data.

The £10 from ebay ones plus Sigrok / Pulseview is a good combination, in my experience.

Hi,

Please post your actual config.g file using the </> tag

Thanks.

Frederick

you could get a mosquito magnum. it can reach 30-35 mm^3/sec.

@Phaedrux said in Stealthchop on z axis with 3 z motors ?:

Do you mean from this thread?
https://forum.duet3d.com/topic/21296/resonance-spreadcycle-and-stealthchop/19?_=1613410278985

The tuning procedure only needs to be a small movement for the drivers to auto tune themselves. The data sheet says a normal homing procedure should suffice.

yes also this thread.
but i think i was wrong and the tuning on the 3 z motors is succesfully.
i was confused about the pwmGradAuto 0 stays on 0 but other parameters is changing

It's confirmed - the same print with the same orientation printed just fine when I heated up the second nozzle.
engikeneer, I also use the chimera! The ringing is caused (in my opinion) by the large and heavy bed and bed slinger technology. I suspect the only way to maintain the 500 by 500 work envelope and reduce ringing is by going to a different movement technology where the head(s) travel in x and y and the bed is limited to z motion.
I had avoided messing with the height of the nozzles because I find it really tricky to hit just the right height with both and being off by 0.05 mm is enough to cause issues.
I am really getting disenchanted with a two nozzle setup and am thinking of converting back to a single nozzle. The reason I am reluctant is because in a single nozzle setup you still need to adjust the offset between probe and nozzle unless you happen to run a piezo head where the nozzle and probe are one and the same. I had all kinds of problems with consistent probing with a piezo setup where it was working exceptionally well in one spot and would end up pushing the bed down in another spot. Way too finicky!

I was hoping to wait a bit for the tool head changing technology to get sorted out a bit more but this is getting very frustrating. I do not trust the accuracy claimed in positioning tool head height between two different head assemblies. Even with a single head and probe offset dialed in just right, I find that I tweak the baby step height here and there for the best first layer even though repeatability of the probe is very good. Once the height is perfect, I do not ever release holding current on the steppers in order to avoid having to re-probe and re-adjust between prints.
I have already given up printing two material prints but was hanging on to the two nozzle configuration in order to easily switch between two different nozzle diameters (0.4 and 0.8 mm).

Some heavy soul searching will be required!

@Pierre52 said in G1 Issues:

@fcwilt Hi Frederick. Yes I did cut the relevant parts into X Y and Z homing files. Your input has also significantly reduced the number of lines in each. Thanks again for all your help.

Cheers
Peter

Always glad to help when I can - and if I cannot help I will try to not make things worse. 😉

Frederick

Just ran into this while debugging a print time discrepancy. There is an issue open with Prusa Slicer so hopefully it gets fixed soon: https://github.com/prusa3d/PrusaSlicer/issues/5599

natthapolvanasrivilai created this issue in prusa3d/PrusaSlicer closed RepRapFirmware Flavor add faulty Acceleration Control G-Code (M204) #5599

You probably don't need to increase the data rate. There have been two relevant developments:

If you were using DAA then there was a bug that caused extruder movement to be delayed and sometimes steps to be lost. This was fixed in firmware 3.2.2. At high step rates, various issues caused the synchronisation between main and expansion boards to be less than perfect. This has been addressed in firmware 3.3beta. There is an unofficial beta already available. I am currently preparing the official 3.3beta1 release.

@hackinistrator yea the original was a TPU profile I was setting up but I didn't realise I had exported that profile, I will use what you sent me as it is so much nicer and seems to have removed that pause as well at the end of each move.

I will have a go using your settings but upping the printing speed to 70mms and also try prusa slicer and see how I get on with it.

I know Simplify3D were meant to be releasing a v5 but I am not paying again to do the upgrade and by the looks of it, the Prusa Community for the Slicer is really powering the slicer forward.

Yes, Veti's right, the probe is about 20mm below the nozzle. Besides that the situation seems to be improved, but I've still got an area in front where the nozzle is too low and area opposite to it, where the nozzle is too high.

Thanks for confirming.

its written in the details

Negative Temperature Coefficient (NTC) Thermistor Model: B3950