Duet3D Logo Duet3D
    • Tags
    • Documentation
    • Order
    • Register
    • Login

    RepRapFirmware 3.2 planned improvements

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved
    General Discussion
    28
    99
    6.7k
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • dc42undefined
      dc42 administrators @gtj0
      last edited by dc42

      @gtj0 said in RepRapFirmware 3.02 planned improvements:

      So the value at which speed decreases will be configurable via M558?

      The idea is to allow fast-then-slow probing with G30, without having to use M558 to change the probing speed. I haven't decided on the exact mechanism yet.

      Duet WiFi hardware designer and firmware engineer
      Please do not ask me for Duet support via PM or email, use the forum
      http://www.escher3d.com, https://miscsolutions.wordpress.com

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • garyd9undefined
        garyd9
        last edited by

        Several months ago, it was discussed (and demonstrated) that RRF on a duet2 was no longer able to handle higher speed movements. Even 150mm/sec movements on a delta machine could cause hiccups on a duet2 board. Around that time, you did do some optimizations, but said you'd re-visit it after 3.01 went out the door (and/or redo timing tests?)

        "I'm not saying that you are wrong - I'm just trying to fit it into my real world simulated experience."

        botundefined 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
        • botundefined
          bot @garyd9
          last edited by bot

          @garyd9 On that list is to improve step pulse generation, and re-introduce multi-stepping. This should help achieve faster speeds on prints which are not limited by the gcode queue, but by step pulse generation.

          *not actually a robot

          arhiundefined 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • arhiundefined
            arhi @bot
            last edited by

            This post is deleted!
            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • zaptaundefined
              zapta
              last edited by

              Any plans to support slicer's (e.g. Prusaslicer) time markers for more accurate time-left display?

              Or is it already implemented on RRF? I am still on 2.x.

              dc42undefined 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • dc42undefined
                dc42 administrators @zapta
                last edited by

                @zapta said in RepRapFirmware 3.02 planned improvements:

                Any plans to support slicer's (e.g. Prusaslicer) time markers for more accurate time-left display?

                Do you mean the M73 command?

                Duet WiFi hardware designer and firmware engineer
                Please do not ask me for Duet support via PM or email, use the forum
                http://www.escher3d.com, https://miscsolutions.wordpress.com

                zaptaundefined 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • CCS86undefined
                  CCS86
                  last edited by

                  Any chance of revisiting this topic?

                  https://forum.duet3d.com/topic/4802/6th-order-jerk-controlled-motion-planning

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 2
                  • dc42undefined
                    dc42 administrators
                    last edited by

                    It's on the list for implementation, but IMO it's pointless as long as jerk or junction deviation is needed at corners. The first-order motion components need to be made continuous before or at the same time as worrying about third and high order components.

                    Duet WiFi hardware designer and firmware engineer
                    Please do not ask me for Duet support via PM or email, use the forum
                    http://www.escher3d.com, https://miscsolutions.wordpress.com

                    botundefined CCS86undefined 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • Nuramoriundefined
                      Nuramori
                      last edited by

                      This post is deleted!
                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • botundefined
                        bot @dc42
                        last edited by bot

                        @dc42 Is there anything that a slicer could output to make improved motion planning easier for the firmware?

                        I've been playing around with IceSL, which requires a LUA script to process the sliced model and generate gcode output. And therefore, we have an opportunity to use the raw, non-truncated, slice geometry data before it is turned to gcode and calculate anything we wish and format it alongside the gcode in any way we wish.

                        Unfortunately, the underlying slicer does not generate curves. But, we can calculate angles, segment lengths, extrusion rates, etc. in the slicer and offload that from the FW.

                        I'm currently making a RRF-specific printer profile for IceSL, which is basically just implementing all the features duet users expect, and producing gcode compatible with RRF.

                        Long story short, we have the possibility now to do high-precision pre-processing of the gcode at the same time that we slice it.

                        *not actually a robot

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                        • Bipotronicundefined
                          Bipotronic
                          last edited by

                          Implementation of Variables of GCode Meta Comments would be useful. Or is this function already implemented?

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • zaptaundefined
                            zapta @dc42
                            last edited by

                            @dc42 said in RepRapFirmware 3.02 planned improvements:

                            Do you mean the M73 command?

                            Yes, M73. This is what I got from in a 22minutes (estimated) gcode file:

                            M73 P0 R22
                            M73 P0 R22
                            M73 P4 R21
                            M73 P9 R20
                            M73 P13 R19
                            M73 P18 R18
                            M73 P22 R17
                            M73 P27 R16
                            M73 P31 R15
                            M73 P36 R14
                            M73 P40 R13
                            M73 P45 R12
                            M73 P49 R11
                            M73 P54 R10
                            M73 P58 R9
                            M73 P63 R8
                            M73 P67 R7
                            M73 P72 R6
                            M73 P76 R5
                            M73 P81 R4
                            M73 P85 R3
                            M73 P90 R2
                            M73 P94 R1
                            M73 P99 R0
                            M73 P100 R0
                            

                            In the early phases of the print probably the remaining time R is more useful for the estimation and in later phase probably the percentage P and actual time so far will give a better estimation.

                            The markers seem to be in (estimated) 1 minute intervals.

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • dc42undefined
                              dc42 administrators
                              last edited by

                              I've added M73 to the list for consideration.

                              Duet WiFi hardware designer and firmware engineer
                              Please do not ask me for Duet support via PM or email, use the forum
                              http://www.escher3d.com, https://miscsolutions.wordpress.com

                              zaptaundefined 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • zaptaundefined
                                zapta @dc42
                                last edited by

                                @dc42 said in RepRapFirmware 3.02 planned improvements:

                                I've added M73 to the list for consideration.

                                Thanks.

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • CCS86undefined
                                  CCS86 @dc42
                                  last edited by

                                  @dc42 said in RepRapFirmware 3.02 planned improvements:

                                  It's on the list for implementation, but IMO it's pointless as long as jerk or junction deviation is needed at corners. The first-order motion components need to be made continuous before or at the same time as worrying about third and high order components.

                                  What is causing that dependance?

                                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • zaptaundefined
                                    zapta @dc42
                                    last edited by

                                    @dc42, FYI, I run a small experiment correlating the M73 markers with actual prints (replaced them with G10 and M140 that propagated the values to standby fields in the json). Results look very good, both for linearity and absolute time values.

                                    My slicer has default setting, without any calibration for the max speed, acceleration and jerk of my printer.

                                    You can probably run tests much faster using simulator mode.

                                    8dc1b42b-0963-4e2a-b0d7-d4b0cb1c656d-image.png

                                    5d9ac3fb-8df1-431a-89e6-2d215f0f9439-image.png

                                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • copystringundefined
                                      copystring
                                      last edited by

                                      Please add inverted M80/M81 for meanwell PSUs.
                                      I know. I'm inpatient. Is it a lot of work to implement this?

                                      dc42undefined 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                                      • SpoonUnitundefined
                                        SpoonUnit
                                        last edited by

                                        Could the option be added to set the min limit for behaviours similar to that controlled my M190. A default of 41 seems fine, but ultimately arbitrary, and having the option to hand control of this value to the operator would be nice. M143 sets max limits, perhaps it could be overloaded to support specifying min limits also?

                                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • droftartsundefined
                                          droftarts administrators @dc42
                                          last edited by

                                          @dc42 really looking forward to playing with G5 Bezier curves!

                                          Ian

                                          Bed-slinger - Mini5+ WiFi/1LC | RRP Fisher v1 - D2 WiFi | Polargraph - D2 WiFi | TronXY X5S - 6HC/Roto | CNC router - 6HC | Tractus3D T1250 - D2 Eth

                                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          • dc42undefined
                                            dc42 administrators @copystring
                                            last edited by

                                            @copystring said in RepRapFirmware 3.02 planned improvements:

                                            Please add inverted M80/M81 for meanwell PSUs.
                                            I know. I'm inpatient. Is it a lot of work to implement this?

                                            This is included in the planned work to make the PS_ON pin configurable.

                                            Duet WiFi hardware designer and firmware engineer
                                            Please do not ask me for Duet support via PM or email, use the forum
                                            http://www.escher3d.com, https://miscsolutions.wordpress.com

                                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                            • First post
                                              Last post
                                            Unless otherwise noted, all forum content is licensed under CC-BY-SA