Smart Effector issue

dc42

@tecno have you tried the following to eliminate the false triggering:

increase the R parameter in the M558 command, in case it is the previous XY move causing the spurious triggering;
reduce the probing acceleration, because it may be the Z acceleration at the start of the probing move that causes the spurious triggering.

tecno

@tecno have you tried the following to eliminate the false triggering:

increase the R parameter in the M558 command, in case it is the previous XY move causing the spurious triggering;

reduce the probing acceleration, because it may be the Z acceleration at the start of the probing move that causes the spurious triggering.

Tried R0.8 still the issue +++ Will not go down to bed on all points !!!

Phaedrux

@tecno said in Smart Effector issue:

From where does this X=40.0, Y=60.0 coordinate originate?

Assuming you're doing a G29 there, the grid spacing is determined by M557 in your config.g

https://docs.duet3d.com/en/User_manual/Connecting_hardware/Z_probe_mesh_bed

tecno

@phaedrux said in Smart Effector issue:

@tecno said in Smart Effector issue:

From where does this X=40.0, Y=60.0 coordinate originate?

Assuming you're doing a G29 there, the grid spacing is determined by M557 in your config.g

https://docs.duet3d.com/en/User_manual/Connecting_hardware/Z_probe_mesh_bed

Thanks, now it gets a bit clearer.

Barracuda72

after watching our vid our prob are the short rods...but makeing the effector mount wider just makes it softer..more bending while probing. Other problen, that i had on my Delta with faulty sensivity..heatbreak came loose...so it looses lots of sensivity.
About your Rods...when i designed my delta some years ago there where plently of sites to calculate things like Rod lenght...max angles of rods. Maybe DC42 still have some links to such a calculator. It would be much better to have longer rods..if its ok to loose some build height. Your construction is prone to effector tilts that affects the stability while probing

tecno

@barracuda72 said in Smart Effector issue:

after watching our vid our prob are the short rods...but makeing the effector mount wider just makes it softer..more bending while probing. Other problen, that i had on my Delta with faulty sensivity..heatbreak came loose...so it looses lots of sensivity.
About your Rods...when i designed my delta some years ago there where plently of sites to calculate things like Rod lenght...max angles of rods. Maybe DC42 still have some links to such a calculator. It would be much better to have longer rods..if its ok to loose some build height. Your construction is prone to effector tilts that affects the stability while probing

The rods and the adapter are original Dreammaker OverLord PRO, going back to a larger/wider effector (original adapter) made the situation better. Only trying to get this old Delta printer functional with a bit more modern parts.
I am in a process of building a large Delta of 1.4m height and ~550mm print diameter, Rods 610mm long directly to Smart Effector via magnets.

tecno

Can somebody show me how mesh.g is written? To be run with G29

Stephen6309

@tecno This is what I use.

; mesh.g
; called to load/make heightmap.csv
M98 P"/macros/ResetBabystepping"
M561       ; clear any bed transform
while iterations < #move.axes & move.axes[iterations].visible
  if !move.axes[iterations].homed
     G28
     break
G29 S1        ; load heightmap.csv
if result > 1 ; make if it doesn't exist
	G29 S0

That {1} isn't in it.

tecno

@stephen6309 said in Smart Effector issue:

@tecno This is what I use.

; mesh.g
; called to load/make heightmap.csv
M98 P"/macros/ResetBabystepping"
M561       ; clear any bed transform
while iterations < #move.axes & move.axes[iterations].visible
  if !move.axes[iterations].homed
     G28
     break
G29 S1        ; load heightmap.csv
if result > 1 ; make if it doesn't exist
	G29 S0

That {1} isn't in it.

Not what I was looking for, below a mesh of small circles I want to probe But do not how to write that mesh.g file.

Barracuda72

@tecno take a look at https://reprap.org/wiki/Delta_geometry and theres a minimum angle of the arms..and in your vid the angles looks smaller if you probe the outermost ppoints...and then you loose all the stability..for m it looks if the arms are too short or the build diameter is too big. make a small test and just probe with a smaller build plate diameter. Use http://www.escher3d.com/pages/wizards/wizardbed.php to get a bed.g and do the probing again...and look how stable the effector might be without probing in the air

tecno

@barracuda72 said in Smart Effector issue:

@tecno take a look at https://reprap.org/wiki/Delta_geometry and theres a minimum angle of the arms..and in your vid the angles looks smaller if you probe the outermost ppoints...and then you loose all the stability..for m it looks if the arms are too short or the build diameter is too big. make a small test and just probe with a smaller build plate diameter. Use http://www.escher3d.com/pages/wizards/wizardbed.php to get a bed.g and do the probing again...and look how stable the effector might be without probing in the air

With 80mm probe radius I have just under 30° angle on rods. So the angle is well over recommended 20° minimum.

Barracuda72

@tecno in the vid..when you probe the oauter points the whol effector tilts..and dont trigger...i had the same...2 towers forces the effector on the buildplate and the 3rd tower cant stabilize it...mybe its a prob because we only have mag arms...im sure you need more than 20° if you use mag arms..
its easy to try a smaller bed diameter in the bed.g and make a test...
Its just the same probe that i had on my 300mm Delta

tecno

@barracuda72 said in Smart Effector issue:

oauter points the whol effector tilts..and dont trigger

Medicine is M558 P8 R0.45 C"probe+servo0" H5 F3500 T2500

tecno

@tecno said in Smart Effector issue:

@stephen6309 said in Smart Effector issue:
@tecno This is what I use.
; mesh.g
; called to load/make heightmap.csv
M98 P"/macros/ResetBabystepping"
M561       ; clear any bed transform
while iterations < #move.axes & move.axes[iterations].visible
  if !move.axes[iterations].homed
     G28
     break
G29 S1        ; load heightmap.csv
if result > 1 ; make if it doesn't exist
	G29 S0
That {1} isn't in it.
Not what I was looking for, below a mesh of small circles I want to probe But do not how to write that mesh.g file.

G29 Run file sys/mesh.g, or if that file isn't found then do G29 S0
How is that file written?

achrn

I don't think it works like that.

For mesh bed compensation you can't probe at arbitrary positions, you probe on the regular grid defined in M557.

Mesh.g is not for defining the probe points. As I understand it, it's for use if you have a sequence of commands you need to run to do bed probing (e.g. activate or pick up a probe).

I think you may be conflating or confusing mesh bed compensation with delta automatic calibration which uses a bed.g that does contain points to probe. Which is it that you are attempting?

tecno

@achrn said in Smart Effector issue:

I don't think it works like that.

For mesh bed compensation you can't probe at arbitrary positions, you probe on the regular grid defined in M557.

Mesh.g is not for defining the probe points. As I understand it, it's for use if you have a sequence of commands you need to run to do bed probing (e.g. activate or pick up a probe).

I think you may be conflating or confusing mesh bed compensation with delta automatic calibration which uses a bed.g that does contain points to probe. Which is it that you are attempting?

G32 is no problems (bed.g)
G29 can not reach all points

tecno

@tecno

Manual is clear as MUD

Not one word what can be in that file to be found!

A Former User

This post is deleted!

achrn

@tecno "can not reach all the points" seems to be a different complaint from probe sensitivity. Is that now the problem you are now trying to resolve? If it is the location of the points, what matters is your M557 - what M557 command do you have?

tecno

@arnold_r_clark said in Smart Effector issue:

@tecno said in Smart Effector issue:

Not one word what can be in that file to be found!

Im afraid that is not true.

There 100% IS an example of what can be in a mesh.g file, it is shown in the docs which can be found HERE

If you scroll down to the G29 command it lists what each "switch" for the command does and it also shows an example of what said mesh.g file can contain.

OK

Then I have to excuse me not understanding English that well.

Anywho my problem still exist with can not reach