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

    Issues with pressure advance since RRF 3.4

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved
    General Discussion
    46
    308
    37.7k
    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.
    • jens55undefined
      jens55 @Adrian52
      last edited by

      @Adrian52, thanks for posting the script and the results. I will see if I can get that working here!

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • jens55undefined
        jens55
        last edited by

        I went back to the original script posted by DonStauffer with the raft and I did see the ever so subtle change in the printout. Interpretation of the test print is difficult but it works better than what my previous script was able to do.
        I kept the raft so I could remove the finished print in one piece and examine it clearly. I did have adhesion problems because it's a single line and I am working on adjusting my bed temperature to fix that.
        Final verdict: I didn't know what I was doing and pressure advance does in fact work on the CR10 printer. I have not yet tried this on the Jubilee where the extruder is driven off a tool board. Note that this only speaks to PA changing and not necessarily to how effective the PA is in an actual print.
        Tests are ongoing ......

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
        • gnydickundefined
          gnydick
          last edited by

          This post is deleted!
          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • Heartleander81undefined
            Heartleander81
            last edited by

            Update on my conversion to Klipper.
            At first the corners didn't look any better than with RRF until I came across a post today that refers to extruder smooth time.
            The standard is with Klipper 0.04, which I also use.
            Switched to 0.01 and the corners look awesome.
            In the article it was said that some extruders can not cope with the smooth time and then you have to get smaller. see my pictures.

            20221121_171555.jpg

            With smooth time 0.04

            20221128_153229.jpg 20221128_153233.jpg 20221128_153236.jpg

            With smooth time 0.01

            R4ffersundefined Argoundefined 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 2
            • R4ffersundefined
              R4ffers @Heartleander81
              last edited by

              @Heartleander81 wow mate what a difference

              Mb6hc + 3hc + 1lc on Voron V2.4, Mini 5+ exp 2+ on Vzbot 235 AWD, Duet 2 wifi on Ox CNC and Mini 5+ on Millennium Milo v1.5 mini mill.

              Heartleander81undefined 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • Heartleander81undefined
                Heartleander81 @R4ffers
                last edited by

                @R4ffers oh yes.

                @dc42 is there also something like pressure advance smooth time under RRF? A few clippers have the problem with the high smooth time, but those who have problems are mostly DirectDrive extruder users. Maybe that's an approach you can follow.

                Phaedruxundefined dc42undefined 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • Phaedruxundefined
                  Phaedrux Moderator @Heartleander81
                  last edited by

                  @Heartleander81 Can you link that article you mention?

                  Z-Bot CoreXY Build | Thingiverse Profile

                  sebkritikelundefined 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • sebkritikelundefined
                    sebkritikel @Phaedrux
                    last edited by

                    @Phaedrux I see some discussions on it at the bottom of Klipper's Kinematics page
                    https://www.klipper3d.org/Kinematics.html

                    Some other pages of interest
                    https://klipper.discourse.group/t/pressure-advance-smooth-time-on-direct-extruders-with-short-filament-path/1971
                    https://github.com/Klipper3d/klipper/issues/4442

                    richfelker created this issue in Klipper3d/klipper

                    closed Pressure advance smoothing induces e-axis position swings that scale with acceleration #4442

                    Large(ish?) IDEX - 6HC, 1HCL
                    Stratasys Dimension 1200es to 6HC Conversion

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • dc42undefined
                      dc42 administrators @Heartleander81
                      last edited by dc42

                      @Heartleander81 said in Issues with pressure advance since RRF 3.4:

                      @R4ffers oh yes.

                      @dc42 is there also something like pressure advance smooth time under RRF? A few clippers have the problem with the high smooth time, but those who have problems are mostly DirectDrive extruder users. Maybe that's an approach you can follow.

                      No, there isn't anything similar. I will look into that Klipper feature.

                      The reason I have made no progress on this is that while a number of users seem to think that pressure advance doesn't work as well in RRF 3.4 as it did in 3.3, and I am prepared to believe that there may be a difference because the relevant code had to be rewritten to accommodate input shaping, nobody has been able to provide a simple GCode script and machine settings that demonstrate a difference when input shaping is disabled. That includes me - I have compared RRF 3.3 and RRF 3.4 prints.

                      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

                      Heartleander81undefined petriheinoundefined CR3Dundefined gnydickundefined camnewnhamundefined 5 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • Heartleander81undefined
                        Heartleander81 @dc42
                        last edited by Heartleander81

                        @dc42
                        @Phaedrux

                        I couldn't find any differences between 3.3 and 3.4.x, but I still have a picture of a test where the corners became nice with PA. As now with klipper. The Artikel from sebkritel is that who I read.

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • Argoundefined
                          Argo @Heartleander81
                          last edited by Argo

                          @Heartleander81

                          So altering the smooth time value did improve your corners and PA alone did not?

                          Heartleander81undefined 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • petriheinoundefined
                            petriheino @dc42
                            last edited by

                            Hi folks, my guess is OP simply did finer calibrations after update and found out underlying RRF issues regarding PA, Retraction, Extruder steps and acceleration relation... I got similar results (improvements) with Klipper conversion. I did some testing and posted it here earlier.

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • Heartleander81undefined
                              Heartleander81 @Argo
                              last edited by

                              @Argo said in Issues with pressure advance since RRF 3.4:

                              So altering the smooth time value did improve your corners and PA alone did not?

                              PA alone didn't make the whole corner look nice. See the picture with the corner sticking out in the direction of travel. Only with the change of smooth time and renewed PA, which was then higher, did the corners become so clean.

                              Argoundefined 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                              • Argoundefined
                                Argo @Heartleander81
                                last edited by

                                @Heartleander81

                                I see.

                                I know from another Klipper user that he also only could get nice corners by playing around with the smooth time setting. Pressure advance alone did not help much.

                                Maybe extruders / hotends are so particular nowadays that we need this setting to get nice corners?

                                Here is the example from the user I'm talking about:

                                unknown.png

                                He has a bowden setup and needed to increase the smooth time in order to get nice corners. PA alone did not the trick.

                                @dc42
                                How high are the chances we might get this feature for RRF? I think this might very much help those who are having problems with PA at the moment.

                                Heartleander81undefined 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                                • Heartleander81undefined
                                  Heartleander81 @Argo
                                  last edited by

                                  @Argo ok. Nice test from him. I find for my Hevort 0.02 smooth time and 0.044 PA. Worked nice. I hope my Info can help Duet.

                                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • CR3Dundefined
                                    CR3D @dc42
                                    last edited by

                                    @dc42 Hi David,

                                    I have to join this conversation because through my contact to @Heartleander81 i noticed this effect with "round corners" at some of our machines to.

                                    I think this comes with newer firmware and if you made some changes into PA there would be an issue. But how can we test it that it would be helpfull for you?

                                    one of our customers has now contacted us explicitly about this effect and is looking for a solution. I can't compensate for it by increasing the PA value. We've tested a lot here.

                                    Thank you 🙂 Regards Christian from @CR3D

                                    Christian from CR-3D
                                    Homepage:
                                    www.cr-3d.de

                                    Facebook:
                                    https://www.facebook.com/cr3d.official

                                    Our Discord Server
                                    https://discord.gg/SxRaPNuRdA

                                    Thingiverse Profile:
                                    https://www.thingiverse.com/cr-3d_official/about

                                    dc42undefined 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                                    • dc42undefined
                                      dc42 administrators @CR3D
                                      last edited by dc42

                                      @CR3D said in Issues with pressure advance since RRF 3.4:

                                      But how can we test it that it would be helpfull for you?

                                      1. Find a print where there is a clear visible difference between the effect of pressure advance (e.g. on corners or infill) between RRF3.3 and RRF3.4.4 with the same configuration for both, and no input shaping when running RRF 3.4.4.

                                      2. Edit the GCode file to reduce it to a short print, preferably just 1 or 2 layers.

                                      3. Post that file along with your config.g and other relevant macro files.

                                      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
                                      • gnydickundefined
                                        gnydick @dc42
                                        last edited by

                                        @dc42 why don't you just generate the move list from a 3.3 system and from a 3.4 system for the same gcode and output it to text files and diff them?

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

                                          @gnydick said in Issues with pressure advance since RRF 3.4:

                                          @dc42 why don't you just generate the move list from a 3.3 system and from a 3.4 system for the same gcode and output it to text files and diff them?

                                          Because none of the prints I and others have tried show any difference between 3.3 and 3.4. Nobody has produced a print and machine settings that shows a difference. If somebody ever does, then I will be able to use the method you suggested or another method to see what has changed.

                                          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

                                          oliofundefined gnydickundefined 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          • oliofundefined
                                            oliof @dc42
                                            last edited by

                                            I personally believe that the changes must have happened before 3.3 ... or that the observed issue isnt due to a change in firmware but a change in perception of acceptable corner bulging due to the performance of non-RRF systems.

                                            A decent way to bisect this is to take a Duet2 board, and go back all the way to RRF 2.0.3, and then work through at least 3.0, 3.1.1, 3.2.2, 3.3 to see whether my hypothesis holds.

                                            But I wouldn't ask anyone to lose a week of their life to do this...

                                            <>RatRig V-Minion Fly Super5Pro RRF<> V-Core 3.1 IDEX k*****r <> RatRig V-Minion SKR 2 Marlin<>

                                            dc42undefined 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                            • First post
                                              Last post
                                            Unless otherwise noted, all forum content is licensed under CC-BY-SA