Multiple Motion System intgration issue with Job file

NeoDue

@SANJR said in Multiple Motion System intgration issue with Job file:

@NeoDue

Thanks for the feedback

I only request people who have encountered such situation to give their opinions or suggestion. And i do not stump people......... quite not sure why this tone was conveyed......

And before i post any query i usually go through the documentation and threads in the forum....still some information is not understood..it could also be interpretation issue.....that´s the reason for reaching to help in the forum .....

I personally feel the duet documentation is good and expansive but the second motion is for experimental support (as per the documentation) and in the trial stage a lot of things can be discussed to support each other........

Finally nobody needs to survive the rant.... hope we are all matured to understand the intent of discussion and the purpose of forum

Well, I don't know where you come from, therefore it might be something cultural. But IMHO a forum is to be used in such a way that you

create a thread where you post your question, thereby obeying the rules the forum owner has written in his "how to request help" thread and then
patiently wait until someone answers, ideally taking the time to see if you might be of some help elsewhere.

None of this includes sending PMs to users you never had contact with before and notifiying them about your question. That is what you did and what I call and perceive as "stumping".

Anyway, back to topic: as I pointed out with the link, you have a daemon.g that does not follow what dc42 suggests. That might cause the issues, or it might be that you miss a "wait" somewhere.

oliof

I don't think that daemon.g and multiple motion systems is the right way to solve your problem of enabling/disabling your wire feed. I would suggest you try to describe the problem you want to solve and asking for input on that.

I think you want to enable/disable a wire feed for an automated welding machine. The way I would approach that is with tool change macros and a PWM controlled feed system (i.e., laser style control). That would relieve you of daemon.g and multiple motion systems which require a really intimate understanding of RRF and is very hard to debug when something doesn't work as expected.

Best,
oliof

PS: I want to comment that I share the sentiment that DMs pointing me towards new threads are less than welcome, especially if they arrive at my inbox on a Saturday night at 21:37. Most of us here are volunteering our time and pick what and when we can contribute.

o_lampe

@SANJR Why do you use G1 H4 U9999 in your makros? Do you have an endstop at the U-axis?
I also noted before, that it would be better to use an if-statement instead of a nested while loop.

if (global.weldtorchstate == 1)
        G1 H2 Unn F1000 ; make it a short move, since you repeat the loop 5x per second

I'm with @oliof. You create a problem, where it doesn't exist. Dual stream, daemon.g, macros...
Clean the plate and start from scratch.
Maybe define the feeder motor as extruder?
Check out the G1 P-parameter and M670. It seems you can switch valves (or torches) only during extruder moves?
Maybe there are other ways to switch an IO port during extrusion?

SANJR

This post is deleted!

SANJR

@o_lampe

Hi,

The U axis has an endstop
Tried with using an if statement, instead of an while statement the issue persists

SANJR

Thanks to All

Yes, i think its cultural. Before i post any request for the help i make sure that the rules of the forum are obeyed...... because we share the problems and request for suggestions from users who have no relation to others and they take their valuable time and efforts to answer. The reason for PM or DM is to let know of the issue and not to disturb or to let know of the cause immediately. So personally this was a way asking politely to the forum users but the tone was conveyed in a totally different sense, obviously i think its cultural.

In a civilized manner the tone of the request was framed and messaged, but this has to lead to the discussion much more than issue.

By any chance request the administrators or the responsible person to make this as one of the point in ¨Guide for posting requests¨. Because duet users are worldwide and its not only about the language but also the way how it is to be done.

Alternatively the forum software could also be updated so that, before anybody DM or PM someone only after accepting the request users could message them if request not accepted then even if chose to message cannot be done. By this cultural difference like stumping could be avoided. (This may also include time of request).

NeoDue

@SANJR said in Multiple Motion System intgration issue with Job file:

In a civilized manner the tone of the request was framed and messaged, but this has to lead to the discussion much more than issue.

Some definitely final words about this:
As you might have noted from the reaction from @oliof I am not the only one who felt offended by your action. Thus, I fear I need to stress once more that in our cultural surroundings, the way of how you made your request is perceived as anything but "civilised".

If I may give you some general advice:
You might want to keep one thing in mind: while the Duet forum is accessible worldwide, it is a european company, and as such, by far the most of its users are. More so, the admins who make the rules are as well. This also means that you have to expect that western communication standards shall be applied here.
If I were to post in let's say an arabic or japanese forum, I would also have to learn and obey the spoken and unspoken rules there first, and I could not rely solely on what is noted inside that forum but would have to take cultural differences into account in order to get what might be considered "common sense" in that culture. Even more, I should accept that the error was on my side if I did not follow those rules. Blaming the problem on a lack of forum rules or a lack of forum software capabilities as you do at the moment is the opposite of that and risks getting helped because it continues to offend people (which your "civilised" sentence above does as well by the way).

And that is something that I need to state as a German (and usually us Germans are the ones that are considered rude and blunt in other cultural surroundings...)

oliof

@SANJR OK, just to be very clear about this: I ask you to never send me a personal message again. Thank you for respecting my request on this.

SANJR

It´s very disturbing to see a post with the words ¨offended, our cultural surrounding, common sense owning the probelm¨. Sorry to say these reflect the state of mind.

Not sure the messages where i have posted was refering the forum to balme. Definitely that was not i meant, then why was it taken like this? This is not a matured way of communication in a well respected forum..... I just wanted to make sure the same problem is not repeated by others elsewhere. And the spoken and unspoken are really hard and difficult to understand as per what ever the standards is being refered too......

What is the point of contextion here? Accepting the error was...really.....???

Word Civilized itself represent the members of the forum are well respected.....

Really think either the choice of words and the whatever is really being taken out of the context.......

And personally i have nothing against to anyone with an cultural inquisitive thought

SANJR

Finally the probelm which i have been trying to solve is done.

Phaedrux

I think the lesson here is to not pester people with direct messages. I understand it may be frustrating to wait for your thread to get some attention, but give it at least 24 hours to give people a chance around the world to even view it. If you still feel your thread hasn't received any attention, feel free to bump it or send a moderator a message.

SANJR

@Phaedrux

Well said..... in a clear and polite manner. Agreed