[not yet solved] Tevo Little Monster DuetWifi errors
-
Thanks...I'll check it and I'll report the results...
In the same time I'll try to understand better other stuffs related to this..
https://duet3d.dozuki.com/Wiki/Using_mesh_bed_compensation -
I tried make good homework ...but i miss still something.
As the file Eric posted I tried do the same. Now the bed.g look like this:; 7 points, 6 factors, probing radius: 150, probe offset (0, 0)
G30 P0 X0.00 Y150.00 Z-99999 H-0.080 ; trigger height 1.640 > done
G30 P1 X129.90 Y75.00 Z-99999 H0.320 ; trigger height 1.880 > done
G30 P2 X129.90 Y-75.00 Z-99999 H0.240 ; trigger height 1.800 > done
G30 P3 X0.00 Y-150.00 Z-99999 H-0.020 ; trigger height 1.540 > done
G30 P4 X-129.90 Y-75.00 Z-99999 H-0.262 ; trigger height 1.298 > done
G30 P5 X-129.90 Y75.00 Z-99999 H-0.320 ; trigger height 1.240 > done
G30 P6 X0 Y0 Z-99999 S7 ; Bed center, main trigger height 1.560
; For G30: Use S-1 for measurements only, without calculations. Use S4 for endstop heights and Z-height only. Use S6 for full 6 factors
; If your Z probe has significantly different trigger heights depending on XY position, adjust the H parameters in the G30 commands accordingly.
; The value of each H parameter should be (trigger height at that XY position) - (trigger height at center of bed); Bed center, main trigger height 1.560 - sottrarre all'altezza centrale le altezze per ciascun punto e mettere la differenza positiva o negativa come altezza nei vari G30.
I taken 3 times all the 7 point. I commanded down the head close the bed and lowered by 0.05 steps against the glass. I noticed that if i use bigger step the head one time against the glass lift a little on xy , so I used the smallest steps.
And the result is this:
BUT the result in printing is identical.... one side barely stick , the other stick like hell.
I tried also see if the BLtouch was aware of changing bed high. I removed two spacer that sustain the bed (screwing a little) and this is the result:
I'm stuck.
Also if I manually level the bed with spacer to make the calibration look like perfect , I'm sure the printing will not go well. As mentioned the delta printer have more tolerances so the solution should be where you suggest but it didnt work
-
Eric add those line in the comment of the bed.g :
- entered in config-override.g G31
And this is the config-override.g :
; This is a system-generated file - do not edit
; Delta parameters
M665 L397.048 R156.896 H524.725 B175.0 X0.206 Y-0.111 Z0.000
M666 X-0.295 Y0.233 Z0.062 A0.00 B0.00
; Heater model parameters
M307 H0 A93.8 C266.0 D9.4 S1.00 B0
M307 H1 A372.4 C90.9 D4.4 S1.00 B0
M307 H2 A340.0 C140.0 D5.5 S1.00 B0
M307 H4 A340.0 C140.0 D5.5 S1.00 B0
M307 H5 A340.0 C140.0 D5.5 S1.00 B0
M307 H6 A340.0 C140.0 D5.5 S1.00 B0
M307 H7 A340.0 C140.0 D5.5 S1.00 B0How he calculated the new parameters for the M665 ?!?!
-
M665 and M666 values are obtained though using delta calibration. They are written to config-override.g through the command M500, and then loaded when the printer starts up as long as M501 is at the end of your config.g (which it is from your earlier post). You can see what values are currently set from M666 and M665 by typing the commands into the console with nothing after them:
Are you running delta calibration before trying to get the mesh bed compensation working? It looks to me like you are showing pictures of the mes bed compensation but not the results of delta calibration. you may need to run delta calibration a few times to get it to converge.
Use the command G32 in the gcode console a few times and post the results.
-
Hi Tony,
thanks for your time too...
5 tries with cold bed :
First G32 cold bed
Calibrated 7 factors using 7 points, deviation before 1.534 after 0.000
37 points probed, mean error 0.003, deviation 0.068
Height map saved to file heightmap.csv
Second G32 cold bed
Calibrated 7 factors using 7 points, deviation before 0.033 after 0.000
37 points probed, mean error -0.000, deviation 0.064
Height map saved to file heightmap.csv
Third G32 cold bed
Calibrated 7 factors using 7 points, deviation before 0.052 after 0.000
37 points probed, mean error 0.047, deviation 0.063
Height map saved to file heightmap.csv
Fourth G32 cold bed
Calibrated 7 factors using 7 points, deviation before 0.034 after 0.000
37 points probed, mean error -0.001, deviation 0.059
Height map saved to file heightmap.csv
Fifth G32 cold bed
Calibrated 7 factors using 7 points, deviation before 0.018 after 0.000
37 points probed, mean error -0.002, deviation 0.062
Height map saved to file heightmap.csv
Now 5 tries with hot bed and hot nozzle :
First G32 hot bed
Calibrated 7 factors using 7 points, deviation before 0.130 after 0.000
37 points probed, mean error -0.021, deviation 0.056
Height map saved to file heightmap.csv
Second G32 hot bed
Calibrated 7 factors using 7 points, deviation before 0.066 after 0.000
37 points probed, mean error 0.030, deviation 0.063
Height map saved to file heightmap.csv
Third G32 hot bed
Calibrated 7 factors using 7 points, deviation before 0.055 after 0.000
37 points probed, mean error 0.037, deviation 0.064
Height map saved to file heightmap.csv
Fourth G32 hot bed
Calibrated 7 factors using 7 points, deviation before 0.049 after 0.000
37 points probed, mean error 0.000, deviation 0.057
Height map saved to file heightmap.csv
Fifth G32 hotbed :
Calibrated 7 factors using 7 points, deviation before 0.065 after 0.000
37 points probed, mean error 0.038, deviation 0.062
Height map saved to file heightmap.csv
The M665
Diagonal 407.831, delta radius 159.010, homed height 523.247, bed radius 175.0, X 0.508°, Y 0.646°, Z 0.000° -
I have added the M665 to the config.g then I restarted the printer and run twice the G32 with hotted bed , but this doasnt change a thing... the problem still remain the same:
I settled the 0.1 offset. If I set 0.05 i go thorough mouse bite even with the new Bondtech extruder.
Still something is not well settled ...
-
@giostark you should run G32 a few times, until it gets as close as possible to converged. Leave the mesh bed levelling out for now.
Once you have it converged as close as possible then you can do mesh bed levelling if you need to. They are not the same thing.
As you are using a BL touch off to one side it is worth manually checking the probe trigger height at each point you are using for G32 in bed.g. Start by confirming that probe correctly sets Z0 in the bed center. Then move to each of the other point and check the Z trigger height. If you see any difference (cause by effector tilt) the capture that in the H offset in the G30 commands in bed.g
Cheers
Tony
-
Sorry , but is not what I have done already some post above?
After I change the M665 with the above content the new grid look like this . It seems more regular than before:
Sorry again , what you mean as "converged"?
I have done :
1)z-probe for the center point.
2)for all the 7 points taken the trigger height and subtracted it at the center trigger height and added the numbers int the bed.g as above posted.
3)changes the M665 in the config.g with new data calculated by the firmware.
4)run the G32 several times (auto delta calibration) and also runt the auto grid calibration.
5)tried to print with the above results, even with the map of this post.I have not understood your last sentence....
-
Is arriving also the BLTouch-Smart V2... lets see if I can solve those problems...
-
@giostark I think you are making progress!
Step 4 above: run the G32 several times (auto delta calibration) . That is where you should see the value with deviation before and after reduce after each step once it has reduced enough that it's no longer changing "much" between each step then it's converged. The "much" depends on your system and how repeatable it is.
Please show the output of G32 after running it a few times.
Cheers
Tony
-
Ok Tony , understood I'll do that soon as possible....
this is what I have done yesterday night.
I removed the B175 from the bed.g accidentally and those was the result:
Then I checked the belt just to be sure they were not too lose and inserted back the B175 and restored the original M665 with standard data (for TLM).
I exchanged the bed point with those :
G30 P0 X0 Y132.28 H0 Z-99999
G30 P1 X121 Y69.86 H0 Z-99999
G30 P2 X129.9 Y-75 H0 Z-99999
G30 P3 X0 Y-150 H0 Z-99999
G30 P4 X-129.9 Y-75 H0 Z-99999
G30 P5 X-121 Y69.86 H0 Z-99999
G30 P6 X0 Y59.15 H0 Z-99999
G30 P7 X56.09 Y32.38 H0 Z-99999
G30 P8 X64.95 Y-37.5 H0 Z-99999
G30 P9 X0 Y-75 H0 Z-99999
G30 P10 X-64.95 Y-37.5 H0 Z-99999
G30 P11 X-56.09 Y32.38 H0 Z-99999
G30 P12 X0 Y0 H0 Z-99999 S9And the result was this one:
1rst pass
second pass:
Third pass:
Fourth pass:
It seems clear that the system is not accurate. Hope is the BL sensor that make this discrepancy.
The result in printing is the same. One side stick one not.I'll try with the new BL-touch to do what you suggest. It that should arrive Friday , with the hope that I can come out all this.
-
@giostark said in [help] Tevo Little Monster + DuetWiFi + DuetTouch7" errors:
Hi ,
Can you tell me if is right this procedure?
I have followed the procedure for calibrate the bed.g
new sensor BLTouch smart V2 original:
For each point I have done those passage
1)G31 Z0 ; clear the previous Z
2)Lift the nozzle close the bed . Then Z-5 to touch the bed, then rise of 5 and start lowering 0.5 to touch the bed again, then rise of 0.5 and start lowering again of 0.005 to touch the bed again. Those steps for 3 time for each point. I had to do this because on delta printer I noticed that the nozzle tend to shift if pressed to much with big steps of lowering. So tried to be the more accurate I could be.
2)G92 Z0 ; set the zero Z
3)G1 Z5 ; rise of 5mm
4)M280 P3 S10 I1 ; release the trigger
5)G30 S-1
6)copy the result for 3 times and take the medium.
7)take the center Z height and subtract each number for each point.I selected the right number with the ">" , the one of the 3 pass done that is the medium
; 7 points, 6 factors, probing radius: 150, probe offset (0, 0)
G30 P0 X0.00 Y150.00 Z-99999 H-0.124 ; trigger height 1.194 - 1.238 - >1.194> done
G30 P1 X129.90 Y75.00 Z-99999 H-0.430 ; trigger height 1.501 - >1.507 - 1.513 > done
G30 P2 X129.90 Y-75.00 Z-99999 H-0.265 ; trigger height 1.355 - 1.392 - >1.355 > done
G30 P3 X0.00 Y-150.00 Z-99999 H0.023 ; trigger height 1.047 - >1.047 - 1.053 > done
G30 P4 X-129.90 Y-75.00 Z-99999 H0.316 ; trigger height 0.754 - >0.754 - 0.773 > done
G30 P5 X-129.90 Y75.00 Z-99999 H0.370 ; trigger height 0.718 - 0.693 - >0.700 > done
G30 P6 X0 Y0 Z-99999 S7 ; trigger height 1.077 - 1.064 - >1.070 donefirst pass:
Calibrated 7 factors using 7 points, deviation before 1.596 after 0.000
second pass :
Calibrated 7 factors using 7 points, deviation before 0.146 after 0.000
-
After I changed the M665 with new data:
M665
Diagonal 408.220, delta radius 159.047, homed height 524.265, bed radius 175.0, X 0.640°, Y 0.720°, Z 0.000°First pass:
Calibrated 7 factors using 7 points, deviation before 1.499 after 0.000
So I would ask why the deviation is so different each time?
-
The F******* problem is still the same....
Im going mad.... -
@giostark you do not appear to be running the G32 multiple times. For now ignore the bed mesh compensation (G29) and run G32 a number of time (let's say 5) and report back those results.
-
There is something else ... I'm working on it. I'm trying different solutions and other software. I let you know...
-
Hi,
I learned other stuffs and tried to understand better some functionalities ...
Here what I have done that present the same issue on large print:I have generated a new bed.g and calculated the H parameter for each point:
G30 P0 X0.00 Y140.00 Z-99999 H0.066 ; 1.316 - 1.303 - 1.291 - 1.310 >>> 1.310-1.244=0.066
G30 P1 X121.24 Y70.00 Z-99999 H0.291 ; 1.512 - 1.537 - 1.549 - 1.543 >>> 1.535-1.244=0.291
G30 P2 X121.24 Y-70.00 Z-99999 H0.178 ; 1.433 - 1.445 - 1.395 - 1.408 >>> 1.422-1.244=0.178
G30 P3 X0.00 Y-140.00 Z-99999 H-0.023 ; 1.206 - 1.206 - 1.250 - 1.225 >>> 1.221-1.244=-0.023
G30 P4 X-121.24 Y-70.00 Z-99999 H-0.244 ; 1.000 - 0.988 -1.006 - 1.006 >>> 1.000-1.244=-0.244
G30 P5 X-121.24 Y70.00 Z-99999 H-0.296 ; 0.938 - 0.950 - 0.944 - 0.963 >>> 0.948-1.244=-0.296
G30 P6 X0.00 Y70.00 Z-99999 H0.057 ; 1.306 - 1.293 - 1.281 - 1.324 >>> 1.301-1.244 =0.057
G30 P7 X60.62 Y-35.00 Z-99999 H0.097 ; 1.331 - 1.350 - 1.356 - 1.328 >>> 1.341-1.244=0.097
G30 P8 X-60.62 Y-35.00 Z-99999 H-0.143 ; 1.107 - 1.100 - 1.100 - 1.100 >>> 1.101-1.244=-0.143
G30 P9 X0 Y0 Z-99999 S7 ; 1.227 - 1.252 - 1.246 - 1.252 >>> 1.244
This is a 5 pass of G32 without a G29 (I have done just a one G29 after the new M665 data inserted in config.g otherwise the nozzle stop 5mm before the bed at any printing)
Calibrated 7 factors using 10 points, deviation before 0.031 after 0.029 (last of 5)
Calibrated 7 factors using 10 points, deviation before 0.032 after 0.030
Calibrated 7 factors using 10 points, deviation before 0.032 after 0.030
Calibrated 7 factors using 10 points, deviation before 0.031 after 0.030
Calibrated 7 factors using 10 points, deviation before 1.487 after 0.029 (first of 5)Now, The M665 from Eric is different from what the firmware have calculated for my printer. Never mind , I used what the firmware say .
I tried to recheck the Zprobe and all the point with new M665 data and the Hs are more or less identical. I mean 0.005/0.01 of tolerance .When I try to print large object the segment closed between those point are :
x -80 , y-50
and
x-80 , y+20
are too much pressed on the bed.
Instead the :
x120 , y20
and
x120 , y-50
is too lose from the bed.So it seems that the printer let stay the print more high where it believe the bed is high and low where the bed is low. BUT the result is that where it believe that is high the print dont stick and where is low the print can barely extrude. So the bed is not slope as it believe.
Can be the S7 parameter in the bed.g the problem?
The H parameter should correct all this but they didnt seems to be adopted during the print ....Suggestions?
-
@giostark said in [help] Tevo Little Monster + DuetWiFi + DuetTouch7" errors:
I have generated a new bed.g and calculated the H parameter for each point:
Did you establish the correct H parameters by measuring the trigger height at each point?
If you need to use H parameters to compensate for effector tilt, then you cannot also use G29 mesh bed compensation; because G29 has no facility for making trigger height corrections. But judging from your height maps, you won't need to use mesh bed correction.
-
Hi dc42 ,
yep , as the G30s show up, then I have done the average and then subtracted the center probed.. For each point 4x (nozzle touching the glass bed) G92 Z0 + G1 Z5 + M280 P3 S10 I1 + G30 S-1Azz... I didnt know that.
So Now should be fine launch a M561(clear the actual bed compensation) and then a G29 S2 (disable the bed compensation) ?
I should put this command at the start of the bed.g?edit:
im trying to do that .. -
Just avoid running G29 or G29 S1 so that you never load a height map. But if you do load one, running M561 or G92 S2 will disable it.
