[not yet solved] Tevo Little Monster DuetWifi errors
-
@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.
-
It seems that the printer ignoring the H value !
I restarted with 6 point for make the things simple . All close to the circumference and the last in the middle.
The end stop are "perfect". Belt well tied. (not too much).
The point are well calibrated directly from the home
G29 disabled and ...
Bed compensation in use: none
Bed probe heights: 0.083 -0.063 0.133 -0.056 0.079
If I run the G32 event 10 times in a raw the result is the same.I suppose that the H value is more or less ignored because if I revert the + and - of the bottom numbers nothing change.
Also if i leave all point with H0 stock the printed part look like the same.
Rise the Z offset increment the problem.; bed.g file for RepRapFirmware, generated by Escher3D calculator
; 7 points, 6 factors, probing radius: 150, probe offset (0, 20)
G30 P0 X0.00 Y132.35 Z-99999 H-0.069 ; >>> 1.272-1.341=-0.069 >> ok
G30 P1 X121.08 Y69.90 Z-99999 H0.135 ; >>> 1.476-1.341=0.135 >> very heigh printing on the bed
G30 P2 X129.90 Y-75.00 Z-99999 H0.012 ; >>> 1.353-1.341=0.012 >> heigh
G30 P3 X0.00 Y-150.00 Z-99999 H-0.204 ; >>> 1.137-1.341=-0.204 >> ok
G30 P4 X-129.90 Y-75.00 Z-99999 H-0.341 ; >>> 0.900-1.341=-0.341 >> low
G30 P5 X-121.08 Y69.90 Z-99999 H-0.484 ; >>> 0.857-1.341=-0.484 >> very low printing on the bed
G30 P6 X0 Y0 Z-99999 S6 ; 1.341The bottom side is too pressed (and gem on the right when rise a little when release the material compressed before) , the top is too high and dont stick...
Any ideas why are ignored that H values? Also if I give a +0.700 or -0.700 to the point that are more high and low , nothing change in the print ...
So I have done tons of time those passages for discover that are not recognized
-
It's a known issue that the H value is ignored when deployprobe.g and retractprobe.g files are used. Fixed in 2.02RC4 which I am trying to get finished today.
-
Ah
Ok so im not dumb
Now I mount the RC3. I'll be the first on the other side the Atlantic Ocean that will try the RC4
So my brain can stop fry for some hour
-
Damn found it... but just now that you told me. Any way thanks for the patience and the support...
@kuhnikuehnast said in Firmware 2.02 Release candidate 3 now available:
Interesting thing I found about G30:
- If you use:
G30 X20 Y20to probe the bed at a specific point, you always have to calculate the offset of the probe, because the coordinates of the nozzle are used.
Whereas if you use 2:
G30 P0 X20 Y20 H0 Z-99999the offset of the probe is already calculated and the real probe coordinates are used but not the "actually" coordinates of the nozzle
- The H- parameter is still not taken into account when probing. Therefore, I performed a little test:
M561 ; delete any bed transformation G1 X45.457 Y8.602 Z10 F15000 ; go to probing point on floating bed G30 X45.457 Y8.602 H0 S-1 ; define this point as Z=0 M561 ; delete any bed transformation G1 X45.457 Y8.602 Z10 F15000 ; go to probing point on floating bed G30 X45.457 Y8.602 H5 S-1 ; define this point as Z=0 M561 ; delete any bed transformation G30 P0 X20 Y20 H0 Z-99999 S-1 ; probe point P0 M561 ; delete any bed transformation G30 P0 X20 Y20 H3 Z-99999 S-1 ; probe point P0 M561 ; delete any bed transformation G30 P1 X20 Y20 H3 Z-99999 S-1 ; probe point P1This ended up in the results:
20:20:45G32 bed probe heights:, mean nan, deviation from mean nan 20:20:42G32 bed probe heights: 0.004, mean 0.004, deviation from mean 0.000 20:20:39G32 bed probe heights: 0.007, mean 0.007, deviation from mean nan 20:20:36Stopped at height 1.399 mm 20:20:31M98 P"0:/macros/Test H-Factor" Stopped at height 1.399 mmSo as the H-factor differs every probe, the results are all the same...
greetings kuhni
-
Im still trying...lets see what we reach.
In the same time I bought the original Genuine E3D V6 Hot-End
https://www.amazon.it/gp/product/B07CN8JP47/ref=od_aui_detailpages00?ie=UTF8&psc=1
I was looking the the Pico 3D but on the site is sold out and they never answered to my mail.
I'll let you know how the work proceed. -
So...
Some considerations...1)There is not any difference if I select S6 or S7-S8-S9 in the bed.g, the print result is pretty the same , also if the parameter auto calculated differ a lot.
- I produced right now several bed.g file and all of them have "H" parameter reconfigured. (12 external point and 3 inside or 6 outside and 6 inside)
BUT there is something strange in the procedure.
The trigger height for each point have a reasonable difference between each other. I calculated the difference and added into the bed.g BUT still the point stay too high or too low.
So the trigger eight is not the only parameter that affect the distance from the bed.
I choose to lock the S parameter in the bed.g at 6 because the automatic calculation fix the rod length at 411+ instead than 397+ as I measured with the ruler. (in the original firmware there is settled 397.1073 that confirm the distance).
>>> Concrete example: I'm gone for this point during a test with (6 out points + 6 inner points)
-Removed any old Z offset.
-G1 X112.41 Y64.90 (nozzle down at G1 Z3 from home position, moved to the XY coordinate and with incremental steps dug to the bed)
Then M280 P3 S160 I1 - G92 Z0 - G1 Z5 - M280 P3 S10 I1 - G30 S-1.
The trigger height is 1.320 . Measured several time . Is consistent, all the attempts are more or less the same.
In the center (x0 y0) the trigger height is 1.100
So 1.320-1.100=0.220 The H parameter is H0.220.
BUT if after the calibration (G32x3) I reach that point I can see that there is still 0.250mm from the bed!!! (used a thickness gauge - and if nozzle down 5 times of 0.05 i can touch the bed so is a real 0.25)
The other points do almost the same despite they are too low or high.
So...WHY?
I'm missing something?
(the endstop are all leveled with digital caliper - The motors are all the same and well wired. I can print a more or less amazing test cube.Thanks for any suggestion
I understood that the delta printer have those tolerances ..BUT !
If is this the case the trigger procedure as explained dont solve the problem.
There is not solution that go by attempts all the times for each point? - I produced right now several bed.g file and all of them have "H" parameter reconfigured. (12 external point and 3 inside or 6 outside and 6 inside)
