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

    RepRapFirmware 3.0

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved
    General Discussion
    35
    176
    29.9k
    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.
    • brunofportoundefined
      brunofporto @dc42
      last edited by

      @dc42 said in RepRapFirmware 3.0:

      OTOH a "sanity checker" that looks for obviously missing or obsolete parameters on GCode commands in config.g would be possible.

      This should be enough 😄 Thanks!

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • gtj0undefined
        gtj0 @A Former User
        last edited by gtj0

        @dc42 said in RepRapFirmware 3.0:

        I will add a facility to cause an emergency stop if any axis endstops are triggered unexpectedly.

        @bearer said in RepRapFirmware 3.0:

        Now this is getting interesting...

        Interesting indeed! As long as it's configurable by endstop.

        • RRF 3 supports multiple endstop switches on axes (one per motor) natively. You no longer need to split axes during homing.

        This would imply that if you have only 1 motor you can't have 2 endstops (maybe a min and a max). Just curious why.

        dc42undefined 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • dc42undefined
          dc42 administrators @gtj0
          last edited by

          @gtj0 said in RepRapFirmware 3.0:

          This would imply that if you have only 1 motor you can't have 2 endstops (maybe a min and a max). Just curious why.

          No, you can have multiple axis endstops even if there is just one motor. There is currently no way to tell the firmware that you have separate min and max endstops; but I might add this later.

          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

          gtj0undefined 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • gtj0undefined
            gtj0 @dc42
            last edited by

            @dc42 said in RepRapFirmware 3.0:

            @gtj0 said in RepRapFirmware 3.0:

            This would imply that if you have only 1 motor you can't have 2 endstops (maybe a min and a max). Just curious why.

            No, you can have multiple axis endstops even if there is just one motor. There is currently no way to tell the firmware that you have separate min and max endstops; but I might add this later.

            That would be welcomed (since that's what I have) 🙂

            X and Y have 2 motors per axis and each have min and max endstops.
            Z has 3 motors, 3 max endstops and a piezo probe.

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • Vetiundefined
              Veti @dc42
              last edited by

              @dc42 said in RepRapFirmware 3.0:

              The current plan is 30V or perhaps 36V. It's difficult to find 5V buck regulator chips that accept higher than 40V input.

              why not says that for input above 30V the 5V line has to be supplied via the ext 5V?

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

                The expansion board doesn't have an ext 5V input.

                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
                • A Former User?
                  A Former User
                  last edited by

                  This post is deleted!
                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • dc42undefined
                    dc42 administrators
                    last edited by

                    I have made new builds of RepRapFirmware 3 available:

                    Duet WiFi/Ethernet: https://www.dropbox.com/s/fyvibzm0zl92hiy/Duet2CombinedFirmware.bin?dl=0
                    Duet Maestro: https://www.dropbox.com/s/m0r3ldy424mxf4v/DuetMaestroFirmware.bin?dl=0

                    As before, use these with caution! In particular, test your endstops and Z probe before relying on them. See https://duet3d.dozuki.com/Wiki/RepRapFirmware_3_overview for required configuration changes.

                    The Duet Maestro build also has some improvements to the menu system:

                    • Fan speeds, print speed modifier and extrusion rate modifier have '%' displayed after them automatically
                    • New item 534 is the current IP address in one go (to replace items 530, 531, 532 and 533)
                    • New item 535 is the percentage of the current SD card file completed
                    • New item 536 is the estimated print time remaining, based on the percentage of the file that has been completed

                    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

                    A Former User? 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • Catalin_ROundefined
                      Catalin_RO @dc42
                      last edited by

                      @dc42 said in RepRapFirmware 3.0:

                      @catalin_ro said in RepRapFirmware 3.0:

                      Even with the new firmware I would have to separate the two axis for the G0 Y0.09 command that compensates for the difference in switches positions. It would be nice to have, maybe only during homing and only while in relative mode, the possibility to issue a command like G0 Yaaa:bbb (the final retract, after the slow speed pass, a single G0 Y1.09:1.00 would handle the situation, combining the precise gantry alignment with the small retract). Alternatively, a solution for specifying a per axis alignment offset would be equally good, with immediate compensation through applying the corresponding number of steps.

                      That could be done, but it's a lot of work to do for just one or two users. It is really that difficult to adjust one of the endstop positions or add a shim to get them both to trigger at the same point?

                      Well, trying to achieve such a precision (0.09mm) when positioning the homing switch is really tricky, at least with classical mechanical switches. There are some cylindrical ones, similar to the NPN/PNP sensors and those can be indeed positioned very precisely. On the other hand, I'm on the same wave length with you - it is not worth making something really special for just few users as long as the solution already exists and it requires just a few extra lines in a macro. Things get significantly simpler by having to do the split, precise tune and recombine of the axis only for the alignment difference.

                      In my dual Y axis setup I have also installed limit switches (connected in series to the homing ones) to handle possible configuration problems and missed steps. If an axis has multiple steppers and multiple homing switches, will the M581 defined triggers handle them properly?

                      RRF 3 doesn't yet implement M581. I intend to change M581 to work with a single input, also I will add a facility to cause an emergency stop if any axis endstops are triggered unexpectedly.

                      The idea to specially handle the homing/limit switches is the best from my point of view. If it would trigger a macro, if present, instead of the emergency stop, it would be even better. There might be situations when hitting an endstop requires special action or, on the contrary, none at all (I have messed up myself quite a few jobs by mistakenly touching one of the endstops!) - after all the spindle end everything else could be stopped through the macro and the user could be asked for possible actions through some messages.

                      The special handling of the endstops also simplifies the homing scripts because of the no longer required M581 commands!

                      botundefined 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • Martin1454undefined
                        Martin1454 @dc42
                        last edited by

                        @dc42 said in RepRapFirmware 3.0:

                        It's difficult to find 5V buck regulator chips that accept higher than 40V input.

                        How about takeing 2 stages? 40V->buck to 12V-> buck to 5V
                        Many uses 12V fans and LED's and other accessories, it was one of the main selling points for me for the duex5

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • botundefined
                          bot @Catalin_RO
                          last edited by

                          @catalin_ro

                          Metrol offers switches with repeatability as small as 1 micron. I’m using 3 micron repeatability switches. Sure, they cost a bit but if you only need one it’s reasonable. Like $60 usd iirc for 3 micron.

                          *not actually a robot

                          A Former User? Catalin_ROundefined 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • veng1undefined
                            veng1
                            last edited by

                            This may be already implemented but I've not seen it explicitly stated.

                            On a RailCore, because a single motor causes a diagonal move, it is possible to install two limit switches, probably Y axis and then move to home the Y axis so it is perpendicular to the X axis?

                            Furthermore, can there be an homing switch offset to compensate for the likely case where the two limit switches are not in exactly the same relative position so when the carriage is homed, it can be made perpendicular?

                            Catalin_ROundefined 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • A Former User?
                              A Former User @bot
                              last edited by

                              @bot said in RepRapFirmware 3.0:

                              @catalin_ro

                              Metrol offers switches with repeatability as small as 1 micron. I’m using 3 micron repeatability switches. Sure, they cost a bit but if you only need one it’s reasonable. Like $60 usd iirc for 3 micron.

                              Omron also has some very precise ones. But what would you use it for? If the motors are strong and do not loose steps within one print, it would not matter if the next print after a restart is slightly on a different place on the plate, or?

                              deckingmanundefined botundefined Catalin_ROundefined 3 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • deckingmanundefined
                                deckingman @A Former User
                                last edited by

                                @lb said in RepRapFirmware 3.0:

                                @bot said in RepRapFirmware 3.0:

                                @catalin_ro

                                Metrol offers switches with repeatability as small as 1 micron. I’m using 3 micron repeatability switches. Sure, they cost a bit but if you only need one it’s reasonable. Like $60 usd iirc for 3 micron.

                                Omron also has some very precise ones. But what would you use it for? If the motors are strong and do not loose steps within one print, it would not matter if the next print after a restart is slightly on a different place on the plate, or?

                                I use a Metrol precision switch on my Z axis where it most certainly is important that homing is accurate.

                                Ian
                                https://somei3deas.wordpress.com/
                                https://www.youtube.com/@deckingman

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • botundefined
                                  bot @A Former User
                                  last edited by bot

                                  Yes, in most cases it is not necessary. I need to align two idex print heads, and so I chose to do it precisely the first time every time.

                                  I also used them for all my homing switches. This should allow me to re-home the printer, in the case of power failure or something, and continue printing without being more than 3 microns off, in theory. In reality, the switches' positions will differ by more than 3 microns due to thermal expansion alone, if the ambient temp increases or decreases, but it's easier to control ambient temp than variability of a cheap microswitch.

                                  *not actually a robot

                                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • A Former User?
                                    A Former User @dc42
                                    last edited by

                                    @dc42 said in RepRapFirmware 3.0:

                                    I have made new builds of RepRapFirmware 3 available:
                                    Duet Maestro: https://www.dropbox.com/s/m0r3ldy424mxf4v/DuetMaestroFirmware.bin?dl=0

                                    Initial testing shows endstops, probing, motion, fans and heaters work as expected. Actual printing to follow, but waiting on some warranty replacements from Tiertime for that to work.

                                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • Catalin_ROundefined
                                      Catalin_RO @bot
                                      last edited by

                                      @bot said in RepRapFirmware 3.0:

                                      @catalin_ro

                                      Metrol offers switches with repeatability as small as 1 micron. I’m using 3 micron repeatability switches. Sure, they cost a bit but if you only need one it’s reasonable. Like $60 usd iirc for 3 micron.

                                      I have not argued about the switch repeatability, even the relatively low cost switches always insure the same position within 0.01mm. But installing them on the two Y axis (in my case!) in order to perfectly square the gantry is beyond tricky.

                                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • Catalin_ROundefined
                                        Catalin_RO @veng1
                                        last edited by

                                        @veng1 said in RepRapFirmware 3.0:

                                        This may be already implemented but I've not seen it explicitly stated.

                                        On a RailCore, because a single motor causes a diagonal move, it is possible to install two limit switches, probably Y axis and then move to home the Y axis so it is perpendicular to the X axis?

                                        Furthermore, can there be an homing switch offset to compensate for the likely case where the two limit switches are not in exactly the same relative position so when the carriage is homed, it can be made perpendicular?

                                        That is exactly my case! The big X-axis gantry (now it probably weight a little above 20kg - this a CNC after all!) has a very small, rather difficult to measure directly, error from perfect 90 degrees. But it can be seen on small rectangular machined pieces using a professional 90 deg reference. Specifying an offset of the homing switch might be an interesting solution. For now I'm handling it exactly as shown in one of my previous messages.

                                        But the problem can be perfectly handled with Duet3D only in the case of multiple stepper on each axis. With just two steppers for handling both X and Y axis (like in the RailCore configuration), perfectly squaring the gantry is impossible. It could be only if on each linear guide on the dual axis there would be two carriages, significantly spaced apart, or longer carriages are used.

                                        veng1undefined 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • Catalin_ROundefined
                                          Catalin_RO @A Former User
                                          last edited by

                                          @lb said in RepRapFirmware 3.0:

                                          @bot said in RepRapFirmware 3.0:

                                          @catalin_ro

                                          Metrol offers switches with repeatability as small as 1 micron. I’m using 3 micron repeatability switches. Sure, they cost a bit but if you only need one it’s reasonable. Like $60 usd iirc for 3 micron.

                                          Omron also has some very precise ones. But what would you use it for? If the motors are strong and do not loose steps within one print, it would not matter if the next print after a restart is slightly on a different place on the plate, or?

                                          Again, this is a CNC and it is about insuring perfect 90deg between the two Y-axis and the X-axis. Also, in the CNC world it is not unusual to install various fixtures in several places on the machine and measure precisely their position only once. The steppers, once the machine is started, are kept energized indefinitely and the position quite precise after a proper homing.

                                          botundefined 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          • botundefined
                                            bot @Catalin_RO
                                            last edited by bot

                                            @catalin_ro

                                            Fair point. I wasn't specifically referencing your case, but just adding general comments about switch repeatability. In the case of needing to square the y axis, I think two metrol (or similar) switches could work. Just place the switches close enough to the same point on each side, and then determine the correct offset and input that into firmware and call it done. It would be repeatably square within 3 microns, depending on how securely and precisely you can affix the switches relative to one another and the y axis. (Edit: this would require making virtual axes, and assigning each side to a different axis for homing.)

                                            That being said, is your Y axis not stiff/rigid enough to be driven on one side only, while maintaining perpendicularity to the X axis? Even if not, you could still drive both sides by one motor, coupling the two sides mechanically, eliminating the need to adjust perpendicularity with two motor positions.

                                            *not actually a robot

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