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

Indirect (bearing) laser filament monitor concept

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved
Filament Monitor
26
109
14.1k
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.
  • undefined
    3dmntbighker @brunofporto
    last edited by 17 May 2019, 00:18

    @brunofporto said in Indirect (bearing) laser filament monitor concept:

    @steveyyc Unfortunately yes....

    The direct bearing seems too slippery for this use.

    I'll think about another solution.

    The best answer would be a garnet blast or something similar on the external diameter.

    Scratch built CoreXY with Maestro
    Heavily modified Ender 3 with Maestro
    MPCNC work in progress with Duet WiFi

    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 2
    • undefined
      SteveYYC @SteveYYC
      last edited by 17 May 2019, 01:25

      Update: Shrink-tubing around the bearing worked for a short while, but since the tubing is soft it quickly developed a groove and began to slip again.

      Still much better than using the bare shiny metal, but I did wind up getting a negative movement on a section of complex infill. Since negative values for R do not seem to work, even setting minimum to 0 I will still get pausing without actual jams/issues on a job.

      Next attempt will be to use salt water and electricity to etch the outer rim of the bearing. I have done this with other SS items and the result is usually an even, "frosted" surface. I don't know if this will be enough "texture" to grab the filament or not.

      undefined 1 Reply Last reply 17 May 2019, 02:16 Reply Quote 2
      • undefined
        SteveYYC @SteveYYC
        last edited by 17 May 2019, 02:16

        @steveyyc Update: Salt Water Etching didn't touch the stainless so I resorted to an emery board and the garnet abrasive took the shine of the bearing very quickly.

        It's definitely going to be hard to get negative values now - the range has shifted to min 555% and max 588%

        Provided this result lasts through a few more jobs I think sanding the bearing may be the solution to the slippage.

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 2
        • undefined
          Adrian52
          last edited by 17 May 2019, 19:24

          I have some preliminary results on the effect of changing the working distance of the sensor. The sensor Web page suggests 5 - 60mm for glossy surfaces, and 20-40mm for white paper. I printed some spacers to go between the top and middle sections of the indirect sensor, and checked the results after printing about 700mm of filament. I have been using A0, and 5mm measuring interval. With no spacer I got 72%(48), 149%(100), 243%(163) for min, average and maximum, normalised to average =100 in the brackets. With the 10mm spacer, I got 180(49), 370(100), 390(105). With a 15mm spacer, it was 472(97), 487(100), 505(103), and the 25mm spacer 575(81), 708(100), 749(106). I need to do more tests, but it looks like a longer working distance may be better - the 15mm spacer result is quite good. Perhaps this is worth investigating with direct sensing too.
          I am still getting the sensor reported as v1 after sending M591 D0 A0, sometimes reverting to v2 after a number of M591 D0 s (it is a v2 sensor)

          undefined 1 Reply Last reply 17 May 2019, 20:02 Reply Quote 2
          • undefined
            3dmntbighker @Adrian52
            last edited by 17 May 2019, 20:02

            @adrian52 said in Indirect (bearing) laser filament monitor concept:

            With a 15mm spacer, it was 472(97), 487(100), 505(103)

            Yeah, 15 looks really good, unless you actually want a slightly broader range. At least it looks like a sweet spot should be close at hand.

            Scratch built CoreXY with Maestro
            Heavily modified Ender 3 with Maestro
            MPCNC work in progress with Duet WiFi

            undefined 1 Reply Last reply 18 May 2019, 03:40 Reply Quote 1
            • undefined
              Synapsis
              last edited by 17 May 2019, 21:09

              I'm having the same problem so I used a file and cut grooves in the bearing then with a black marker I drew thin lines on the bearing to create alternate colors on the surtface.
              Now it does not slip but I'm getting to much movement and so it stops the print.

              Duet3D laser filament monitor v1 on input 3, disabled, allow 40% to 130%, check every 3.0mm, current pos 4.4, brightness 93, shutter 3, measured min 160% avg 185% max 203% over 540.4mm
              Duet3D laser filament monitor v1 on input 3, disabled, allow 40% to 130%, check every 3.0mm, current pos -9.7, brightness 70, shutter 11, measured min 156% avg 185% max 199% over 1365.7mm

              Is there a secure way of knowing which version the sensor is?

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • undefined
                3dmntbighker
                last edited by 17 May 2019, 21:21

                Has anyone looked at using encoders? I think I have read discussions but I can't recall.

                Scratch built CoreXY with Maestro
                Heavily modified Ender 3 with Maestro
                MPCNC work in progress with Duet WiFi

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • undefined
                  SteveYYC @3dmntbighker
                  last edited by 18 May 2019, 03:40

                  @3dmntbighker I printed a 10mm spacer to insert into the remixed design and it's working much more consistently for me as well.

                  One thing I have noticed is that the design leaks enough light (probably due to all the flat interfacing surfaces) that turning on a lamp to look at the print will change the brightness and shutter values for the monitor, which will change the range values.

                  Does anyone know if there is a way to lock brightness and shutter values using M591 or a similar command? Even if that mean I had to unpause a print after using a task light, that would be better than having the range completely change after each use of the task light.

                  Or do I now just need to work on making a light-proof variant of the design.

                  undefined 1 Reply Last reply 21 May 2019, 13:58 Reply Quote 0
                  • undefined
                    dc42 administrators
                    last edited by dc42 18 May 2019, 10:52

                    Are you both using the V1 laser filament monitor? The V2 will read double if you use it with pre-2.03 series firmware.

                    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

                    undefined undefined 2 Replies Last reply 18 May 2019, 12:57 Reply Quote 0
                    • undefined
                      Synapsis
                      last edited by 18 May 2019, 12:18

                      I'm running Firmware: RepRapFirmware for Duet 2 WiFi/Ethernet 2.03RC2 (2019-05-14b2).
                      Mine has on the board 1.2 Laser, so would that be V1?

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • undefined
                        Adrian52 @dc42
                        last edited by 18 May 2019, 12:57

                        @dc42 I have a v2 monitor, and using the 2.03 firmware. Monitor is recognised as v2, until I send the A0 command from the console ; it is then recognised as v1. Sometimes it reverts to reporting v2.

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • undefined
                          SteveYYC @dc42
                          last edited by 18 May 2019, 14:14

                          @dc42 My foolish mistake - I was still running f/w 2.02
                          I have updated to 2.03-RC2 and can now see that my sensor is version 2 (and appears to be producing more reasonable values).

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                          • undefined
                            Synapsis
                            last edited by 18 May 2019, 15:09

                            @SteveYYC When did you buy your laser filament monitor? Does it have V2 on the board?

                            undefined 1 Reply Last reply 19 May 2019, 23:26 Reply Quote 0
                            • undefined
                              3dmntbighker
                              last edited by 19 May 2019, 22:24

                              I think I'll be waiting for an updated design with a longer working distance to assemble and install mine. As for light leaks, how about some tape in a few spots? I have the adrianr52 version printed, and I find the slot is not wide enough for my bearings. My bearings are 3.98mm and my slots ended up 3.85mm or so.

                              Scratch built CoreXY with Maestro
                              Heavily modified Ender 3 with Maestro
                              MPCNC work in progress with Duet WiFi

                              undefined 1 Reply Last reply 21 May 2019, 13:48 Reply Quote 0
                              • undefined
                                SteveYYC @Synapsis
                                last edited by 19 May 2019, 23:26

                                @synapsis I bought it from spool3d.ca because they're local.

                                Yes, my board has v2.0 silkscreened on the side with the sensor.

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • undefined
                                  Adrian52
                                  last edited by 21 May 2019, 13:43

                                  There seems to be a linear relationship between the sensor distance and the average percentage reported:
                                  alt text
                                  This is the percentage value returned is on the Y axis, and the distance between the sensor and bearing surface on the X axis. Looks as though it would give 100% with contact! Also looks as though the minimum returned is a bit more sensitive to distance than the maximum.

                                  undefined undefined 2 Replies Last reply 21 May 2019, 13:45 Reply Quote 1
                                  • undefined
                                    SteveYYC @Adrian52
                                    last edited by SteveYYC 21 May 2019, 13:45

                                    @adrian52 That graph does an excellent job of showing the sweet spot of 17-22mm distance between the sensor and the bearing. I didn't expect it to be that sharply defined.

                                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                                    • undefined
                                      Adrian52 @3dmntbighker
                                      last edited by 21 May 2019, 13:48

                                      @3dmntbighker I did leave the centre of the bearing slot as a nominal 4mm, the region for the moving outer bearing being 4.2mm. So maybe its worth checking if the bearing/bolt is fully seated - on my print it takes a bit of a push for it to click in place, but then it rotates freely. Could post one with a bit more tolerance it that would help.

                                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • undefined
                                        Adrian52 @SteveYYC
                                        last edited by 21 May 2019, 13:58

                                        @steveyyc I tried making a double walled 15mm spacer, with an inner channel of 7x4mm, with a 3mm thick wall, linking the sensor to the bearing surface. I even put a little 0.5mm thick flap to block the LED shining into the sensor chamber. The results were very similar to those obtained with the plain 15mm spacer, so in my hands I don't think light leakage is a problem.

                                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                                        • undefined
                                          3dmntbighker
                                          last edited by 3dmntbighker 21 May 2019, 19:29

                                          Sounds like an optimized design is in the near future. I could definitely use a bit more bearing clearance. I think the whole thing could be a bit wider with some bearing slop and room for a longer bolt. It seems like it's tighter in there than it needs to be to save a few mm outer dimension.

                                          Scratch built CoreXY with Maestro
                                          Heavily modified Ender 3 with Maestro
                                          MPCNC work in progress with Duet WiFi

                                          undefined 1 Reply Last reply 23 May 2019, 20:32 Reply Quote 1
                                          58 out of 109
                                          • First post
                                            58/109
                                            Last post
                                          Unless otherwise noted, all forum content is licensed under CC-BY-SA