ZA and ZB connections ?

Rudy2A

S0,5 Est-ce le problème?

It’s with people like you that we move forward!

As I start and sometimes I am a little stupid ... if it is not S0.5 what to put, I simply copied from a previously cited example.

For the rest I understood ...

Veti

@Rudy2A

you have to write S0.5
you wrote S0,5

notice , and . duet does not use , for decimal representation.

Rudy2A

@Veti said in ZA and ZB connections ?:

vous devez écrire S0.5
vous avez écrit S0,5

Ok ... frankly, I was far from that mistake . Thank you !

Rudy2A

Hello, thanks to the members of this forum and more particularly to Veti.

I solved my problem and my current tests are very good. I only have a few small adjustments left and everything will be on top!

I still have a question ... I would like to get the best out of G32 and G29 in my impressions. How do you go about your settings?

You make a G32 in your slicer and you included in your Bed.g G29 or G29S1 file or else, you put G32 and G29 (S1) or vice versa in your slicer or do you use another method?

I take your advice once again.

Veti

if you run G32 then you need to run a G29 and not a G29 S1.

Rudy2A

@Veti said in ZA and ZB connections ?:

si vous exécutez G32, vous devez exécuter un G29 et non un G29 S1.

Very good, but in what order? G29 followed by G32 (or vice versa in my slicer or G32 in my slicer and G29 in my Bed.g or other file?

The best solution...

Phaedrux

You can put everything in your slicer gcode if you want it to run before the print every time.

You can use G32 for the leveling tilt first, and then do a g29 to map the surface of the bed. The g29 could be within bed.g and called as part of G32 (which just calls bed.g) or you could have it as a separate command in the slicer start gcode. Up to you. But it is important to correct for tilt before doing the mesh compensation.

Phaedrux

More simply:

Slicer start gcode:

G28 ; home the printer
G32 ; level for tilt
G29 ; mesh bed compensation mapping

Rudy2A

@Phaedrux said in ZA and ZB connections ?:

Vous pouvez tout mettre dans votre gcode slicer si vous voulez qu'il s'exécute à chaque fois avant l'impression.
Vous pouvez d'abord utiliser G32 pour l'inclinaison de mise à niveau, puis faire un g29 pour cartographier la surface du lit. Le g29 peut être dans bed.g et appelé dans le cadre de G32 (qui appelle simplement bed.g) ou vous pouvez l'avoir comme une commande distincte dans le slicer start gcode. Dépend de vous. Mais il est important de corriger l'inclinaison avant de faire la compensation de maillage.

Thank you, quick and precise !!!

This forum is like Duet material, that is to say of quality !!!

dc42

@Veti said in ZA and ZB connections ?:

if you run G32 then you need to run a G29 and not a G29 S1.

It's quite in order to run G32 to correct for loss of sync of the Z motors, followed by G29 S1 to load a height map to compensate for gantry sag and any undulations in the bed surface.

Rudy2A

Happy New Year everyone !

I spoke too quickly ... I realized that when I wanted to print large pieces the leveling of the bed did not work finally!

While searching the forum, I found a case very close to mine, but unfortunately that has apparently not been resolved!

https://forum.duet3d.com/topic/725/still-having-problems-with-bed-compensation-with-the-dc42-probe?_=1578077431668

However, I would point out that before my mini IR probe, I had a BLTouch and the problem was the same!

Thank you.

dc42

@Rudy2A said in ZA and ZB connections ?:

I spoke too quickly ... I realized that when I wanted to print large pieces the leveling of the bed did not work finally!

Are you now using G32 to level the two sides of the bed, with the two Z motors connected to separate drivers? If so, after running G32, do you then get a level height map if you run G29 S0 ?

Rudy2A

@dc42 said in ZA and ZB connections ?:

Utilisez-vous maintenant G32 pour niveler les deux côtés du lit, avec les deux moteurs Z connectés à des pilotes séparés? Si oui, après avoir exécuté G32, obtenez-vous une carte de hauteur de niveau si vous exécutez G29 S0?

Need details ...

Capture d’écran 2020-01-04 à 23.37.52.png

When I look at my height map, I see that the corner in front on the left (near the arrows XYZ) is too high! So, if I understood correctly, I must lower my bed on this side using the adjusting screw. However if I look at my test print which is in the same place, the deposit of the PLA is too high and does not really stick to 100% on my bed, which could indicate that I should assemble my bed!
What does the grid (reference model) represent perfectly straight on my height map and what does the green part (for me) represent?

Rudy2A

@dc42 said in ZA and ZB connections ?:

Are you now using G32 to level the two sides of the bed, with the two Z motors connected to separate drivers? If so, after running G32, do you then get a level height map if you run G29 S0 ?

Yes absolutely, I use the two separate Z pilots ... G32 then G29 ...

But the problem is that, even if I adjust my bed in any way after doing G32 and G29, the result remains the same! It is as if the correction of my bed keeps in mind the error of the departure! Difficult to explain ! But, I find myself after the correction with the same faults (in the same place as at the start) without any correction having been made and yet I see perfectly moving the Z differently.

Phaedrux

@Rudy2A your mesh would benefit from more points. It's fairly sparse.

Rudy2A

@Phaedrux said in ZA and ZB connections ?:

votre maillage bénéficierait de plus de points. C'est assez clairsemé.

For the sake of understanding, I prefer to use the P of M557 than S
M557 X11: 250 Y11: 252 P4
What would be the P value to make it more meaningful?

Rudy2A

@Rudy2A said in ZA and ZB connections ?:

votre maillage bénéficierait de plus de points. C'est assez clairsemé.

Par souci de compréhension, je préfère utiliser le P de M557 que S
M557 X11: 250 Y11: 252 P4
Quelle serait la valeur P pour la rendre plus significative?

My bed is 300X300

Phaedrux

Try double?

Rudy2A

@Phaedrux said in ZA and ZB connections ?:

Essayez double?

Here, I get this result from M557 P4 to P8 ...

Capture d’écran 2020-01-05 à 00.52.12.png

The worst part is that by looking for solutions to my problem on the forum, I found quite a few cases similar to mine, but each time, the cases were not resolved or were not commented on final solution, it's a shame!

Rudy2A

As I said a little higher ... No matter the result of my height map by making a G29S0! My first layer does not receive any correction, the impression always remains identical in all the tests (and yet the height maps are never identical) ... same defect in the same place, it is frankly annoying not to understand!