SOLVED Difference between M28 and manual upload of Gcode

JBisc

Hey evrybody

I am currently facing the problem, that there is a different behaviour by using M28 or using manually upload of a Gcode file over Duet Web Control

if I use M28 (by M28 "0:/gcodes/name.gc")), some commands of my uploaded file are deleted:

for example all command G4 P100 are deleted.

If I am using the some file and manually upload it, it does not happen.

Do you guys habe any idea? I am running out of ideas.

Newest firmware used.

Phaedrux

@lepetitmort said in Difference between M28 and manual upload of Gcode:

Newest firmware used.

Please be specific. What version of firmware and DWC are you using. And what board?

JBisc

@Phaedrux said in Difference between M28 and manual upload of Gcode:

rmware and DWC are you using. And what board?

Duet Web Control 2.0.7
Duet 3 Main Board 6HC
FIRMWARE_NAME: RepRapFirmware for Duet 3 MB6HC v0.6 or 1.0 FIRMWARE_VERSION: 3.0 ELECTRONICS: Duet 3 MB6HC FIRMWARE_DATE: 2020-01-03b3

Phaedrux

Thanks, that's helpful. I'm not sure if this is intended/expected or not. That will be for @dc42

dc42

Uploading files using M28 should not remove any command lines. However, AFAIR it does remove comments. Are you certain that your G4 lines are not commented out with a semicolon at the start?

JBisc

Yes I am sure that nothing is commeted out.

Here is an example:

If i send the following gcode


M106 S1.0

G4 P25

;M106 S1.0
M106 S0.0
M106 S1.0
M106 S255
M106 S1.0

G00 Z0.000000
G00 X105.324704 Y211.976535
M106 S1.0
G01 Z0.000000 F100.0(Penetrate)

the final file on the duet looks like

G4 P25
;M106 S1.0
G0 Z0.000000
G0 X105.324704 Y211.976535
G1 Z0.000000 F100.0;Penetrate

I am not understanding what is happening here.

dc42

Are you running your Duet 3 in standalone mode or with an attached RPi?

JBisc

@dc42 Attached RPI on which a python script sends the commands.

dc42

@lepetitmort said in Difference between M28 and manual upload of Gcode:

@dc42 Attached RPI on which a python script sends the commands.

I'll ask @chrishamm to take a look at this.

JBisc

@dc42 Great thanks a lot!

chrishamm

Thanks for reporting this, I've got a fix ready that will be published as part of DSF 1.3.2.