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

    Wavy surface problem.

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved
    Duet Hardware and wiring
    10
    64
    4.7k
    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.
    • Luke'sLaboratoryundefined
      Luke'sLaboratory @Egon.Net
      last edited by

      @egon-net

      20201016_000159.jpg 20201015_204348.jpg

      Suprisingly, yes!

      I forget what the numbers were for feeds+speeds, but it made a considerable improvment for $12

      Luke
      http://lukeslab.online

      Egon.Netundefined gloomyandyundefined Duckersundefined 3 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • Egon.Netundefined
        Egon.Net @Luke'sLaboratory
        last edited by

        @luke-slaboratory said in Wavy surface problem.:

        @egon-net

        20201016_000159.jpg 20201015_204348.jpg

        Suprisingly, yes!

        I forget what the numbers were for feeds+speeds, but it made a considerable improvment for $12

        Holy cow! What a difference!

        I already have installed an accelerometer, just waiting for the montion planner overhaul with imput shaping in reprapfirmware...

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • gloomyandyundefined
          gloomyandy @Luke'sLaboratory
          last edited by

          @luke-slaboratory So is that improvement from adding the extra mass to the printer?

          Luke'sLaboratoryundefined 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • Luke'sLaboratoryundefined
            Luke'sLaboratory @gloomyandy
            last edited by

            @gloomyandy

            Yessir! Both pictures were me trying to find the worst light where I was, but I fully admit that they're not 1:1 comparative since they weren't taken in the same spot.

            Luke
            http://lukeslab.online

            gloomyandyundefined 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • gloomyandyundefined
              gloomyandy @Luke'sLaboratory
              last edited by

              @luke-slaboratory That's interesting though. Complex things these printers!

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • Hiroakiundefined
                Hiroaki @tpra
                last edited by

                @tpra Hello. That print result is excellent ! Can you show me a photo how your printer is constructed?

                tpraundefined 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • CCS86undefined
                  CCS86 @Egon.Net
                  last edited by

                  @egon-net said in Wavy surface problem.:

                  @tpra said in Wavy surface problem.:

                  @egon-net same quality at low speed. even better actually.
                  if i don't go faster with rrf it's because it produces too much ghosting but that's another story 🙂
                  anyway klipper produces the same quality from 40 to 130.

                  Can you test Klipper without input shaper? I wonder how much of the quality increase is beacuse of it...

                  I am very curious to see this as well!

                  Input shaper benefits are pretty well established at this point, and I am anxiously awaiting the feature to roll out for RRF (hopefully supporting my Maestro board). But, I have had a suspicion that something in RRF is driving the steppers in a way that sets up a resonance.

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                  • tpraundefined
                    tpra @Hiroaki
                    last edited by

                    @hiroaki said in Wavy surface problem.:

                    @tpra Hello. That print result is excellent ! Can you show me a photo how your printer is constructed?

                    Hello, nothing crazy, it's a simple cartesian.
                    You can find pictures here : https://forum.duet3d.com/topic/21792/my-latest-duet-cartesian-printer
                    The Z drive has been completly modified since the pictures so it's closer to the one i designed on the funX4. Imho the printer would benefit a lot stronger and heavier frame. That"s why the next one will be a mix of the FunX4 Z and frame + RatRig's vcore3 XY carriage / EVA extruder holder.

                    @ccs86 said in Wavy surface problem.:

                    I am very curious to see this as well!

                    Input shaper benefits are pretty well established at this point, and I am anxiously awaiting the feature to roll out for RRF (hopefully supporting my Maestro board). But, I have had a suspicion that something in RRF is driving the steppers in a way that sets up a resonance.

                    Sorry it took time, i'm printing a no-input-shaper test with the exact same gcode used on the right picture of my comparison, will post results when i'm back at noon.
                    Tbh i don't think it has anything to do with input shaper. I also have the exact same suspicion as you about "something in RRF is driving the steppers in a way that sets up a resonance".

                    You know what makes me crazy with this ? the problem exists, and it's ignored. I don't even understand that seeing the comparison i posted above, no dev wondered or even asked me more informations.
                    I mean, it's not like if a guy who just got its first printer said "it's it does not work why???".
                    I thought the print quality spoke for itself. Clearly not. So why bother ? 🙂

                    CCS86undefined 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                    • CCS86undefined
                      CCS86 @tpra
                      last edited by CCS86

                      @tpra

                      I don't think it's a case of dev's ignoring an issue, so much as it is a slippery issue, which can be impacted/created by a multitude of variables, that nobody has truly nailed down to an actual issue within RRF.

                      I think you are in the best position ever to truly shine light on this, while ruling out any mechanical issues. An identical print, on the same machine & electronics, between RRF and Klipper (sans input shaper), should really get us closer to the core.

                      This is a thread I posted with similar complaints (periodic XY deviation). I never really found a solution, so much as I found ways to mitigate the issue (very high resolution STLs, very small gcode line segments, slower print speed). https://forum.duet3d.com/topic/21825/duet-maestro-struggling-to-produce-smooth-curves/33

                      Luke'sLaboratoryundefined 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                      • Luke'sLaboratoryundefined
                        Luke'sLaboratory @CCS86
                        last edited by

                        @ccs86 said in Wavy surface problem.:

                        Klipper

                        That's my plan for 2 weeks from now - I have a fast corexy that runs klipper on mini5+, and i'll be flopping between klipper and RRF to watch how it changes

                        Luke
                        http://lukeslab.online

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 3
                        • Duckersundefined
                          Duckers @Luke'sLaboratory
                          last edited by

                          @Luke-sLaboratory I gotta ask, sorry for replying to last year, but i face this problem. Can i ask if you use 2209 stepper drivers/interpolation with your steppers? Or are these stock?

                          Luke'sLaboratoryundefined 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • Luke'sLaboratoryundefined
                            Luke'sLaboratory @Duckers
                            last edited by

                            @Duckers Oh wow, been a long while!

                            I never got around to this experiment - its gotten to the point where I've switched from a duet mini5+ on klipper to a duet 6hc on klipper - the mini5+ used 2209's, and didn't really notice any changes between the mini and the 6hc, other than speed!

                            I don't use interpolation on either - experiments with encoders revealed small issues with positioning while using interpolation, but these are also very small!

                            Luke
                            http://lukeslab.online

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