Removal of support for 3-, 4- and 5-point G32 bed compensation


  • administrators

    Currently, RepRapFirmware supports two types of bed compensation:

    • Mesh bed compensation (G29)
    • Legacy 3-, 4- and 5-point bed compensation using G32 and a bed.g file.

    I propose to remove support for legacy G32 bed compensation in a future firmware release. The G32 command and bed.g file would then be used exclusively for the following functions:

    • Auto calibration of delta printers, and perhaps other printer architectures in future
    • Bed levelling using multiple independent Z leadscrews
    • Bed levelling using manual bed levelling screws

    The only command for probing to do bed compensation would be G29. Those currently using legacy 4-point bed compensation could switch to 2x2 G29 mesh bed compensation, provided the probing points are arranged in a square and no trigger height corrections are needed (H parameter in the G30 commands). Those using 5-point compensation could switch to a 3x3 G29 mesh, again assuming that no trigger height corrections are needed.

    Are there any users reading this using legacy G32 bed compensation, who would not be able to change to G29 mesh bed compensation?



  • I'm good with that.



  • Makes sense to me. There is less room for confusion if there is one way and one way only to perform each task.

    Frederick



  • I think that most people currently setting up G32 and a bed.g file are only doing it because that's the only way they're familiar with even though G29 does what they want and more. Then they end up trying to use both which doesn't work.

    Woukd G32 be completely depricated? Or would it still call bed.g? It's a rather large change that people will obviously find annoying. But such is the way of progress. 😉



  • I use g32 only for the purposed functions (dual lead screws alignment and manual bed leveling) so it is ok for me.



  • How do you do the physical bed levelling without G32 & bedg.g? I seem to remember that automatic correction of a three motor z-axis relied on probe points as close as possible to the screws?

    Please can this be updated to explain how to do it without G32 and bed.g:

    https://duet3d.dozuki.com/Wiki/Bed_levelling_using_multiple_independent_Z_motors



  • @doctrucker said in Removal of support for 3-, 4- and 5-point G32 bed compensation:

    How do you do the physical bed levelling without G32 & bedg.g? I seem to remember that automatic correction of a three motor z-axis relied on probe points as close as possible to the screws?

    Please can this be updated to explain how to do it without G32 and bed.g:

    https://duet3d.dozuki.com/Wiki/Bed_levelling_using_multiple_independent_Z_motors

    As far as I understand, G32 will still be there for use with bed.g, but only for use with Physcial bed leveling just like you ask. He want's to remove some old leagacy bed compensation from G32 (which is also in G29)

    For a guide how to use G32 with 3 lead screws, see the last part of this: https://betrue3d.dk/bltouch-on-duet-wifi-configuratio-and-usage/



  • @martin1454 Yes, miss read of the original post by me. Thanks.



  • Please don't do this! I currently built a big update on my cartesian and corexy to calibrate my 2 leadscrews before running a G29. (and also some users in the german Facebook group are going to rebuild it) https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:3181212
    The G32 command is perfect! Don't want to miss it



  • @kuhnikuehnast
    this will still work:
    "............
    Bed levelling using multiple independent Z leadscrews
    Bed levelling using manual bed levelling screws
    .................."



  • good idea, the whole concept with borh G32 and G29 was a bit confusing


  • administrators

    One additional item that will still be supported is using bed.g to test Z probe repeatability, using a series of G30 commands with a S-1 parameter on the last one.



  • As it stands, the proposed functions are exactly what I use G32 for, ie: adjusting multiple Z lead screws.

    Z probe testing is something that I should probably do, too.


 

Looks like your connection to Duet3D was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.