Have (4) paired with a Duet 3 6hc running on a toolchanger. I’m a little worried about heat with the board being covered but a o far no real issues and on board temps stay under 60C. My cover is as follows…
Best posts made by edsped
-
RE: Fly-RRF-36 RP2040 Based CAN-FD Toolboard
-
RE: Duet3D announces new tool board at FormNext
@Surgikill said in Duet3D announces new tool board at FormNext:
@fcwilt said in Duet3D announces new tool board at FormNext:
@Herve_Smith
You consider the prices to be an issue?
The money I spend on hardware is dwarfed by the money I spend on filament.
Frederick
Toolboards are primarily made for tool changer setups, so multiply your cost difference by the number of toolheads. I'm currently building a tool changer, and each toolhead is going to run me close to $400. At some point, cost becomes a favor. When my toolhead alone is over double the cost of an ender 3 you have to take a step back and reevaluate.
I run RRF-36's on my toolchanger and wish I set it up that way sooner.
-
RE: 3.5.0rc1 Input Shaping Layer Shifts not addressed in 3.5.0rc2
@edsped I'll try lowering the L value to the default .25 and test again but it may take a couple of hours.
-
RE: Fly-RRF-36 RP2040 Based CAN-FD Toolboard
As an aside, I pulled the cover off after a 2 1/2 hour print last night and did the finger test for temps and nothing was above luke warm. I know it's not very scientific but it helped with some of my heat concerns.
Latest posts made by edsped
-
RE: Duet 2 Ethernet disconnect when printing and paneldue connected
@dc42 Has there been any more work on this? I switched from a 6HC w/SBC to 6HC standalone and sure enough the disconnects are back. Unlike using the built in WiFi on the Duet 2 that was giving me disconnects I have the 6HC connected to a Trendnet AC1200 Wireless bridge via ethernet. The big difference between SBC and non SBC is that the PanelDue reports all activity in the console in standalone mode and reported nothing in SBC mode.
-
RE: 3.5.0rc1 Input Shaping Layer Shifts not addressed in 3.5.0rc2
@gloomyandy said in 3.5.0rc1 Input Shaping Layer Shifts not addressed in 3.5.0rc2:
@edsped Did you specify an L value in your RC1 settings? If so what was it? There have not been a lot of changes to IS since RC1 so it is interesting that you are having issues.
Reverting to default for L value solved it. Thank you!
-
RE: 3.5.0rc1 Input Shaping Layer Shifts not addressed in 3.5.0rc2
@edsped I'll try lowering the L value to the default .25 and test again but it may take a couple of hours.
-
RE: 3.5.0rc1 Input Shaping Layer Shifts not addressed in 3.5.0rc2
@gloomyandy I did not, was getting weird slowdowns in small areas and a little digging around led me to the L value.
-
RE: 3.5.0rc1 Input Shaping Layer Shifts not addressed in 3.5.0rc2
@gloomyandy said in 3.5.0rc1 Input Shaping Layer Shifts not addressed in 3.5.0rc2:
@edsped What are your M593 settings?
M593 P"ZVDDD" F60 L0.8 S0
I changed the L value because lower values cause the print head to slow down quite a bit at start and stop areas during infill.
-
RE: 3.5.0rc1 Input Shaping Layer Shifts not addressed in 3.5.0rc2
@dc42 said in 3.5.0rc1 Input Shaping Layer Shifts not addressed in 3.5.0rc2:
@tas with input shaping enabled, do the motors sound normal? I get a slight clunking sound when some types of IS are enabled on one of my machines. However, as the IS code is being rewritten I decided not to investigate this before releasing RC2.
You might like to run M122 after doing one of these prints. It has a new field that lists the maximum number of overdue steps encountered, and that may be related.
With RC2 I get clunking bad enough that it causes layer shifts. I would get slight clunks on RC1 but RC2 is a whole other level... I'm to the point that I'm starting to try to figure out how to get back to RC1 with SBC. I can't downgrade to stable because I'm running RRF-36's. ZVD seems to be the mildest for me and ZVDDD is just plain awful.
-
RE: Duet 3 Scanning Z probe
What's the maximum distance the probe can be from the bed and still be effective? I need at least 4mm preferably more for my mount.
-
RE: Issues with pressure advance since RRF 3.4
@Notepad I'll have to dig but my recollections is as low a jerk for X & Y as possible for IS to work properly. That number being somewhere in the neighborhood of 5 - 6 mm/s. I'm trying to follow my academic training and always use units to keep things clear. This was recently posted so I should be able to find a link to the thread when I'm home.
-
RE: Issues with pressure advance since RRF 3.4
@deckingman So if I'm looking at this correctly your settings are counter to the high accel low jerk recommendations for proper
PAinput shaping given elsewhere? I thought, for the CoreXY at least Jerk should have been somewhere around 300 mm/min.