Ah. Thanks. I drilled it out and helicoiled it tonight, looks good, but who knows what effect I have had on the heat transfer portion. Fits nice and tight though. Will test it out this weekend and hope for the best.
If I didn't have about 30 rolls of unopened 3mm filament I'd just switch to 1.75 
It looks like one is a 3mm variant while the other is a 1.75
Yep, that's sadly the problem. Didn't realize the 3mm version is thinner than the 1.75mm one. Really can't see why it'd be like that, but it's true. Looks like 3mm is a M6 thread and 1.75mm is a M7 thread.
I'm going to try boring out the heatsink and putting in 6mm helicoils to see how that works, as there's no other option for those of us wanting to use 3mm filament.
Other thing I though of would be boring out a 1.75mm heatbreak, or cutting off the top of a groovemount and using a die to put on M12 threads.
I wanted to update this to say that the diameter of the volcano heatsink hole and the diameter of the one provided in the PCB kit are NOT the same. My volcano heat break does NOT work (heatbreak is it's too thin). I'd say it's at least 1-2mm off.
Yep, still doing it. Peak valley peak valley, alternates every other sample, even with 20mm spacing.
Rerunning that corner now: M557
Grid: X-150.0:0.0, Y-150.0:0.0, radius 150.0, spacing 10.0, 256 points
And exactly the same thing. High along rows of X, then low along a row of X, then high, etc.
Is it possible there's something mechanically causing it to be low when it's moving one way and high when it's moving the other? That's the only thing I can think of.
By the way, here's what a large square looks like (first layer) WITHOUT mesh leveling - prints pretty good, I'm just trying to get rid of the lumps. Definitely no peak/valley surface.
It's aluminum plate with black spraypainted PEI glued on top with the 3M tape. Let me run it again with 20mm spacing and see what happens…
It's one of your mini IR sensor boards. The probe works well for autoleveling - haven't had any issues there. Also, the three peaks in the graph really are there (there's three bumps in the surface of the print bed). But the alternating portion in that are isn't real, at least as far as I can feel and see.
Hello,
I'm having a really hard time getting the mesh leveling to do something reasonable on my printer. I get a very odd alternating high/low pattern in the Y axis as it probes. Here's the picture:
And my heightmap file:
Any thoughts on what might be causing this odd behavior?
Found a bug with the DWC - when I enter in my webcam URL for the "Webcam Surveillance" preview, only every other "refresh" displays an image. For example, if I say update every 10 seconds, for 10 seconds a picture is displayed, then for ten seconds a broken image is displayed, then 10 seconds of a new correct image, then 10 seconds of a broken image…. etc. By broken image I mean an invalid JPEG, the browser won't display it.
M92 X800 Y800 Z800 ; Set axis steps/mm
Seems really high. Shouldn't it be more like 160 for your setup?
DC42, on my delta I don't use any XY offset for your IR probe when running G30 autocalibration and it works fine. When I run G29 grid levelling after, should I have entered an XY offset via G31 first or not? My probe is offset about -40mm in the Y direction.
Just changing to the correct steps/mm fixed it. I didn't have to do anything with H values as my machine was pretty structurally accurate, and I didn't have any noticible effector tilt. It's printing pretty well without me doing any additional tweaking.
When I thought about it some more it made sense - if the carriages aren't where they're supposed to be due to the wrong steps/mm, there will be more or less travel for each carriage required to lower the probe down to the point where it triggers. I stumbled onto it because I was checking everything to do with how I set up the stepper drivers - 80 steps/mm was the default and I just never changed it. I used the stepper calculator here: http://prusaprinters.org/calculator/ and put in my belt (GT2) and 16 tooth pulley, it said 100, I swapped that into my config file, and it now probes correctly. Double check your pulley and belt info with that calculator - it might be your issue too.
I fixed it!
Wow. I feel dumb. But the root cause was the wrong steps/mm in the config.g file - I had it set to 80 vice 100. Don't know why I didn't think of that earlier. Now it converges to .019 with NO h offsets. I knew my mechanics weren't that bad
What I don't understand is the huge difference between P0,2,4 and P1,3,5. I'm using 1.8 degree steppers, is there some chance that it's causing the problem by not having fine enough control?
Ok, I probed every point exactly as described above. Center was 2.07, the rest are below:
G30 P0 X0.00 Y150.00 Z-99999 H0 ;Trigger height 2.1
G30 P1 X129.90 Y75.00 Z-99999 H0 ; trigger height 2.18
G30 P2 X129.90 Y-75.00 Z-99999 H0 ; trigger height 2.16
G30 P3 X0.00 Y-150.00 Z-99999 H0 ; trigger height 2.05
G30 P4 X-129.90 Y-75.00 Z-99999 H0 ; trigger height 2.16
G30 P5 X-129.90 Y75.00 Z-99999 H0 ; trigger height 2.12
G30 P6 X0.00 Y75.00 Z-99999 H0 ; th 2.14
G30 P7 X64.95 Y37.50 Z-99999 H0 ; th 2.06
G30 P8 X64.95 Y-37.50 Z-99999 H0 ; th 2.18
G30 P9 X0.00 Y-75.00 Z-99999 H0 ; th 2.10
G30 P10 X-64.95 Y-37.50 Z-99999 H0 ; th 2.12
G30 P11 X-64.95 Y37.50 Z-99999 H0 ; th 2.08
G30 P15 X0 Y0 Z-99999 S-1 ; th 2.07 in center
I updated bed.g with H to be the read off value minus the 0,0 trigger height (2.07). So my file looks like this:
G30 P0 X0.00 Y150.00 Z-99999 H.03
G30 P1 X129.90 Y75.00 Z-99999 H.11
G30 P2 X129.90 Y-75.00 Z-99999 H.09
G30 P3 X0.00 Y-150.00 Z-99999 H-.02
G30 P4 X-129.90 Y-75.00 Z-99999 H.09
G30 P5 X-129.90 Y75.00 Z-99999 H.05
G30 P6 X0.00 Y75.00 Z-99999 H.07
G30 P7 X64.95 Y37.50 Z-99999 H-.01
G30 P8 X64.95 Y-37.50 Z-99999 H.11
G30 P9 X0.00 Y-75.00 Z-99999 H.03
G30 P10 X-64.95 Y-37.50 Z-99999 H.05
G30 P11 X-64.95 Y37.50 Z-99999 H.01
G30 P12 X0 Y0 Z-99999 S6
Then I ran autocal again, updated config.g, etc. Now when I run my bed test file with S-1, I get this:
Bed probe heights: 0.699 -0.671 0.703 -0.643 0.694 -0.700 0.104 -0.015 0.052 -0.082 0.124 -0.039, mean 0.019, deviation from mean 0.487
It's almost the same as before.
I still haven't really been able to get to the bottom of this. There is almost no effector tilt (I checked using a 66mm bullseye level after I removed the nozzle).
I have the exact same height reading at the point nearest each tower (all three towers read the same).
I have the exact same height reading at the points furthest along the perimeter equally distant from the tower (all three read the same).
The difference between the three points underneath the towers and the three points midway along the perimeter between each tower is almost 1.5mm.
I'll run it that way and compare in a day or two… and then I'm going to reprint the vertexes and reassemble. About the only thing left I haven't tried. I stuck one of those tiny spirit bullseye levels on the effector, and while it's not perfect side to side, it's really close (bubble stays in the center circle, moves a tiiiiny bit). I don't think effector tilt accounts for all of the weirdness.
I'm using your mini IR probe, and it's about 10mm or so from the nozzle. I had it further away (around 30mm), but the result didn't change much at all when I moved it closer in. My workflow was to set initial trigger height (2.22mm is what it came out to), then run autocalibration a few times. I got it to converge to about .45. Then I updated config.g, then made a duplicate of bed.g but changed the last command to S-1 and read off all the probe trigger heights - that's what I got all those H values from above. Tried feeding those values in turn back into bed.g, which made it converge to almost zero, but the actual result isn't "real" (that's what I mean by cheating with the H values). I'll go back and manually measure trigger height at each point and see if I get something different, if that would help. I've tried two different bed surfaces and get pretty much the same thing (one straight aluminum tooling plate, and another spraypainted black PEI surface).
I've been playing with a large delta and trying to get autocalibrate to work for the last couple of weeks. No matter what I do, it almost always converges to about 0.4, which is terrible. I've checked all the obvious things (rods are perfectly the same length, parallel from effector to carriage, not rotated, etc), but the issue persists. I am starting to suspect there is a serious frame geometry issue somewhere that autocalibrate can't figure out, or that my bed is physically not square to the frame. I made a bed check probe file to see what the probe offsets were at various points around the bed (215mm radius) and here's what I got for offsets (listedin the H values below). Of course, feeding in these H values makes it converge perfectly, but that's cheating and doesn't actually make anything level. I checked to see if there was something on the surface of my print bed that would make the probe return strange values, but that wasn't it either. Any thoughts or pattern to this anyone can see?
G30 P0 X0.00 Y150.00 Z-99999 H.837
G30 P1 X75.00 Y129.90 Z-99999 H-.052
G30 P2 X129.90 Y75.00 Z-99999 H-.712
G30 P3 X150.00 Y0.00 Z-99999 H-.122
G30 P4 X129.90 Y-75.00 Z-99999 H.685
G30 P5 X75.00 Y-129.90 Z-99999 H.125
G30 P6 X0.00 Y-150.00 Z-99999 H-.774
G30 P7 X-75.00 Y-129.90 Z-99999 H.025
G30 P8 X-129.90 Y-75.00 Z-99999 H.621
G30 P9 X-150.00 Y-0.00 Z-99999 H-.037
G30 P10 X-129.90 Y75.00 Z-99999 H-.742
G30 P11 X-75.00 Y129.90 Z-99999 H.002
G30 P12 X0.00 Y75.00 Z-99999 H.2
G30 P13 X64.95 Y-37.50 Z-99999 H.085
G30 P14 X-64.95 Y-37.50 Z-99999 H.114
G30 P15 X0 Y0 Z-99999 H-.303 S6