I think I would like to give some cudos to all the people bending over backwards to help abstracktlighting. You are showing an amazing amount of patience !

I think you guys all swallowed some happy pills ....
While I like my Duet 2 very much, I have run across many things it can't do (yet). Some things are exotic but other things not so much (like being able to do basic decision logic in a macro).
Apparently logic is one of the new things in the new version of the software and I am looking forward to the day when I upgrade but the point is that it is not the ultimate do everything setup. It can't be, there is no such thing.

Sticking my head out ever so carefully ....

I have done two prints with a pressure advance of 0.4 - both failed at the teeth. The failure is slightly different in that the net extrusion is positive but it is well below what is required for the teeth to be printed (virtual zero extrusion). The counter for the extruder 'seems' to report correct amounts but what I see as far as the extruder turning is concerned it is quite a bit short of what the extruder counter reports. The result is that the teeth do not print because there is not enough filament.
I have printed one print so far with the pressure advance turned off and the teeth printed just fine (although not as nice as I had hoped for).
I am in the process of printing the second model without pressure advance.

So, it would appear that my initial issue was valid - pressure advance causes extrusion issues.

I will attach the corrected gcode file as well as the .3mf file.

Yes, I am using absolute extrusion. I have not tried relative extrusion because I do not know enough about how to set that up yet.
M122 reports no hiccups but this is after I started the new print so I am not sure if the hiccups number is correct.0_1566272573372_CFFFP_reduced hirth.gcode [0_1566272599436_CFFFP_reduced hirth.3mf](Uploading 100%)

yes and none

Another vote for the PA-09. Unfortunately it took me a while before I realized that the cheap 'crimps everything under the sun' tools crimp nothing satisfactorily!

Well there is your problem ... you SHOULD have lubed the power supply ! The electrons are getting stuck in there because of too much friction !

Just a slight update - it seems that the Duet web interface might reproduce the last system error. I received a 'filament out' error message instead of the 'heater fault' error message today.

@Ghord said in Duet 2 wifi wiring connections to CR-10 questions:

1. do the original connectors for the cr-10 stepper motors fit the duet board, if not is there a pin out diagram that anyone has that can assist me to rewire a new connector, bearing in mind the wiring from the original stepper is all black.

No, the connectors are different but the DUet comes with a full set of shells and pins. YOu will need a proper crimper. The wiring is pretty straight forward - look at https://duet3d.dozuki.com/Wiki/Duet_Wiring_Diagrams for the Duet pinout. I am sure there is a similar pinout available on the internet for the CR10 (there are a number of different boards in the CR-10)
Having said that, it is really straight forward even if you didn't have the CR10 board present. Just look at where the wires are going. A multi meter is a great help to check which wire goes with which.

1. the duet board calls for a 3 pin connector for the axis end stop switches but the cr-10 is only 2 wire, again can anyone provide guidance on this.

The CR10 uses a switch that connects the two wires together.
This is the bible: https://duet3d.dozuki.com/Wiki/Connecting_endstop_switches
The third wire is 3.3V for any end stop that requires power. It is not used for the CR10. Connect the end stop switch to the ground line through the micro switch.

1. I am going to use the PSU that came with the CR-10, I assume the small control board that is mounted to the back of the case is no longer required for the bed heater and I can wire the bed directly from the board.

Yes

@dc42 said in Mesh map - how is it applied?:

Would a gantry height equalization not invalidate any mesh map?

If the mesh map was generated when the gantry height was equalised, then no. Bear in mind that you may need to tun the equalisation sequence more than once to get them well-equalised, depending on your mechanics. You can do multiple probe/equalisation cycles in your bed.g file if necessary.

My z zero is done with a G30 command using a BLTouch. The gantry equalization results in
:
Leadscrew adjustments made: -0.011 0.080, points used 2, deviation before 0.051 after 0.000

It seems to say that things are adjusted but when I run the equalization again I get:

Leadscrew adjustments made: -0.013 0.012, points used 2, deviation before 0.011 after 0.000

Third run:
Leadscrew adjustments made: -0.011 0.005, points used 2, deviation before 0.008 after 0.000

Fourth run:

Leadscrew adjustments made: -0.000 -0.007, points used 2, deviation before 0.005 after 0.000

Further attemps seem to vary around the same deviation with slight changes due to probing errors.

So when it says 'deviation after 0.000' is it not equalized ?

So let's say I am now equalized and I now run a mesh. If I now cycle power, am I correct in thinking that z positions might have changed but if I run multiple equalization and get close enough then I now have a valid mesh again ?
Good point about making the z zero point one of the mesh probing points but with a full probing taking 2 hours (!!!) I like to sneak up to the full mesh over several different resolution values. Would it make sense to probe z zero as part of the mesh routine and adjust the probing point at that stage to be over a measuring point? I would return the probing point to whatever was defined in config.g after the mesh was generated. How does this affect further z zero probing cycles when the probe is not over a mesh point ?

Do I need to be over a mesh point for the equalization procedure ?

Have you looked at the voltage level when you switch on the bed heat ? COuld it be that you are running out of electrons ?

Thank you for your thought but no. It is an aluminum bed plate with a glass sheet on top and a 120V AC bed heater underneath.

Ah, that makes sense when I think about it ...... any other thoughts on the pattern ?

Just curious if anyone has a thought about what might cause these mysterious patterns on my bed map.
Note that the scanning happens along the x axis but the pattern is along the y axis.
Hardware is a CR10 S5, there are two y rails and two y carriages.
My first guess would be a sloppy rail on the right side but wouldn't 'floppy' also imply some variation in the pattern?
The pattern is consistent with any number of probe points. The uploaded map has 441 points.
Thoughts ?
I am assuming the dip in the middle is gantry sag because of the size of the bed (500*500) but interestingly the sag is quite a bit off center.
I have not yet tried to rotate the glass plate 90 degrees ut that will be my next step.

Might help to post your general location if you are interest in one on one help.

If you are looking for a 'connector kit', that is available from some retailers.

It's a standard Creality CR10 style printer. Bed movement is Y axis, the printhead travels on a gantry which is x and the gantry travels up/down making it the z axis.
Just do a search for CR10 ... I would say that this arrangement of movements comprises the vast majority of printers out there as it (probably) the least expensive way to build a printer.

@fcwilt said in Mesh map - how is it applied?:

@jens55 said in Mesh map - how is it applied?:

Um .... not in my way of understanding

As the nozzle moves away from the bed does the Z position increase?

CR10, cartesian, bed height is stationary and nozzle moves up and down.
If the nozzle moves up then z goes up. As the nozzle moves down, z goes down. If the nozzle were to go below z=0 then z would go even lower ie below zero.

@fcwilt said in Mesh map - how is it applied?:

Hi,

If Z=0 is your minimum then positions below the nozzle would be greater than at the tip of the nozzle, correct?

Um .... not in my way of understanding

In any case your probe is defined with a Z offset value and that is taken into account when probing. So any negative values are not due to that offset but to other factors.

And as I understand it the Z=0 limit is applied after compensation.

Ahh, that sounds like I am worried for nothing .... thank you for clarifying!

What about the nozzle to bed distance for the first layer ?
When you print with a brim, have you measured the thickness of the brim at multiple points all around the model ? If you are printing with a first layer height of 0.2 mm then the brim (which is 1 layer if you are using the Cura slicer) should be less than 0.2mm. That is your squish.
If you are using a 0.4 mm nozzle, is you trace width at least 0.4 mm? What does the surface of your print look like - does it appear you have full surface coverage with a reasonably smooth surface finish ?
There are many factors that affect adhesion so it is quite difficult for me to cover everything that could possibly go wrong.
With the print finished and the bed still at operating temperature, can you remove the print (careful, you don't want to damage your print surface!). If the print pops off with a little hand pressure then adhesion is not good enough.
Did you clean the print surface as per manufacturer suggestion before printing ?
Does the manufacturer recommend adhesion improvers such as glue, hairspray or what-not ?

Assuming your temperature is measured ok, then 70 'should' be ok but I print PLA at a bed temperature of 85 for the first layer and 75 thereafter. Unfortunately I do not know anything about the bed surface that you are using so can't really advise more. All I can say is that this is VERY common and you should find many suggestions when you do an internet search.
Generally what you see is caused by poor adhesion of the first layer.
What is your layer height? What is the gap between nozzle and print bed? What is your extruder temperature ?
Do you see this fault at only one location, multiple or all ?