Navigation

    Duet3D Logo

    Duet3D

    • Register
    • Login
    • Search
    • Categories
    • Tags
    • Documentation
    • Order
    1. Home
    2. NeoDue
    • Profile
    • Following 0
    • Followers 0
    • Topics 2
    • Posts 16
    • Best 4
    • Groups 0

    NeoDue

    @NeoDue

    5
    Reputation
    3
    Profile views
    16
    Posts
    0
    Followers
    0
    Following
    Joined Last Online
    Location Germany

    NeoDue Follow

    Best posts made by NeoDue

    • RE: Change max. hotend PWM during heating phase?

      @Phaedrux:
      Thanks again - it works perfectly. I removed the second step however - this is handled by the gcode of the print itself:

      M307 xxxxx ; PID values for quick heating
      G10 P0 S180 ; set temp of tool to 180°C
      M116 ; wait for temp
      M307 yyyyy ; PID values for stable temps during print
      ; final temp is supplied by part gcode


      @dc42:
      sure, I played a lot with autotune but for some reason did not get any satisfying results with the Duet that combined a quick heat-up and a stable print temperature. I do not remember though if I changed D that much - I will try that.

      Interestingly, the autotune of the old Printrboard had yielded a better result, which is why I fell back to setting the PID values with M301 for a while and simply used what the Printrboard autotune had told me on the Duet as well, but I had to resort to setting an M307 setting to define a maximum PWM since the duet does not seem to provide another way to set this - and then overwrite this setting partly with M301. (On the Printrboard I could define the max. PID drive in the firmware eeprom.)
      This did not work perfectly though (unsure why - maybe due to different response times of Duet vs. Printrboard?). But for now and with Phaedrux' trick I finally have a setting I feel comfortable with.

      By the way - thanks a lot for including the german translation I had sent you into the PanelDue firmware 🙂

      posted in Tuning and tweaking
      NeoDue
      NeoDue
    • RE: Firmware bundle 3.2.2 released

      Same here: I upgraded my Duet Wifi (v1.02) from 3.2.0 (my first v3 firmware) to 3.2.2 and the printer got stuck and required additional help to get WiFi running again. I had used the new update procedure for the PanelDue (5" v3.0) just before that, just to mention that in case it helps. SD card seems fine though, if I can trust Windows...

      @dc42 While searching on how to do this, I found your wiki help section "Installing and Updating Firmware" seems a bit outdated. It is still talking about iape4e/iap4s.bin being needed. Thankfully the M997 command complained about the missing Duet2_SDiap... file instead of showing me obscure error codes as some other systems might do.

      (thanks @T3P3Tony for getting my account running again btw, the Akismet spam tool drove me nuts... now I can at least post something again even if it still bugs me now and then...)

      posted in Firmware installation
      NeoDue
      NeoDue
    • Change max. hotend PWM during heating phase?

      Hello together,

      ever since I finally threw out the old Printrboard on my GRR Neo and replaced it with a Duet Wifi (which I should have done much sooner btw...), I have been fussing around with two things:

      • getting the steppers' motion silent (GRR seems to have used some rather weird motors there...) and
      • minimizing the oscillation of the temperature of the E3d lite6 hotend.

      By now it seems I have finally solved both problems - the motor issue thanks to several hints here and thanks to the new firmware (in case someone needs it - "M569 ... T1:1:0.5:6 C65974" yields the best results so far), and the hotend oscillation after dozens of unsuccessful attempts by rather severely decreasing the max PWM value by using the M307 S... parameter, and this brings me to my question:

      By reducing the max. PWM to 0.25, I managed to reduce the temperature swing from ±3...4°C (which was the best I could get out of both automatic as well as manual tweaking PID parameters) to ±0,7...1°C.

      The drawback is that it takes now some 8...10 minutes for the Neo to heat up.

      So here is my question: is it somehow possible to configure the Duet in such a way that you e.g. use a max. PWM of 0.5 for up to 180°C and then go on with a PWM of 0.25?

      (I am aware that I somewhat contradict the idea behind the PID management of the hotend with this question, but as mentioned above I miserably failed getting it to work like that - regardless what I do, PID always either fires too hard when it recognizes a temperature drop or it reacts too slow when temperature is reached)

      Best regards
      Florian

      posted in Tuning and tweaking
      NeoDue
      NeoDue
    • RE: Change max. hotend PWM during heating phase?

      Wow - that went fast. Thanks a lot, I'll try that!

      posted in Tuning and tweaking
      NeoDue
      NeoDue

    Latest posts made by NeoDue

    • RE: Two Precision Piezo boards in parallel on one input possible?

      I think that goes too much offtopic now - I'll send you a PM 🙂

      posted in Third-party add-ons
      NeoDue
      NeoDue
    • RE: Two Precision Piezo boards in parallel on one input possible?

      @arhi said in Two Precision Piezo boards in parallel on one input possible?:

      I do, lot of experience with piezo materials, using them to drive mirrors, etc ... the major issue with drilling is that you usually mess it up and break the piezo element due to the way drill work, if you could punch the hole out it would be much better... cutting it with a pcb cutter or big paper cutter produces very usable parts... major problem with these is that the "coating" you solder on is crap 😞 .. ideally you should not solder but make contact using some springs

      Interesting - I never had a problem with soldering on them. But I never dared to cut them. I'll remember your advice and try when there is a need again 🙂

      I missed multiturn a lot as making piezo trigger just right is super hard with the %$#^$# one used here, and every time you reassemble the head you need to tweak it again (and after few times it is dead) ... soldering smd is simple, I prefer smd to pth as with pth I need to hold part on one side and solder on other, I need to drill the pcb etc etc... too much hassle, smd is super easy (0805 and bigger, I do hate those 0402 and smaller parts 😄 but when you design it yourself you go with 0805 and 1206 and you can solder that easier than pth with just a little bit practice) ... anyhow with jlcpcb being so cheap these days I let them do all the soldering for me 😄 as it is usually cheaper to get soldered board from them than just buying parts locally

      Ah, JLC were the ones I had checked as well some time ago, but they don't like Eagle files - and I did not want to learn using another software for what little I do... therefore I use Aisler in case the need arises - but with drilled holes. A little old-fashioned I am, I know 😉

      When it came to adjusting, it seems I am lucky: I set it once - and despite disassembling and reassambling over and over to find out what my problem was, I almost never had to touch the potentiometer again. I cross my fingers it stays like that 😉

      TBH I think that's BS 😞
      Their board is cheap so purchasing their bord is not a problem for cloner. [...]

      It is always difficult with such rather cheap electronics - unless you use your own custom ICs and remove the labels on all the other ones, you are never safe. As I said, it is a hindrance, but not a large one. If someone really wants to copy you, he will. Others that just search for an easy way might go on and look for something else. At least the chinese copys I found are not the latest version, so it seems at least they do not care enough or don't think it's worth the investment. IMHO the advanced user needs a clear specification of what the output does exactly (and this is what they ought to provide indeed), but not necessarily the schematic.

      you sure 2 will do? why didn't you go with 3 so you can have 100% one sensor one amp so there's no way they can influence each other? You know how they say if it is worth doing it is worth overdoing 🙂

      Haha 😆
      No, I will stick with two. "As good as necessary for the task" is good enough for me there - otherwise I would have followed your suggestion and built my own amplifier 😉

      posted in Third-party add-ons
      NeoDue
      NeoDue
    • RE: Two Precision Piezo boards in parallel on one input possible?

      @o_lampe

      The trick is to use a differential method. Just before you begin to probe, you read the pressure and then set the trigger point a fixed amount above that pressure. It's only theory until I get the sensor modules.

      Okay, that might work - but you would zero it before every probing point then. Anyway, I would rather prefer something not relying on gases or liquids 😉

      @arhi

      You can cut the big disks into any shape you like, they are rather easy to cut and they still work

      Depends, I think... I have no personal experience with this, but from what I read e.g. drilling them causes weird response curves in some cases.

      There are smaller multiturn trimmers that are rated for lot more than 20 turns and would be better choice but they are smd parts so would have to be designed into the board, almost impossible to just change the existing smd trimmer with a new one with different pinout... the through hole ones are possible as you can bend the wires any way you want 😄 .... if I was designing the board I'd use those (smaller, lighter, cheaper to manufacture.. and still multiturn)

      Agreed. When I solder something myself, I stick with THT, so I don't know what is available. But while I do not miss the multiturn feature, anything of similar size with a longer lifetime would be good indeed.

      If they kept true to their original statement and shared the schematic like they did for original board we could see that ourselves immediately...

      You are absolutely right there. However, I do understand they want to make life more difficult for copycats. Like this, someone who wants to copy the thing at least needs to buy and reverse engineer it - and does not get the schematic for free. It is not much of a hindrance, but it does help a bit. I have to admit I would do the same in their case.

      But it would be good to note in the manual what the outputs do, and maybe remove the outdated schematic that only confuses the buyers. This is exactly what I suggested to them - let's see if they follow my input 😉

      For now, I will wait for my second amplifier.

      posted in Third-party add-ons
      NeoDue
      NeoDue
    • RE: Two Precision Piezo boards in parallel on one input possible?

      @arhi

      I would not agree they are "bad". Piezo is what it is. IMHO the sensors created by precisionpiezo Andromeda and Orion are pretty good (much better IMHO than stand-alone disks where the puny force on the wires will detach them from the disk along with a piece of disk coating)
      Most issues I have (and you have as well from what I see) are the way we are using the technology. When you use the way they designed it, it works out of the box 🙂

      No, the sensors themselves are really good. Any sensors measuring strain or deformation mounted beneath the bed have their disadvantages, simply due to their type of placement. They are simply in a place where forces are not... well, "focused", to put it simple (unsure which is the correct english wording here...). If you place a sensor into the hotend correctly there is no way for the contact force but to go through the sensor (in case of a piezo I count the deformation element it is glued onto as part of the sensor), and the lever arm always more or less stays the same.
      In case of the bed however, there are at least two other ways - and lever arms change, depending on where you push. In theory, you always have the same result - in practice, there are various effects causing problems. It is the same as with several force transducers being mounted below let's say a crane or one mounted directly into the hook... Thus, even an ideal bed sensor array will not work as good as a hotend sensor. The question is always: does it work well enough anyway?
      In my case, I tried to use them as close as possible to the way they were intended to be, but as I work within the restraints of my printer, that only works as well as it allows...

      I disagree with you here 😄 and I have to say, I disagree without ANY proof 😄 but I am somehow sure that there is a way to incorporate a piezo-like sensor in this type of head mount without losing more than 5mm of Z space. [...] but since I actually gave up as even the cheap aliexpress bltouch knockoff give results that are consistent and repeatable, do not require thorough nozzle clean before probing and work "every time" ...

      You dont' know how that thing looks inside - there is not that much material there even if it looks massive 😉 If you could get custom made piezo sensors that are not round for a decent price, it would be rather easy (but would need a complete redesign anyway) and could probably be done without losing z height. But a 20mm disc or even something larger would be really hard, even with redesigning the whole thing. As mentioned in the other thread we talked, there is exactly one place where I could drill a 2...3mm hole through the whole assembly for a - much elongated - BLTouch pin without interfering with something somewhere and letting the cable chain still move as it needs. And all these things need to stay in place...
      Hm, in case I need something SLS printed, I use Rapidobject. For Germany, they have good prices, and no fuss with customs. And the Alumide they offer is simply great 🙂

      That is weird. I had a similar idea myself at the beginning, luckily I have 4ch scope (both digital and analog storage) and I looked at the signal from 3 and 4 andromeda's directly without amp and in my case they don't cancel out. The issue is just in how "sharp" the "touch" is in my case.

      Yes, I had hoped for this, but even with just two channels on my old Tek, I can see the signal peaks with the overlayed vibration being something near λ/2 apart... I guess the resonance frequency of my heatbed fits much too good to its size...😕

      For e.g. this is the test that works for me [...]
      The test looks very much the same than the one I did, except that I used a Ø6mm plastic rod I had lying around (length around 30cm). To get a signal rising above the level of the vibration (i.e. something not canceling itself out) I needed to rise that one some five to 6 cm. No way to get such an impulse with my z axis. As soon as I split the sensors, a gentle tip with the finger was enough...

      Anyway, I have the Precision Piezo v2.85 amp (i.e. the latest variant they sell) in use - and I got feedback from them.

      So here is the solution for anyone who might need it in the future: the digital output of v2.85 does indeed pull the signal line to ground - and that's it. Thus, you can simply wire two of these amplifiers (I would like to support them and not buy the chinese ripoffs) in parallel and that's it 😁

      Regarding the trimmer: yes, I understand why you don't like that thing lasting just 20 full turns. But on the other hand: the lighter (i.e. smaller) the part, the less problems with mechanical disturbances. These trimmers you suggest are in comparison relatively heavy and in my old company I learnt there were problems with those when being built stiffly into force transducers - they got killed or worn-out by the mechanical impulses over time in some cases. Thus, even if I had the space I would not mount that one directly benath my print bed facing downwards as I do with the amplifier - even if I don't know if the vibrations come anwhere near the critical level 😉

      @o_lampe

      That's why I gave up on Piezo's.
      But now imagine you had a [barometric sensor]...

      I like the idea - but apart from the sealing problem, you would have to cope with the air getting hot and thus expanding as soon as someone turns on the heat bed - And this effect will continue for quite some time after the bed has reached its temperature, so I guess you need an amplifier that checks for pulses and discards any change benath a certain value per second - meaning you end up with something similar to a piezo (albeit requiring less speed). I would rather try some silicone oil or so which expands much less and minimise the volume of that to the absolute minimum.

      I guess it might be easier to use the principle of piezo force transducers instead - these do not monitor the voltage peak of the piezo disc as "our" piezo amplifiers do but rather the electric charge created by the piezo. By doing so, you can even measure semi-static forces up to a certain point.

      posted in Third-party add-ons
      NeoDue
      NeoDue
    • RE: Two Precision Piezo boards in parallel on one input possible?

      @arhi Thank you!

      May as an explanation on why I tried my luck with the bed sensors and keep clinging to them (and for bed centre probing for fine-setting the z axis zero I get close-to-perfect results 🙂 ) :

      Due to the restraints I have with my printer, a head sensor would be quite difficult to implement without losing a very significant amount of motion length. The hotend is mounted between the two y axes which are horizontally aligned in opposite to most other printers, with just barely enough space to let the tooth belt through:

      Hotend.jpg
      The whole hotend carriage without the cooling fan and its air guide is less than 70x70mm. The space directly below the extruder is used for the drag chain for the wires which tightly wraps around the base the extruder sits on depending on the XY position... Making the head larger in any other direction (left/right, front/back or downwards) means reducing the possible motion range. Even if I am lucky and there is no negative effect on repeatability due to increating lever arms, I do not want to decrease that. Thus, I see almost no chance to fit a single Ø20mm piezo element in there in such a way that it could actually measure something, let alone an Orion... the downside of having a really compact printer with a rather massive weld housing...

      Now back to the problem:
      What I can say from my experiments is that a full bed mesh not working is definitely a problem with sensors canceling out each other, even if this effect might be somewhat related to the impulse the touch of the hotend nozzle creates as you say.
      Hitting harder does not help much up to a certain point - which I would have difficulty reaching with the rather slow z axis of my printer, and I also fear for my glass printing plate...

      As soon as I unplug the sensor(s) I suspect to cancel out the signal (i.e. no mechanical change at all, I only remove the corresponding cable from the amplifier) I get a wonderful signal for the part of the bed that was previously too insensitive. This would not happen if it was a purely a lack of contact impulse the setup would suffer from.

      So that is what I want to exploit.

      (edit) Apart from that:

      • four springs: not possible with my printer.
      • stiffer springs: tried, does not do anything - surprisingly. Not even using massive spacers instead of springs changes the behaviour.
      • coax cable: already in use for the cables between sensors and amplifier since you had told me that before (and the instructions suggest shielded cables for this as well). Since I use the digital output only, I took normal cable to the Duet input however, but the cables are far away from any motor wiring.

      All in all, since I am using the digital signal only, I guess some gate (edit: an OR gate does not work however since the digital output is active low, so this would rather be an... AND gate...) would be the way to move forward, so thank you very much for pointing me to that solution - unless the designer of the amplifier might have an even better idea. I contacted Precision Piezo (probably this question might end up at @DjDemonD if he is still active?) via their website. Let's see which answer I get 😉

      (edit: typos removed...)

      posted in Third-party add-ons
      NeoDue
      NeoDue
    • Two Precision Piezo boards in parallel on one input possible?

      One question regarding a slightly untypical Precison piezo setup:

      I recently added three Andromeda bed level sensors from Precision Piezo to my Neo (thanks @arhi for a lot of helpful information), and I am (with one exception) quite happy with the result, even if the documentation of these sensors does leave quite a bit room for improvement, outdated as it is... 😕

      Anyway, the sensors work perfectly fine for doing a centered G30, and they work great for doing manual bed leveling.

      They do not work for mesh bed probing though - in two of the edges (the ones located on the bed side with just one leveling screw) I end up not getting a reliably measurable signal if I connect all three sensors to the amplifier electronics. It does not matter at all in that case how I change the polarity of the sensors towards each other.

      From what I can tell, the rather flexible z axis of my printer or the print bed itself causes some kind of vibration (edit: after writing this, I tried and could actually feel that vibration when the hotend nozzle hit the plate, so this is definitely a lack of mechanical dampening in my printer - I am happy I do not get any negative effects while printing...) resulting in weird crosstalk between the three sensors that end up canceling out each other - measuring the signals with an oscilloscope results in something much more resembling white noise than a clear positive or negative peak.

      The amplifier board does do a wonderful job in converting this chaos into a good and stable signal though, if I connect only the two left or the single right sensor - and is capable of measuring more than half of the bed in such a case. Thus, I was wondering if I might end up getting a fully bed-meshing capable sensor array if I used two amplifiers in parallel instead of one. (Another option would be to try some Schottky diodes to cut off the negative part of the signal as good as possible - I still have that on my list edit: in case someone else has the problem - forget the diode, the signal is too small and probably rises too fast, you need at least a precision rectifier with an OpAmp for that)

      Does anyone happen to know how I can connect these two amplifiers to the Duet, preferably by combining them to use a single Duet sensor input? Having two "active low" outputs does not seem to make this task easy - from what I can tell with my rusty knowledge of electronics from the (again - outdated...) schematic on the Precision Piezo site these amplifiers do not seem to simply pull the signal output pin to ground but rather give out / not give out a voltage. On the other hand, this does not seem to fit to the fact you need the pullup resistor in the Duet input enabled... all in all, I am a little lost at the moment.

      posted in Third-party add-ons
      NeoDue
      NeoDue
    • RE: What firmware version are you using?

      @generisi I can confirm that it runs perfectly fine and fast as well.

      I had the "Operation 3 failed" Wifi problem (https://forum.duet3d.com/topic/21562/firmware-bundle-3-2-2-released/) when upgrading from 3.2.0 to 3.2.2 though.

      posted in General Discussion
      NeoDue
      NeoDue
    • RE: Piezo board with 4 sensors?

      I guess, it's not speed but acceleration one has to think about - then It is clearer, at least for me 🙂

      Yesterday, I tried how a piezo speaker I had lying around might react by gluing one onto the frame holding my printbed, roughly where the Andromeda would be mounted if I followed my initial idea. It turned out my spings are too stiff: the bed spring would rather bend the frame if I pressed onto the bed instead of giving in - and the piezo would barely detect anything.

      After some attempts on how to fit everything into the available space (my printer has just 32mm beneath the printing surface with the z-axis being at its lower limit and the printer housing, meaning 13mm for the Andromeda and the adjustment screw), as far away as possible from the heating element and still keeping the adjustment screws accessible, the whole design - with the piezos nicely covered with a housing - looks like this now:

      Druckbett.png
      (the thin aluminum plate is L-shaped to give it more stiffness; that is cut away in the view. So it not quite as flimsy as it might look)

      While this means I will have to drill some more holes into the z-axis frame, I definitely will see a signal now whenever I tap onto the bed with something. Now It's up to finding the correct settings for sensitivity - as soon as the sensors have arrived and I have assembled all this. Some miniature coaxial cable is also ordered 🙂

      When this is running, I want to find a way if I can use the Piezos as "second" z-endstop (i.e. z-endstop controlled by the piezo elements - but in case these fail for some reason, the exisiting less precise endstop detection should kick a bit above that and force the Duet to retry...) but I will open a new thread for that topic unless I find something here in the forum.

      posted in Third-party add-ons
      NeoDue
      NeoDue
    • RE: Piezo board with 4 sensors?

      @arhi Thanks a lot for the hint with the cable! I will keep that in mind.

      To the other problem: okay, this means the higher the gradient of the load change (not the absolute value), the better the signal. Now I understand, thanks a lot.
      This tells me I should probably play safe and try to remove the dampening of the impulse caused by the spring being mounted in parallel to the sensor - even if the sensor does not care a lot about static load. The slower I can go i the end, the less I fear for my precious glass plate...
      My printer has a rather stiff bed (glass plate plus 5mm thick milled aluminum plate) - so if anything gives, it is the metal frame between z axis and bed which is actually the flimsiest part of the whole printer.

      I'll search for some pictures how other printers have their bed mounted, maybe that lets me find an idea on how get the springs out of the way.

      posted in Third-party add-ons
      NeoDue
      NeoDue
    • RE: Piezo board with 4 sensors?

      @arhi Hm. I guess the Orion Sensor is a bit of a pain depending on the geometry of the print head, yes, but I am puzzled about what you say about the Andromeda's... sounds to me like the bed screws maybe got stuck in their guidance due to the off-centered push or something. Force needs to go somewhere 😉

      Let's see how the Andromeda sensors will work for my printer and if the "constant spring load/unload if touched" setup I chose really does what it should long-term. The only other chance to fit a decent z sensor onto my Neo without losing precious X-Y motion range would be to mount a BLTouch above the whole printhead unit and then somehow make the touching pin about 12cm longer and guide it through the whole print head... somehow I doubt that would work reliably...

      posted in Third-party add-ons
      NeoDue
      NeoDue