Hi guys,
I'm playing with my new extruder and would like to know how much it extrudes in a real print.
Is it possible to display extrusion volume in DWC? Printspeed, layerheight and layerwidth? should be available for calculations.
I extruded in free air to get ballpark numbers, but real life is different.

@gtaman
It's actually the same:

• create a global variable blockDaemon
• set global.blockDaemon = true at the start of the M300 file
• set global.blockDaemon = false at the end

Then anyone using Daemon.g for real can add these lines

while global.blockDaemon = true
          G4 S1000

Had my first simpleFOC project running today. It was an old brushless gimbal controller without encoders and with 8bit mcu.
I was able to control two motors independently and relatively smooth (USB power only)
The atmega328 was also at it's limit, but I'm now confident it will work well with the right mcu.

@m0ck1nj
Check the TB6600 datasheet. If it is OK with 3.3V signals on step, dir, enable you can wire it directly.
If it needs differential signals or 5V you can use the much cheaper expansion breakout board

First print today

Instead of a benchy, I tried the extruder-woodgrain test. Yes there is some, but hardly visible. The corners were sharp and even, that was a relieve. The close loop PID setting are quite soft, so I expected worse...

At the top third, the printspeed got so low, that the filament overheated. 10°C less temp and it was nice and shiny again.

Hi gents,
I started pondering the idea to build a hash-printer with the least amount of hardware. The video of the original design shows the typical shaft & dual belt approach we've seen on H-bots and cross-gantry printers to avoid racking.
But I want to use a dual roller constraint as I did on other occasions before. I wasn't sure if that would also work with two beams per axis, so I cobbled together a quick and dirty test rig.

To make it clearer how to wrap the Aramid fishing line around the four rollers I started with a drawing:

This is the Y-axis only, imagine two more extrusions horizontally to build a '#'.

And finally I made demo video to show how easy it is to move the beam from only one side without racking.

@jbergene

According to this picture

• positive X goes to the right
• positive Y goes to the back
• positive Z goes up

@dc42 said in Smart Effector including toolboard-capabilities?:

It's clear to me that the Orbiter could not be used with a Smart Effector made to the current dimensions. We would need to increase the rod spacing to at least 80mm in order to accommodate the various parts of the extruder. We are looking into this, however it would make it unsuitable for the smaller delta printers.

Hi dc42,
I just stumbled across this thread and wanted to guide you back to 2016 , when we discussed the cycloidal direct drive. (I still have it laying around)
I've made an 45 degree adapter for it, that suited the smart effector pretty well.

Another way to mount it, was the split motor/gearbox idea.

I could try to reuse my motor and design a BMG-drive for the Smart effector?

Hi devs,
based on the "extrusion volume" thread, I also think a back EMF calculator as DWC plugin would be helpful for tuning.
The required parameters are almost completely known for the calculation. It only misses coil resistance and inductivity (AFAIK)

Since my Duet boards run on their own network, I don't have access to the EMF calculator at reprapfirmware.org

If we could integrate it as plugin and use 'live' values from the current object model/gcode file, we'd have a nice tuning tool

@nikscha I like the idea. It's like the tool-change macros.
But there is also a problem when you retract / unretract within a toolchange.
Maybe you can solve your problem by renaming G10/G11 to G10.1 and G11.1 via postprocessing. Then you need only one macro for retraction (which also contains the real G10 move)

@dwuk Still looking good for a first attempt. I guess you had mesh levelling off?
Maybe try to dial in each toolhead independently with unaltered single-head gcode. When both work OK on their own, let them cooperate.

@dwuk Backlash won't be your primary problem when you use the "outer perimeter in one go" version of your gcode postprocessor.
I wouldn't spend too much time on it now and try to make a working proof of concept first.
You might have to redesign alot anyway, just put it on your ToDo list.

@Ce72 said in Like Z Banding:

NTC 100K thermistor on there heaters which from what I understand can be a pain to setup and not that great for the higher temps.

Bed temps are pretty low compared to extruder temps. I don't see a problem here?
Whenever a NTC failed on me, it was a lousy crimpjob or broken thermistor leg from too much motion.

@bernardomattiucci I think, the onchip memory hinders the FW to store a finer/bigger map and moving the whole data to the SD-card would lead to constant reading from SD and might cause failure.

Having a few small (slightly overlapping) maps stored on SD and loading only the next relevant map would probably work, but it'd take some postprocessing of the gcode file, I guess.
Because daemon.g wouldn't be able to look ahead far enough to do that while printing...

@Notepad said in Like Z Banding:

Its weird that the woodgrain test appears to be normal and and then your next two prints have this weird artefact.

IMHO, the difference is vase mode versus solid. Might be related to PA-settings? They don't apply in vase mode...

@dwuk Those motors are nice findings...but the small one might be too slow for anything? (15-20PPS @18degree/step divided by 100/1 gearbox) If my math is correct, it'll take 50 seconds for half a turn (outputshaft acting like hobby servo excenter)
You will also need a way to fix the tool in both directions. Otherwise the extruded filament will push it up.

@dwuk said in Sovol SV08 Multiple Motion System Upgrade.:

Not sure why the adjustments are so large

It's just the difference between the configurated tool offset and trigger point of the probe.
Since they are all pretty close (-0.4ish), your bed level looks fine.

@53581 That'll do, but it's a bit overkill.

@ralph-malan said in Closed loop with linear scale:

Is it not commonly done?

IMHO, if a system needs closed loop control it isn't engineered well. Steppers shouldn't lose steps under normal conditions.
But in your case it's about saving money, but still get good results. I hope it pays out.

@dwuk One point of concern is the tiny screw that connects the excenter with the servo. It has to hold the whole weight of the tool?
There is also a big distance between tool-COG and the anchor point of the excenter, which adds the tendency to tilt the extruder rather than lift it. (risk of racking?)

I just thought: worm gear! The smallest motor will be able to lift the tool and it comes with inbuild self locking.