Topics created by tgarr

@tgarr said in MonoPrice Delta Pro - Height Map Interpretation?:

Does the rippling in the height map look like the result of a slightly wobbly rail? Or something else?

That pattern (ridges at one end of X turning into valleys at the other end) indicates that there is backlash in the mechanics. What's happening is that when the effector moves to a particular XY point other than the centre, the nozzle height depends on the direction from which the effector approached that point. G29 in RRF scans alternate lines in opposite directions, hence the alternate ridges and valleys.

To fix or at least mitigate this:

Check that the belts are sufficiently tight Check that the motor pulley grub screws are tight Lubricate the ball joints and the carriage rails or wheel bearings

@tgarr said in (Delta) Mesh Bed Leveling with variable trigger height?:

Sorry, mesh bed compensation. To be done after bed leveling in hopes of getting that last little bit of variation out of the first layer.

I'm am not aware of any way to apply corrections for each point being probed.

In very old versions of the firmware there was a type of mesh bed compensation that allowed that but it is long gone.

Frederick

I think the easiest answer is all of the issues related to Cartesian printers and movements were solved with pen plotters and dot matrix printers. Big companies have been able to produce the most efficient and cheap way to solve the issues so other than a moving Z platform it's virtually plug and play. Also, as I stated previously the processing power to control 4 stepper motors was right at the limit for 8 bit boards. Another disadvantage is the size of the machine, it has to be much taller than the equivalent sized cartesian due to movement required for the edges of the bed, also the bed is round rather than square / rectangular.

The Kinematic control of the head has caught up now so it's lovely and smooth, by design the head will be horizontal (although I did read of paper where they had printed in a terrain following method for the top layers, just required knowledge of the head shape to avoid clashes - this was a few years ago and I can't find any further work carried out - maybe Simplify3D V5 🙂

My SpiderBot is the V1.5 with various upgrades through SpiderBot and the prototype dual head. Attached are a couple of pictures, maybe best to have them side by side as the cantilever of the head via the servo is subtle but is an elegant solution to dual head woes (one of my other printers is the BigBox Dual with print heads the same height so I'm used to suffering the issues with the 1st layer).

[http://www.spiderbot.eu/spiderbot-v2-1-whats-new/?lang=en](link url)

SpiderBot - Tool 1.JPG SpiderBot - Tool 0.JPG

The original design used ball bearings secured with epoxy, as the printer is used with a heated chamber this heat cycling (or my cold shed) caused them to fall off. Philippe (owner of SpiderBot) improved the design by riveting the balls onto the aluminium.

I'm more than happy with mine and the assistance I've had over the years for SpiderBot, it just doesn't get used as much due to having multiple printers and not using ABS.

It's well worth having a nosey though the older blog articles to see the engineering iterations leading up to the latest versions.

@dc42 FYI the new PanelDue got here today, I plugged it in and it worked, so good call there. Thanks.

@Phaedrux the model numbers don't return anything on a google search (that I can find): "SAMV008-001" (and a date) is the only mark on the whole motor. They are Nema17 size, with a body 1.8625" long.

That's the main part of my struggle. There wasn't any amp limit setting in the Lerdge board that I had access to, and the motors are un-branded.

@dc42 Sure enough, 80 steps / mm seems to be the ticket. I was just misunderstanding the concept of microstepping. Told you guys it was something stupid 🙂 (I was fixated on the lerdge board step / mm values)

@JoergS5: thanks, yes, I turned on microstepping with "M350 X16 Y16 Z16 E16 I1 ". Regarding the Z probe, that's my next task...I've got a precision piezo board to wire in next. My short term goal is to use it with the stock piezo sensor that goes over the nozzle. Longer term I'm hoping to do a bed sensor or integrate a sensor into the end effector.

@tgarr

You would wire it the same way as it was to the Lerdge board so one set to the Duet power in +- and one set to your heater mosfet +- then the small pair of wires that went from the heater board to the Lerdge will now go from the heater board to the bed out of the Duet best to make sure you have both power pairs on separate terminals at the power supply and make sure the all are correct +- including the small pair are the correct +and- at the Duet should only go back in one way on the heater board.

Hope this helps