Board 3 not found
-
@bearer I will try that one tonight, thanks!
-
@bearer @dc42
For some reason the system doesn't seem to be stable.
The reponses of the system are not consistent.
M98 P"config.g" does some times a lot and some times nothing at all
Yesterday, I had no tools, tonight suddenly they are backThe command M98 etc resulted in
M98 P"config.g"
<LF>
RepRapFirmware for Duet 3 MB6HC Version 3.1.1 dated 2020-05-19b2 <LF>
Ethernet is disabled. <LF>
RepRapFirmware for Duet 3 MB6HC is up and running. <LF>
Connection to Linux established! <LF>
Warning: VIN under-voltage event (0.9V)Lost connection to Linux <LF>
Connection to Linux established!<LF>Lost connection to Linux <LF>
Warning: 12V under-voltage ok<LF>After that, I only get <LF>ok<LF> restarting sometimes gives the first message sometimes only the last result.
The interface is showing at startup: Duet connected
then after M98 P"config,g" I get on my interface:
Error M574 pin "io1.in" is not free
Error M574 pin "io0.in" is not free
Warning M307: heater 0 appears to be overpowered, if left at full power its temperature is predicted to reach 365C
the M568 command is not longer needed
then the last two messages disapear automaticallyheater o is switched off according to the interface
the first message I get from the M98 command, mentions vin undervoltage, could that be the cause of the inconsistent behavior?
The RPI has its own power
the MB runs on 12V
the expansion boards run on 24V -
@bearer @dc42
Using the M409 K"boards" results in the info below.
The thing that surprises me that the MB shows values for V12 and Vin
The expansion boards show 0 values. Is that potentially the problem?M409 K"boards"
{"key":"boards","flags":"","result":[
{"canAddress":0,
"firmwareDate":"2020-05-19b2",
"firmwareFileName":"Duet3Firmware_MB6HC.bin",
"firmwareName":"RepRapFirmware for Duet 3 MB6HC",
"firmwareVersion":"3.1.1",
"iapFileNameSBC":"Duet3_SBCiap_MB6HC.bin",
"iapFileNameSD":"Duet3_SDiap_MB6HC.bin",
"mcuTemp":{"current":36.2,"max":37.0,"min":32.3},
"name":"Duet 3 MB6HC",
"shortName":"MB6HC",
"uniqueId":"08DJM-956L2-
G43S4-6J1D8-3SJ6M-9B6GG",
"v12":{"current":11.4,"max":11.9,"min":0.1},
"vIn":{"current":12.1,"max":12.6,"min":0.1}},{"canAddress":1,
"firmwareFileName":"Duet3Firmware_EXP3HC.bin",
"firmwareVersion":"3.1.0 (2020-05-15b1)",
"mcuTemp":{"current":0,"max":0,"min":0},
"shortName":"EXP3HC","state":"running",
"v12":{"current":0,"max":0,"min":0},
"vIn":{"current":0,"max":0,"min":0}},{"canAddress":2,"firmwareFileNa
me":"Duet3Firmware_EXP3HC.bin",
"firmwareVersion":"3.1.0 (2020-05-15b1)",
"mcuTemp":{"current":0,"max":0,"min":0},
"shortName":"EXP3HC",
"state":"running",
"v12":{"current":0,"max":0,"min":0},
"vIn":{"current":0,"max":0,"min":0}},{"canAddress":3,"
"firmwareFileName":"Duet3Firmware_EXP3HC.bin",
"firmwareVersion":"3.1.0 (2020-05-15b1)",
"mcuTemp":{"current":0,"max":0,"min":0},
"shortName":"EXP3HC",
"state":"running",
"v12":{"current":0,"max":0,"min":0},
"vIn":{"current":0,"max":0,"min":0}}]} -
(i'm out of my depth, a long time ago; maybe @Phaedrux or the other wizards can shed some light on it)
((d'oh, yes, please relabel diagram instead of changing addresses))
-
Currently, it's normal for VIN and V12 to show zero for the expansion boards in M409, because the expansion boards don't report the voltages. I plan to fix this before firmware 3.2 release. Meanwhile, you can see the actual voltages using M122, for example M122 B1 to show the voltages for the board with CAN address 1.
Feel free to set the CAN addresses 1, 2, 3 of your expansion boards any way you like, but in future please re-label the boards in your diagrams "Expansion board 1" for the board with CAN address 1, similarly for boards 2 and 3. Talking about "Expansion board 1" when that board has CAN address 2 or 3 is very confusing.
Connection to Linux established! <LF>
Warning: VIN under-voltage event (0.9V)Lost connection to Linux <LF>
Connection to Linux established!<LF>Lost connection to Linux <LF>
Warning: 12V under-voltage ok<LF>Those messages indicate that you have a problem with VIN power to the main board.
-
@dc42 I originally misunderstood the settings of the dip-switches. Didn't realize it was a binary setting. Thanks to remarks made by Bearer I got the place where I could find the functioning. Hence the setting of position of the dip-switches did not correspond to the board numbering. Sorry for the confusion.
-
That looks good. Did you sort out the VIN power issue?
-
@dc42 I have not been able to reproduce the dialog at all.
I got this result by using M98 P"config.g"
Only answer I get back via the terminal screen is:
ok<LF>On the screen I get a message M307 on heater 0 being overpowered (this is the bed), although the heater is swiched off.
-
@ahwitmer said in Board 3 not found:
On the screen I get a message M307 on heater 0 being overpowered (this is the bed), although the heater is swiched off.
That's common when you have a high-powered heater. It's warning you that you should install as thermal cut-out for safety.
Is your current problem the 2000C reading on heater 4? What does M308 S# return, where # is the sensor number (T parameter) that you specified in the M950 H4 command?
Please post your config.g file.
-
Sorry for the delay,
In fact the over power warnings were given without having heated anything. Also the bed is powered via a solid state relay. For now the message does not persist anymore.
De temperature issue of 2000C is caused by two problems but solved.
I'm using an encapsulated thermistor. nicely fitting in the heater block.
The contacts are not connected to the metal encapsulation, however when mounted in the heater block and fixed with the screw, one of the contacts is suddenly shortcutted with the metal housing. I ordered new ones.In itself not a huge problem be it, it was caused by an issue with my lighting.
I'm using Cob lights which were screwed with plastic screws to the metal print head gantry. For some reason there was a metal connection between the negative pole of the lighting.Combination of the two issues resulted in the 2000C
The bed thermistor issue I did not solve yet.
Having a two year old running around, slows down progress somewhat....
-
@ahwitmer said in Board 3 not found:
Having a two year old running around, slows down progress somewhat....
Uhg, tell me about it!!
-