2.03RC5 leveling issue

SPAX

02:39:01G32
G32 bed probe heights: -2.687 -2.702 -2.807 -2.825 -2.948 -3.058 -2.749 -2.889 -3.022 -2.864 -3.056 -2.895 -2.875 -2.700 -2.974 -3.005, mean -2.879, deviation from mean 0.122

02:36:56G32
G32 bed probe heights: -2.693 -2.696 -2.826 -2.850 -2.954 -3.071 -2.761 -2.895 -3.022 -2.858 -3.056 -2.913 -2.882 -2.706 -2.968 -3.005, mean -2.885, deviation from mean 0.121

dc42

Those results show differences of around 0.02mm which isn't ideal, but not too bad. Try S6 instead of S7.

SPAX

@dc42
Did s6.
Now G32 repeats little good....
G32
Calibrated 6 factors using 16 points, deviation before 0.132 after 0.106

But before on 2.02 was be after 0.03-0.08(maybe because I did matte on my glass today)

Thank you. I will try to print something tomorrow....

SPAX

@dc42
Now better, but not ideal (((

Calibrated 6 factors using 16 points, deviation before 0.450 after 0.109
Calibrated 6 factors using 16 points, deviation before 0.260 after 0.174
Calibrated 6 factors using 16 points, deviation before 0.207 after 0.156
Calibrated 6 factors using 16 points, deviation before 0.346 after 0.113
Why this happening?
First layer poor....some place the nozzle touching the bed some plase have pit...
If I run G29 the nozzle starting print like on wave... and first layer much more poor .

dc42

@spax, what type of Z probe do you have on your delta printer?

After run G32 a few times, if you then run G29, what does the height map look like?

SPAX

@dc42, I use your IR probe.
22:32:26G29
109 points probed, min error -0.158, max error 0.575, mean 0.214, deviation 0.150
Height map saved to file heightmap.csv
22:26:15G32
Calibrated 6 factors using 16 points, deviation before 0.178 after 0.100
22:25:04G32
Calibrated 6 factors using 16 points, deviation before 0.239 after 0.095
22:23:55G32
Calibrated 6 factors using 16 points, deviation before 0.371 after 0.126

SPAX

I have 6mm aluminium plate + 0.5 heatsink pad + 4mm glass (back side painted in black).

SPAX

@dc42 any thoughts?

Phaedrux

Can you rerun the G29 heightmap with a piece of plain paper covering the bed surface? The idea being to eliminate any inconsistencies in the IR probe reading the surface.

dc42

Also please post a screen shot with the height map rotated so that we are looking along the X axis.

SPAX

@dc42 @Phaedrux

19:36:16G29
97 points probed, min error -0.587, max error 1.307, mean 0.383, deviation 0.415
Height map saved to file heightmap.csv

19:28:00M500

19:27:48G32
Calibrated 6 factors using 16 points, deviation before 0.254 after 0.091

19:26:43M500

19:26:37G32
Calibrated 6 factors using 16 points, deviation before 0.132 after 0.111

19:25:31M500

19:25:01G32
Calibrated 6 factors using 16 points, deviation before 0.209 after 0.080

19:23:54M500

19:23:44G32
Calibrated 6 factors using 16 points, deviation before 0.379 after 0.108

dc42

That height map looks terrible, as if you are probing off the edge of the bed or something like that.

SPAX

@dc42 Coz idea with paper is bad idea) Paper of sheet not 100% flat...

garyd9

@spax said in 2.03RC5 leveling issue:

@dc42 Coz idea with paper is bad idea) Paper of sheet not 100% flat...

That height map has high points "0.25mm of more" and low points "-0.25 or less." A sheet of paper isn't going to deviate in thickness by over 0.5mm!

SPAX

@garyd9 @dc42
that also because paper sheet was be not on all bed surface...I have bed dia 40cm, paper A4

dc42

Time to get a bigger sheet of paper?