Posts made by jrlederer

…engages a pinion to effectively apply brakes to carriages...? Sounds pretty trick and cool! Mind to attach some photos to show off this neat design? Looking forward to seeing it.

Have a nice day to all!

Hey there @Zesty Brian! It's Jonathan from over on your discord server. I, too, ran into this annoyance while performing similar updates to the firmware if my duet wifi board. What ended up working for be was to pull the SD card from the duet, copy over the firmware 2 firmware files as instructed on the page linked below, and then follow the recovery direction for fallback scenario #3 found in this page:

https://www.duet3d.com/wiki/Updating_main_firmware

Oddly, despite multiple attempts at adjusting the SetNetwork macro which uses the shory script described in the @updating to firmware 1.19 from below that which explains to disable the M552 S1 line of your current [SDcard]:\sys\config.g (simply modify the line to read ";M552 S1" by adding the leading semicolon) file before the dual upgrading of the firmware packages by issuing the M997 S0:1 from Paneldue once the files are in place and you have written the macro containing the M587 command with your appropriate details for SSID and password. Once all the prerequisite steps are completed and you go ahead with issuing the M997 S0:1 command, the last step is to run the macro file which will add your SSID to the known network list, then finally you MUST manually issue an "M552 S1" which will illuminate the LED next to the wireless component on the duet wifi board followed by a message displaying the IP address it ended up catching from the server. After all that is completed, you mustn't forget to navigate to the DWC server at that very IP address, go to SETTINGS->SYSTEM EDITOR ->CONFIG.G and edit the semicolon out from ahead of the M552 S1 line which in an earlier step we commented out.

Really hope this helps. Interestingly, I tried any 5 times to modify the syntax of the macro made called SetNetwork to no avail – kept getting error messages in console after issuing the macro. The only way I succeeded was to literally perform the entire Fallback procedure #3 in that linked site above from start to finish exactly as listed. Then suddenly the configuration settled in and didn't give me any error messages. YMMV.

Thanks so much for the response. Looking forward to chatting via email.

Happy Holidays to all!

Hi all, just thought I'd toss this message in here for two reasons:

firstly, I too have at one time desired this functionality and so it's nice to see some movement in the topic.

Secondly, because ask the necessary people are already involved in this thread that I would have direct messaged otherwise with the fact that currently I'm in the process of outfitting my second MetalMax delta frame with a newly built Diamond Hotend and am running into serious issues that I'm hoping one of the veterans in here can address:

• I'm using three Nimble extruders and had ordered from Shapeways a properly printed effector mount designed by the Zesty guys for this purpose. Initially, I mounted all the hardware and attempted to deploy it, only to find that the positioning of the extruders severely impeded the range of motion needed by the diagonal arms in order to reach positions that I require (such as dead center – homed). I posted this in the Zesty forums and it turns out the consensus is that I must be the first to have tried this since I built everything correctly yet still have this debilitating problem with how to achieve motion given the crowded airspace immediately above the platform which causes problems.

I continued my determination to get things working and was able to fashion a way to mount the entire effector from near the nozzle with the hopes that this mounting method, paired with trimming the Shapeways effector to remove the protruding sections which originally were there to host the magnetic ball/diagonal arm interface, would free up the effector to allow movement.

The result is that the effector IS able now to move, but is still severely limited in its range of motion. Depending on the orientation (of which there are three) I connect the effector at, I am limited thereafter to a triangle (roughly) which reaches to only about a quarter of maybe a sixth of the 300mm build platform and offset toward the side of the effector with the biggest space between adjacent extruders happens to be.

For this very reason, Stefan's original idea presented above would be competely desirable solution since, though I'm not certain if when using the regular bowden tube compliant mount the effector is limited from reaching the bed extents or not, but assuming it has full range, it would be a simple solution with which to run the Diamond as I so desire to do while removing the complications evidently introduced by attempting to utilize three RDD extruders to operate the diamond hotend with.

Thanks for taking the time to read this message. This makes me think that the delta may not really be a suitable platform for utilizing the Diamond Hotend, and brings to the forefront of my mind once more the conversation between Deckingman and myself where I had at one time expressed my desire to build a duplicate rig, based on his, and so on the absence of any workable suggestions which to try at the place I've been stuck at (as detailed above), I respectfully re-request from Deckingman the permission (and associated plans and bill of goods I would need to obtain) in order to follow the master down a tried and true path for Diamond success!

Is the difference between the newest version noticeable enough to warrant upgrading the two is got on my two delta printers, if the current ones are functioning properly?

Thanks for the response. Can you tell me by any chance what the difference between the ones you use and the LM76 version? If I understand correctly, the limiting factor is that the mounting holes should be 20mm spaced holes in a square pattern in order to mount the carriage adapters. Are there any other constraints to observe? Thinking about it for a moment, it doesn't seem necessary to span the entire length of the towers with rails since the lower maybe third doesn't ever get traversed…it's that a fair assumption? DC42, for instance, in your build, can you tell me the dimensions of your build and what rail length you ultimately decided upon just to serve as an example from which I can base my decision on? Thanks again. Also, from where does one obtain the new filament monitoring sensor system you've created. I've looked on your e-store as well as Filastruder but no dice.

Thanks.

Jonathan

Hi all,

been a while since I've been around here due to demanding curriculum in engineering school, but back and had a question with hopes that someone here will know the answer. I've searched around quite a bit, but still have no definitive answer to my issue.

I've got two MetalMax delta frames from tricklaser, which I really like due to the sturdiness and well machined extrusions. My desire is to upgrade these printers to sport linear rails to complement the PCB effector systems I've got. Through my searches, I've learned that the popular size of linear rails used for this purpose are MGN-12 HiWin rails, but then I came a post from a well known expert (mhackney) who at one point was going to embark on this same endeavor and his choice of parts were LM76 Speed Demon rails size SG size 10. I'm simply not sure what is the better choice, price being of no concern.

The unknowns, on top of the decision as to which rails to get are as follows: what length of rails do I need to order, and secondly, how best to attach the hardware to the frames I've got, which are (I believe) standard 2020 extrusions.

Any/all recommendations are greatly appreciated, as I'd really like to expedite the upgrade process but simply don't want to order the incorrect stuff and deal with scratching my head in frustration thereafter.

Thanks, in advance, for sharing your knowledge,

Jonathan

On second thought…maybe I just should leave it be and you can have a look upon receipt of it back to you. While I'm confident in my abilities with regards to utilizing my multimeter properly, I don't see really any possibility except for problems by opening up the possibility of it being a user damaged issue while it's currently DEFINITELY NOT that. Probably better that you pros have a look at it when it arrives back to you so you can determine how it could be that the two from the same package were DOA while the other works perfectly. It is interesting to know though, for future reference, what values ought to be displayed by the components.

Thanks anyway, and looking forward to the working replacements as I've finally been able to print satisfactorily every since assembling that first board which worked and has been working brilliantly. I can't say enough about what a great development this device you've come up with has been for my experience. Literally changed the game for me.

Cheers!

Funny enough, yes, that does actually make me feel a bit better off. I wish there was some way to figure out what could be stopping these two pcbs from providing the strain function…because otherwise they're perfect...lights go on a as soon as my thermostatic control hotend fan realizes hotend is above 60C, etc...just not giving me touch feedback which is a bummer cuz u dare not tinker with the one that works, but I desperately want to try the volcano high flow nozzle with my new printing abilities (compliments of your cool new effector release!). Any ideas on what to look for?

Thank you David for your prompt reply…and I must say, what a fantastic solution to the delta issues I had previously been up against. I say this as in currently printing with the one working pcb effector of the bunch and it is just astounding how well it's working for me, I must say. Though, I'm not able to currently obtain results like others have of variances after a G32 of next to nil, such as 0.007 like some users, but I am getting the best numbers I've been able to obtain yet with any other solution of approximately 0.031 (which is technically sufficiently low to work well, and he proof is in the results, which for me is finally having reasonably great looking output!! Thanks so much.

Hi guys,
I'm just writing this thread to inquire what someone might have to offer in the way of resolution to an interesting problem i just came across yesterday. I had, about a week ago, received two parcels. One containing one compete smart pcb effector setup (including haydn's arms, pt100 sensor, 24V heater cartridge, pcb components), and the other containing 2 additional basic kits only (just pcb components and heatsink).

So, I assembled and have had excellent results with the first of the two packages (the entire system), and have been getting better results than ever before with my delta printer. Then yesterday, I decided to assemble one of my additional effectors to host a volcano hotend version and realized once it was all together that while everything functioned, the strain sensor was not working. I figured maybe I was too rough with it during assembly and that maybe I scratched the surface or something. Then, I opened the second extra effector from the second parcel containing the two additional ones I bought, and this time was extra careful not to mishandle the board during assembly, but to my dismay, the second of the two additional boards I received displays the same defect: everything functions except the Z-probing strain function. Just to be sure it isn't the wiring on my printer, I reattached the original assembly which had been functioning just wonderfully and voila, working just fine.

It seems like both pcb effectors that came from the second package are both defective, and I'm having difficulty believing that could be possible. Please advise.

Thanks,
Jonathan

Oh yeah, thought I'd mention for completeness sake that upon powering up the printer, both boards flash twice the LED that indicates contact, but other than those two initial flashes, I can't make the LED illuminate again thereafter, no matter if I tap or flex the board…nothing. In contrast, the working board initializes with the same two flashes, but thereafter, any touch of the board (even the slightest brush against it) causes the LED to light up in response. That's how it should work, I know that.

Thank you very much, David. I was not in doubt that the board needed to be replaced due to something faulty going on with it (which is, admittedly, very uncommon in my experience), but Tim requested I follow protocol, so I happily obliged. Thank you for confirming the need for replacement. Much appreciated, sir.

Tim, shall I have my assistant send the board back to the address that's listed as the return address on the Duex5 parcel I recently received, or (preferably) would you send out the replacement board with a return label included in the box with which he can simply stick that label onto the box I repacked it in prior to leaving for New York and get it back to you that way?

Thanks, in advance. I suppose either method would work. I understand the hesitation to send out the replacement board without securing payment in the event it's not returned, but if you'll consider our current disposition carefully, I think you'll easily see that you are currently up on me well in advance of the cost of the board due to the 3 rolls of Taulman filament which I ordered and paid for, but haven't received due to the reasons you outlined in your last email to me regarding this very subject. It certainly would be more efficient to do it as an advanced replacement, as it would make it much more likely that the working replacement board would be on hand for me upon my returning home from the weeklong trip in currently on, while simultaneously makingbit easier for my assistant to send the board to you without confusion (considering there's a language barrier in place as he's recently come to US from the Philippines; not that he couldn't do it), but a box containing a prepaid return label would absolutely make the process more straightforward for him.

Thanks for your assistance regarding this simple matter. I respect whichever method you insist upon, though I would hope for the easier one, particularly considering the unfulfilled paid order that is still in your favor currently.

Kindly,
Jonathan

Hello all, this thread is merely to follow protocol according to Tim at Filastruder with regards to a recent delivery I received of a latest revision Duet WiFi board that I believe needs to be replaced as it has issues and I just literally unwrapped it minutes before noticing the problems. I emailed Tim to request he send me out a replacement and I would use the included return shipping label to get him this particular problematic board back to him for whatever needs to be verified. This being my nearly 10th such board, I just believe I ought to know when something is amiss,though Tim insists that I need to get the community to agree that it needs to be RMA'd, which I've no problem with, so here is the situation:

I received the board a few days ago and just yesterday placed it in its new home, attaching all steppers and heaters and thermistors, etc, including the band new PanelDue v2.0 attached to the also brand new 5" LCD (such works perfectly, BTW). Powered up and the end stops, when manually activated by hand, do in fact reflect they're being touched add the LED on the board corresponding to the X, Y, Z tower ends top extinguish when I press the end stop, then go back on once released. At this point I was pretty excited that everything was working…then I went to attach to the DuetWIFI AP in order to further configure the board and get to the web interface. Here's where I first noticed an issue -- no AP signal was being broadcast, so I had a look at the PanelDue with the intention of issuing a M552 via the console in order to see what it thought was going on. Another issue noticed at this point -- PanelDue was sitting at the initial screen but at the top instead of "idle" it was showing "connecting"...but wait a while and never got past that. Just to verify, I connected that PanelDue to a working machine right next to it and it operates as expected when connected to it.

At this point, I figured possibly firmware corrupted so proceeded to press the ERASE followed by RESET and connected to same computer I usually use for that purpose, but here was and is the most concerning issue -- nothing recognized by device manager. I tried a few USB cables, and noticed that certain ones would cause the device manager screen to refresh as though it has found something, but then it did refresh again and nothing ultimately had changed. The board was getting power over the USB cord, so I tried manually manipulating the cable slightly, and not surprisingly was able to get the device found tone to sound a few times, filed almost immediately by the device disconnected tone, frustratingly. So apparently there's an intermittent connection issue with the USB mini inlet port. After trying tens of times to get the device to be stable and recognized by windows, a single time I was able to position it in such a way that I succeeded. So I quickly ran SAM-BA 2.16 and performed the firmware USB install, followed by the comparison utility to nature sure it got in there without errors. As expected, it asks me to lock the regions, which I did, then pressed the reboot from whatever button at the bottom. Despite the intermittent USB connection problem which definitely exists, I was pretty confident that I could deal with it now that apparently the firmware was properly loaded (how many times does one gave to go to those extents, typically...right?). I powered up again using the power supply as normally would, and frustratingly -- very frustratingly -- still no successful connection via PanelDue, nor any AP being broadcast with which to connect to and then further configure.

So, ultimately, I need for those in the position to make such determinations, to please do so so that I can get this board replaced and move on with my life. Thanks for listening, your everyone is having a beautiful day. Tim, I am leaving for New York for one week in about an hour from now, but I have packaged the board in question back in its original packaging and let my assistant know to be ready to bring it over to FedEx to return it back to you,at which point please simply send me out another (hopefully not faulty Duet WiFi latest revision with flyback protection built in). I await your okay then I'll have my guy place it in the mail.

Kindly,
Jonathan

Again, lucky that this has been brought up already as it saves me the trouble of starting a thread out on my own! This is because I've recently observed some really bizarre behavior relating directly to this that I'd been meaning to discuss due some time.

I, too, am using the 300.15mm diagonal arms with the red cup endings, each pair bound by two springs, one at each end of the arms pairs. Here's what I have found that's tripping me out:

I have long been questing for an all green bed height map as I've seen some users here post one they have their flavor of Z-probe setup,though I've had lots of difficulty obtaining that result. Additionally, I happen to have really admired tricklaser's game design (the max metal delta frame) and so purchased a pair of them and outfitted them nearly identically and currently utilize them in such a way that I try to keep one working well, while I use the other as a test platform for new ideas and technologies – that way I've always got one working printer in the event that a new idea details me on the other one.

Here's where it gets strange -- my reliable metalmax (I call it Metalmax_DuetWiFi_I) is the first one I noticed the or phenomena which is that if I leave my M665 with statically entered Length value of 300.15 and solely use S6 (six factor calibration after probing), oddly I can only achieve deviations of no better than 0.125 or so on a great day, which is not great as I know my bed is seriously flat considering the makeup of the base covered by 4mm Boro glass. The biggest advance I've had recently was when, in my frustration, I reduced the probing radius by a good percentage (which has negative effects of printing larger than that value), but in a nice change my numbers improved to deviation after probing of approx. 0.085. Still not great but better...

I made an interesting discovery while tinkering about after setting my probing calculations to utilize 9-factor calibration routine, after which I get the kids off values I had expected when setting up probing to begin with -- in the vicinity of.03, which initially looks great, but upon closer inspection, I find that the values auto-determined are so far out that it greatly effects the scaling of prints in a huge way -- since, when I'm getting 0.03 deviation, my M665 "L" value gets calculated off of actual length by a considerable amount -- example values of like 387.85mm -- clearly inaccurate, the result of such are parts that are much smaller than they ought to be.

Now there's another bizarre thing taking place which is: considering both of my MetalMax frames being populated by nearly identical components, one would logically be led to find that the calibration values determined by probing ought to be pretty similar, though the most bizarre thing is happening even prior to auto calibration -- even something as fundamental as the effector height at home position is vastly different from the MetalMax v.I and the second (MetalMax v.II)! Oddly, ask other things being the same (trick truck mini carraiges, along with the CF tricklaser 300.15mm arms and nearly identical effectors), the M665 H value on version I it's approximately 375mm while it's cousin (version II) needs a value of H nearly 75-85mm higher to grip a sheet of paper when traveling downward in the Z direction from homing position. Now most intriguing thing I'm finding on this version II with the increased apparent Z height, is that if I go ahead and run a 9-factor calibration on it, I obtain the ever so sought after value after Calibration deviation of 0.001, which at first was mind boggling! Until I checked the auto determined values entered into the M665 values such are so far out of reality that accurate prints are obviously impossible -- recently when I got that deviation of 0.001, the calculated diagonal rods length are entered in as mid 400mm lengths! Damn it! I just can't seem to get this to reflect reality while also obtaining a green height map. It's very frustrating, the two issues, one which is that two identical component- built frames should have such vastly differing values of foundational values such as height, but then also that the calibration results are terrible if only allowing for 6-factor calibrations, and the accompanying height map in those situations looking like god-damned mogul runs at a ski resort (for both printers side by side), but then if allowed to utilize 9-factor calibrations I can finally realize deviation values is been hoping for and expecting this entire time (0.003-0.001,at long last) but only at the expense of the numbers being even closely based upon reality. This entire thing is very frustrating and I'd love to know why this is.

To that end, the suggestion posted ago email regarding the springs being far to stiff on the tricklaser diagonal arm configurations is the first time I've heard any advice that makes sense and I will certainly try that at my next convenience, though it is difficult to imagine that the spring tension could account for either the differential of lengths when comparing two nearly identical machines side by side having such strangely differing values, of the incredible altering calibration results between 6- and 9-factor calibration getting better to the tone of improvements from a shitty 0.254 deviation to the long sought after results of 0.003 - 0.001. This is giving me a headache and I'd be fidget indebted to anyone who can help me to resolve this wild discrepancy I'm realizing through my multiple hundreds of tries over a wide range of probing hardware, which I've finally settled on DJDemonD 's wonderful precision piezo hardware setup. Note to find out the reason for the strange results and ultimately how to resolve these inconsistencies!!

Thanks for listening.

Jonathan

Ian -

nice that this topic was already raised; saves me some typing :). Question relating precisely to this thread, which is do you see any hurdles presented by trying to commission a diamond hotend on a delta? Particularly weight, influence of effector angle caused by torques imparted by the Bowden tubes which will need to follow along with effector. I guess I'm trying to ask why you haven't used a delta for your awesome work. Do you anticipate problems or challenges due to the kinematics of the machine?

Thanks,

Jonathan

W3DRK,
by any chance do you browse the forums and read this? If so, please respond as I've sent you a PM but no reply. Thanks very much.

Jonathan

It all tracks back to one bad day some time back when I had a short in what then was a new quick- connect system for effectors to mature it easier to swap out bergen my two metal max deltas, as I had found what now has become common place via themakerhive.com a product which is a circuit board with connections to two fans, Thermistor, LED, hotend all via a 12 pin proprietary connector which I inadvertently made a mistake while crimping the connector due to being very overtired. Problem was the mistake was actually in the board though I was convinced it was with the wiring loom end of the connector. So I proceeded to fry one, replace it, inspect the wiring thought I find the error, corrected it (or so I thought), reconnected the effectors and magic smoke. I was pissed off and so I'm like screw Metal Max #1, key me prove to myself this goddamn effectors quick change system works by running a test using the second metal max system in the room next door and I'll call it a day…you can only guess how I finally narrowed down the wiring error to be on the effector and not the printer -side of the connection. What a day.

Yes, I've got other computers to try it on. Though the issue, in my opinion, respectfully of course cuts I know you guys are the masters of this trade, but the program appears to run fine, just not when the (what everything to me is screaming problem with this particular board) specific duet wifi in question gets plugged in….then all goes to shit.

BTW, as far as board power is concerned, this is being connected to my pc in a standalone manner (ie. Not installed in any machine...just the card via USB no wires whatsoever) because I can't get a firmware running in it I had to decommission it in place of a functional board in the meanwhile.

Thanks again guys for very valuable insight. Haha Simon, speaking of polyjet, would you happen to have a few spare hundred thousand dollars I can borrow to outfit myself with the HP tech you mentioned d above?

Thanks again guys.

P.s. -> hey Ian, would you mind if I essentially copied your machine?

Cheers.

Jonathan

Hi all,
Just wondering whether anyone reading this has the required skills, equipment, and willingness to repair a pair of duet wifi boards. Each is u in need of an onboard stepper driver replacement. FWIW, I do have another third board which is totalled with the exception of all drivers being functional do it could theoretically be parted for the necessary drivers to place on the boards that need them. Please do respond if you'd be willing to help a fellow hobbyist out for a reasonable price.

Thank you.

Jonathan