Posts made by rGlory

@dc42 said in M104 with inactive tool puts heater in standby mode:

I think I see what you are saying, it's that in a dual heater machine the heater will be in standby mode, so when the call to SetToolHeaterStandbyTemperature sets the standby temperature it will affect the heater setpoint; but in a shared nozzle machine the heater will be in active mode so it won't.

Exactly

However, if a slicer sends a M104 command near the start of the file to put the second tool on standby when it was previously off, then your proposed change would still set the heater to standby temperature - which is wrong if it is being used by the active tool. So I think it doesn't quite fix all instances of the problem.

Yes it is possible. But first it is unlikely to happen - usual flow I believe is to issue M104 to inactive tool for it to heat in background and then M109 to active one to wait for it to reach. But even if that is the case solution for this case is very simple and straightforward - just send inactive tool M104 command (or newer Gnn command) in printer startup code. This is very simple step and nothing comparing to find every instance of M104 in middle of printing and remove it. And could be just documented in Wiki for multiextruder/shared nozzle setup.

On another side calling StandbyTool on standby state does not sound right, and usually it leads to problems sooner or later (what is actually happened in this case). If I would develop it I would write it like this:

void Tool::Standby()
{
     if( state == ToolState::standby )
         return;
     ...

but of course would do that in the beginning of developing, doing so now would be too dangerous for possible side effects. If you would want to hear my opinion I think cleaner solution would be to check from which state Tool is coming from and if it is off then it would also check every heater state and only apply state transition if it is in the same state. Probably the same for active to standby or standby to active transition as well. So something like this:

void Tool::Standby()
{
     if( state == ToolState::standby )
         return;
    for( auto heater : heaters ) {
        if( heater->GetState() == state ) heater->standby();
    }
    state = ToolState::standby;

}

this is more pseudocode, but I think idea is clear. But again most probably it is not the good time to do it now when there are many parts depends on current behavior and in current situation changes in M104 section seems to be the smallest change which should have minimal side effects and pretty easy to test.

Thanks,
Slava

@dc42 said in M104 with inactive tool puts heater in standby mode:

This is why I mentioned the possibility of ignoring the M104 request (at least in terms of not changing the current temperature) if the standby tool shares heaters with the active tool.

It depends on what it means of ignoring M104 request. There are 2 actions - set active and standby temperature of the tool and switching tool into standby mode. I think it is enough to prevent only second part and it should be fine.

So the code would become something like this:

I see what you mean, looks like you are afraid that without this call temperatures on non shared heaters would not be set. But the point is it is not really necessary. M104/109 handling code sets temperatures first:

https://github.com/dc42/RepRapFirmware/blob/d9f051b6c658fa278b22535a8bd03d124bcf8fad/src/GCodes/GCodes2.cpp#L1361

		if (simulationMode == 0)
		{
			SetToolHeaters(applicableTool, temperature, true);
		}

which in order sets active and standby temperature for the tool:

https://github.com/dc42/RepRapFirmware/blob/d9f051b6c658fa278b22535a8bd03d124bcf8fad/src/GCodes/GCodes.cpp#L4238

	tool->SetToolHeaterActiveTemperature(h, temperature);
	if (both)
	{
		tool->SetToolHeaterStandbyTemperature(h, temperature);
	}

SetToolHeaterActiveTemperature would not affect either shared or separate heaters:

https://github.com/dc42/RepRapFirmware/blob/d9f051b6c658fa278b22535a8bd03d124bcf8fad/src/Tools/Tool.cpp#L430

	const bool setHeater = (currentTool == nullptr || currentTool == this);

it would be false and not affect either. SetToolHeaterStandbyTemperature() on another side will work differently for shared and separate heaters:

 reprap.GetHeat().SetStandbyTemperature(heaters[heaterNumber], standbyTemperatures[heaterNumber]);

will be executed. Now separate heater machine will have all heaters in standby mode and this will affect their current temperature. On shared heater heater will be in active state and this will not change temperature, only store it.

So according to this it is completely not necessary to call Tool::Standby() all temperatures would be updated properly by existing code. So I think cleanest fix here would be as I suggested before:

                           if( applicableTool->GetState() != ToolState::standby ) 
				reprap.StandbyTool(applicableTool->Number(), simulationMode != 0);

as it will involve the minimum code change and minimize possible side effects.

But of course it is up to you to decide.

@deckingman said in M104 with inactive tool puts heater in standby mode:

You say that the standby temperature needs to be maintained as part of the material properties in Cura. That's all well and good. Then you say you need to change it for each extruder. Why? If it's set in materials properties why do you need to make changes for each extruder?

Because I do not want to screw up material definition for particular workaround. And yes I see this solution for changing standby temperature for particular printer hardware configuration as a workaround and not proper solution. If you disagree with that I am totally fine, I just try to point again and again state maintenance has a bug here and it produces this behavior. If tool would not switch from standby to standby both parties would be happy - shared nozzle and not and we would not need to create different material per printer and I would not spent long time trying to fix this issue.

For this printer, you can't have separate active and standby temperatures - they have to be the same because you have a shared heater for each tool.

Yes I can, if state would be maintained then standby temperature would be happily ignored by my printer but would still work by printer that has separate heater and everybody is happy.

Then you say that if you want to adjust the temperature on the fly through the web interface, you won't be able to do it. Of course you will. Why on earth do you think you won't be able to? Hundreds if not thousands of us do that so why do you think it won't work for you?

Sorry maybe I did not make myself clear. I can change but next standby temperature command from Cura will screw it up again. And it will do that only for me - I mean shared heater. Different heater people are not affected.

@dc42 said in M104 with inactive tool puts heater in standby mode:

I am sorry, you most definitely are asking for RRF to ignore Cura's attempt to change the current temperature of the tool that is on standby. Cura asks to do that when it expects to switch to that tool in the near future.

I am not sure we are on the same page here. I am referring to the current situation with RRF as represented in github on your branch and what Cura does. So M104 Tn Sxxx sets standby temperature for inactive tool first. Am I correct here? Setting standby temperature would affect temperature of heaters associated with that tool if they also in standby mode. And it works for multiple nozzles ie separate heaters. But if a heater is shared it would be in active state (deactivating one tool puts it in standby and activating another brings it back to active if I am not mistaken here). So changing standby temperature on inactive tool would not affect shared heater if not this bug that reapplies standby mode to that tool again which puts heater into standby mode.

The problem is that Cura seems to be assuming that the tool on standby doesn't use the same heater(s) as the current tool.

I think Cura is correct assuming that the tool in in standby. Problem is that M104 handling code in RRF blindly reapplies standby mode to the tool again which applies standby mode to all heaters associated with it and that breaks the logic - shared heater loosing active state from active tool. So making M104 to check if that tool already in standby and not to do that again (standby temperature applied before and would be handled properly if heater is in standby mode) would fix this issue for shared heater and should not break anything for not shared one.

Are you certain that there isn't an option in Cura to leave the temperatures of tools alone when they are not active?

Only option I found is to disable temperature control completely. And it is not simple - you have to create a json file defining your printer and disable temperature control completely. That what I have right now and I inject temperature commands into g-code but for me this is not a very good solution. And I spent long time and many prints cancelled to find cause and this solution.

@deckingman said in M104 with inactive tool puts heater in standby mode:

Your arguments don't make any sense at all

If that arguments not good enough for you lets put it this way: almost every new user using Duet and Cura for shared hotend with multiple extruders is going to hit this issue and it takes quite long time and frustration to identify the cause and find solution. Either task is not simple. Yes we can blame Cura for that and give up, but there is a bug in firmware and fixing that will help those new users. Good enough for you now?

Thanks,
Slava

@deckingman said in M104 with inactive tool puts heater in standby mode:

Therefore, if you can't physically have a lower standby temperature (because both tools share the same heater), then why don't you simply set the standby temperature to be the same as the active temperature? Then it won't matter what tool is in what state.

In theory yes, in practice this is very error prone method. First - Cura maintains that standby temperature as material property. So if I update material I need to remember to go to each extruder and fix that. Plus if I have another printer with separate nozzles I need to remember not to do that or to revert that back. Plus if I want to adjust temperature in fly trhough web interface in Duet to tune my printing this also will be screwed by incorrect state transition. On another side if firmware would fix state maintenance that would work for both variants of printers - shared nozzles or not, or even one that has both shared and not shared in the same hadrware uniformly without any issue.

I think it is pretty clear that state maintenance has a bug here there should be no transition from standby to standby mode. Otherwise logically we should have transition for active tool from active to active again. That would fix the issue as well, but I do not think that is necessary.

As I said before, I don't understand why you are trying to use a low standby temperature for two tools which share the same heater.

I am not trying to use standby temperature, I do not have a choice. Cura injects that code no matter what AND the worst possible way. I know that IT is Cura's problem, but why not to fix bug here and on a side effect it would eliminate this issue with Cura?

To repeat again I do not get confirmation yet but I think it is pretty clear that transition from standby to standby is a bug and fixing it should not break functionality for existing users and improve other people experience at the same time.

@dc42 said in M104 with inactive tool puts heater in standby mode:

Granted, if the tool is already in standby, it could do it by setting the tool temperature directly instead.

Not quite. There is no instead here - M104 or M109 handling changes standby temperature already and I do not ask to touch or change it. This is existing functionality. I only ask not to standby tool that is already in standby state.

But that wouldn't solve your problem, would it?

The point is it actually would. Problem is this:

 // code here
T1 ; new tool activated, now T0 is in standby
// some more code
M104 T0 S123 ; cura sets standby temperature for T0 and RRF screws T1 state by reapplying standby to T0

So T0 is already in standby state here when M104 executed. For multiple hottend people it will change standby temperature heater for T0 and stanby temperature would be used. For shared hotend if M104 does not put T0 into standby again standby temperature for T0 would be updated but it will not affect heater as it will keep active state from T1. I hope I explained it clearly. So properly maintaining state here should not break functionality for multiple hotend and would fix for shared one.

What you seem to be asking RRF to do is to ignore Cura's attempt to change the temperature of the standby tool - which would break the behaviour for users with dual-nozzle printers.

No I do not. I am only asking to maintain state and do not standby tool that is already in standby mode. Everything else should be as it is.

@dc42 said in M104 with inactive tool puts heater in standby mode:

It's not a bug.

Sorry, but I clearly see a bug here - tool is already in standby mode and put it in standby mode again. It is clearly a bug with improperly maintaining state in the firmware. For example if I have tool 0 active and execute T0 will it put it into active state again and switch from T0 to T0? Executing T0 deactivation and T0 activation code? No I do not think so. Because state of tool needs to be maintained. Putting aside proper or improper Cura behavior - M104 Tn Snnn rexecutes standby transition for inactive tool when it is already in standby state. This is clearly a bug or improper state management. If that bug is fixed then it will eliminate problem with Cura - win win situation.

if Cura doesn't provide that facility, then the question is: to what extent should RRF put up with slicer bugs and try to work around them? Could we identify exactly when we should obey a M104 command that refers to a standby tool, when when to ignore it? In this particular case, we could say that M104 commands that refers to a tool that is on standby and has a heater shared with the active tool should be ignored; but will that always have the "correct" effect? What if each tool has multiple heaters, and only some of them are shared?

I am not asking here not to obey M104 command, taht is not necessary. It should change standby temperature as it does now. I only ask to fix state management that it would not standby tool that is already in standby state. Then Cura problem will disappear or fix would be easy and obvious. And it should not affect 2 nozzle users.

@dc42 said in M104 with inactive tool puts heater in standby mode:

That will break the functionality for existing users.

If existing users rely on bugs, it should be fixed anyway or at least documented. But how about:

if( applicableTool->GetState() != ToolState::standby ) 
          reprap.StandbyTool(applicableTool->Number(), simulationMode != 0);

Because currently code "puts" tool into standby mode even if it is already in standby mode. Can at least this be considered as a bug and fixed? Because that what actually screw it in this situation - tool already in standby by T command, but M104 puts it in "standby" mode blindly again, without even checking if it is not already there.

Isn't there a switch in Cura to tell it that you have a mixing nozzle, so you don't want it to mess around trying to set 2 different heater temperatures?

I do not think so, I spent long hours try to identify the reason and trying to fix it. And I suggest to put this fix as I am afraid every new client using duet3d and mixing dual extruder with Cura will hit this problem immediately. And it is not very easy to find the reason, it cost me quite long time and frustration. If you do not care about one nozzle people and 2 nozzle ones are first class citizens and you do not want to touch erronous behaviour if it may affect them, it is ok, would be good to know.

Actually I looked into source code in github and the fix probably would not be as straightforward as I thought first, the problem is that the tool supports multiple heaters. That can be solved by comparing all heaters in both active and selected tools and if any of them shared prevent it to switch state.

But I came with more interesting conclusion reading the source:

https://github.com/dc42/RepRapFirmware/blob/dev/src/GCodes/GCodes2.cpp line 1306

	// New behaviour from 1.20beta12:
	// M109 Snnn
	// - If no tools are active, set Tool 0 to active
	// - Set active tool's active and standby temperatures to Snnn
	//
	// M109 Tnnn Snnn
	// - If no tools are active, set Tnnn to active
	// - If another tool is active but Tnnn is off, set Tnnn to standby
	// - Set Tnnn's active and standby temperatures to Snnn
	// M104 does the same but doesn't ever select a tool

So according to this "If another tool is active but Tnnn is off, set Tnnn to standby" what we discussed here is a bug, not intended behavior, because from source and observed behavior it sets Tnnn to standby no matter if it is off or not. If it would work as described here the fix would be easy if necessary at all - activate another tool at the begining of code and it would not go into standby mode.

If this is a bug indeed fix is oneliner:

https://github.com/dc42/RepRapFirmware/blob/d9f051b6c658fa278b22535a8bd03d124bcf8fad/src/GCodes/GCodes2.cpp#L1388

instead of:

 reprap.StandbyTool(applicableTool->Number(), simulationMode != 0);

it should be:

 if( applicableTool->GetState() == ToolState::off ) 
    reprap.StandbyTool(applicableTool->Number(), simulationMode != 0);

@deckingman said in M104 with inactive tool puts heater in standby mode:

But I'm not going to try to help you any more because you clearly don't want to listen.

I got your message, but I am afraid we understand little bit differently what "help" means. I just want to point - the way I want to do it does not conflict with your way and does not enforce you to change. But your help here from the beginning is to force me going particular way because you think it is better. And instead of explaining why this way is better you just saying it should be this way and if I try to explain why I want my way (and I am not telling you how to do that, just trying to say that my way could be also useful sometimes) you say I do not listen, you are tired and so on.

I do see benefit of controlling temperature from slicer (and many other people do, otherwise they would not put that there) and I think it is very easy to fix this issue in firmware so I came here to ask - is it possible? What I got back? "Where is the M104 coming from? Is it slicer generated? If it is, you might be kind of stuck." That's it? Sounds like I am too small to listen and if cannot be solved without changing firmware nobody cares. And I cannot try to express my opinion without hurting your fillings. Sorry.

@dc42 said in M104 with inactive tool puts heater in standby mode:

Because slicers don't ask the firmware what sort of tools have been configured, and require you to tell them. Some slicers don't understand mixing tools at all.

The thing is if firmware would handle it (have different behavior if heater shared or not) then I do not need to tell slicer if my heater is shared or not and slicer can produce generic code that would work on both printers with shared nozzle or not.

Is that not the target and we have setting in firmware to change tools and so on? We can put that all into slicer and not bother. But make them unified is better imho.

The M104 and M109 commands were never designed to handle the flexible tool configuration that RepRapFirmware provides. That's why RepRapFirmware provides G10 for setting temperatures too.

I cannot enforce Cura developers to use G10 instead of M104/M109, I can leave with manual temperature control. What I am trying to say - this will solve many people issue and should not affect existing users. And on top of that I think that is easy to implement feature. So this is feedback from a user of duet3d card and pretty long time spent of fixing this problem and frustration with that and I think this feature will improve mine and other people experience. If it is too hard to do or you think it will break existing users or just would not want to bother so be it.

@deckingman said in M104 with inactive tool puts heater in standby mode:

If you want to use different temperatures for different materials

You do not understand as you probably not using Cura. It maintains library of different materials with their properties (for different makers, color etc). So if you define material and set temperature for it, it will be updated when you switch btw materials. But if you need to put it manually into g-code you are on your own. That is especially a problem when you have more than one printer and in some of them temperature controlled properly, but some of them require g-code change. Do you get it?

@deckingman said in M104 with inactive tool puts heater in standby mode:

Seems like the problem is with Cura.

I do not disagree with that. But I doubt the issue will be fixed soon there, as ultimaker printers do not have such config if I am not wrong. So having this solution in duet would be another reason to use it with Cura and good improvement.

But I say yet again, there is no need to use temperature control of the hot end in the slicer. Disable it and do as I said with the G10 commands in the start gcode.

It is really a bad way to do it - changing temperature in g-code instead of properly modify it in slicer settings. Then you loose properties of different materials that slicer maintains, you need to do that manually. Also you cannot control temperature for the first layer vs the rest, which sometimes is handy.

DC42 has already pointed out that other slicers try to pre-heat the tool on standby and that is why the firmware works the way it does. So if he changes the firmware to suit you and the way you choose to use your slicer, then it'll upset all the other users who use a different slicer.

Preheat only makes sense for printers/users with separate nozzle ie separate heaters. For shared heaters preheat does not work anyway and this change will not break anything and it is very easy to differentiate separate heater/shared one in firmware.

@phaedrux said in M104 with inactive tool puts heater in standby mode:

Perhaps the solution they provide would also work for you.

This solution is exactly what I mentioned - I have to disable temperature control and put custom g-code into printer startup. This works but is a terrible solution - it requires to change startup g-code every time material changed and you cannot fine control temperature anymore (for example different one for the first layer and so on). You actually
can by injecting it manually but that is a pain.

On another side it is a pretty easy fix on firmware level:

1 That information is already in config
2 It should not affect existing multi-extruder printers. Single extruder ones are screwed by this problem anyway.

@deckingman said in M104 with inactive tool puts heater in standby mode:

if you have a single heater, why are you trying to set a different standby temperature?

I do not, Cura does and there is no way to stop it (as much as I know) unless you disable temperature control completely.

Either T0 or T1 is active when printing and as they have the same heater then it follows that both must be active.

T0 and T1 cannot be active at the same time (using Tn command), as they have separate extruders. They use the same heater but there is no way to let Cura know that. Duet firmware already knows that from config but it does not care and puts heater in standby mode when M104 T1 Snnn issued after T0 activated and vice versa.

You can't set a lower standby temperature because you only have one heater for both tools.

I do not want to set lower standby temperature and I do not want to use standby mode at all. But I do not have a choice, no matter what I do Cura issues M104 command after tool change and after custom code generated (otherwise I could reactive heater in that code) so putting it into standby mode.

I've told you how to set it up using G10 Pn Snn Rnn.

I do not control Cura that way, I can choose temperature in boxes. If there is way to tell Cura to issue G10 instead of M104 please let me know - issue solved.

And stop blaming the firmware because that isn't the problem.

That problem exists:

https://community.ultimaker.com/topic/25233-auto-inserted-m104-t0-s0-during-print-with-dual-extrusion/

https://github.com/Ultimaker/Cura/issues/4204

As a workaround I always need to run a post script to remove the cura adding M109 Sxxx gcode... but this remove also the first M109 Sxxx that I need to be there then I need to edit the file and activate manually the first M109...

https://github.com/Ultimaker/Cura/issues/5155

I also had the problem with printing from the second extruder of a GeeeTech A10M where the nozzle would not heat up. I came up with a fix which seems to be supported by the printer firmware.

And I am not blaming firmware, I am just saying it is easier and more logical to fix it in firmware, because firmware already has that information handy - if heater shared or not. Slicer needs to be configured at least or even worse post processing needs to be added.

mtmello2003 created this issue in Ultimaker/Cura

closed Cura add temperature update gcode when tool change, without need it. #4204

szerwi created this issue in Ultimaker/Cura

closed Cura 3.6 disables heating while printing dual extruder #5155

@dc42 said in M104 with inactive tool puts heater in standby mode:

This is intentional behaviour, to handle slicers that try to preheat the tool on standby shortly before switching to it.

So this is a workaround? Maybe it should be reworked? I looked through and this "feature" seems to screw pretty many people already. I saw a request on this forum to remove "standby" state completely and I think because of this issue. Anyway for firmware not to do it is pretty simpe - that information is right there.

It looks like your slicer assumes that tools 0 and 1 have separate heaters and it is trying to set different temperatures for them. You need to tell your slicer that this isn't the case.

Why slicer should care? Firmware has hardware configuration and it says right there: T0 and T1 share the same heater. Do not change the state through T1 when T0 is active and vice versa. I think it is very simple and should not break any other printers that have separate hotends.

@deckingman

Where is the M104 coming from? Is it slicer generated?

Yes, it is generated by Cura. And of course it generated worse possible way - after custom G-Code for tool change is already generated.

If it is, you might be kind of stuck.

Sorry I do not understand. Is firmware here written in stone?

M104 is deprecated and ideally, you should use G10. So G10 Pn Rn Sn will set both the active and standby temperatures.

Unfortunately I do not control Cura developers. As much as I know there is no way to change that. I found a workaround - disable temperature control completely, but that is a terrible workaround.

So M104 T1 S100 followed by T1 should make it active.

I think M104 should not make tool active/standby but Tn should. But this is a different story. At least it should not change it's state when heater shared with active tool.

TBH, I'm not sure what it is you are trying to do. If you have multiple tools using the same heater, then you can't have different active and standby temperatures.

I am trying to use pretty simple setup - 2 extruders and one hotend with Y-joiner. Slic3r does not work well with multicolor yet. Cura with duet3d together screw me up I cannot prevent it to put hotend into standby mode. I had to disable temperature control and move it to printer setup G-Code which is terrible solution. So I am asking this issue was reported multiple times why not to put solution in firmware when it is so simple?

So if I have Tool 0 active and issue command:

M104 T1 S100

This sets standby temperature for T1 and puts T1 in standby mode. This is explicitly painfull when I have T0 and T1 attached to the same heater. I understand that M104 changes standby temperature when inactive tool is used but it should not modify that tool state. I think only T command should change state active/standby.

Or at least is it possible to make M104 not to modify heater state when active T and tool in parameter of M104 use the same heater?

Firmware Version: 2.02(RTOS) (2018-12-24b1)

Thanks,
Slava