@dc42 Thanks

Dear Dc42,

Well, I guess after reading through the link I am a still a bit confused.
But I will start exploring and hopefully things will clear up if I dig in the code.
According to step 1. I shall first ask you for a kinematic type number after having suggested a name:

LinearDeltaWithExtraCartZ.

And then implement what you suggested for step2.

Cheers,

Hello all,

This is a follow up of an old request I think:
https://forum.duet3d.com/topic/424/delta-tool-support-axis
Sorry to come back after so long time with this issue, but I understood at the time that you were about to rewrite the firmware to make this possible/easier.
My goal is currently to turn my 3d printer into a 3d clay/paste extruder.
The problem is that the clay is pretty heavy, too heavy to be mounted as in a flying extruder on the 3 delta axis.
As you say hinted homming is an issue.
My current idea would be to attach the container with a fastconnector after homing and offsetting the effector down by a couple of centimeters.
And to reply to tony, the tube between extruder and clay will be 3/4 of an inch so pretty stiff.

My first idea (might be a bad one) was to have the clay hanging and thus could follow the x-y movement a bit. Tube would act as a leash.
The printer is pretty high so I think it could follow.
Also adding an elastic element could potentially address the constant lenght issue if tuned well and still prevent the "whole" weight to be on the effector.
Essencially to start experimenting though I would need at least a Z motor to follow the Z of the delta.

Thank you in advance.

p.s. Sorry I realise this might not be the right forum category, I posted here because I just read 2 articles on similar subjects.

hello It would be my greatest pleasure too. Diamond hotend here I come….

@dc42:

sga, is there any reason why you can't use a config.g file for your most common configuration, and then for each additional configuration, create a macro file that you run after starting up? The only commands in config.g that you can't override later are the network configuration commands to set MAC address, IP address etc. (which don't yet work on the Duet WiFi anyway). I even have a macro file to switch my Cartesian printer over to CoreXY mode, so that I can test CoreXY support in the firmware.

Sorry, you are certainly right. I do have my effectors on magnet balls. I have the std one working now and all parts ready for a dual vulcan, as well as a ceramic paste extruder. In the future maybe next year I will probably add more (laser) but I have no parts or clear plans yet.

The main differences between the 3 current heads will be in the geometry:
-nozzle height and number and position
-z probe height
-Extruder steps per mm or mm3 for the paste.
-max speed etc…
The only risk is to crash the nozzle by pressing the bed autolevel button before selecting the appropriate config macro.

I was naively thinking a different config.h was required for every geometry but a macro library would be just as good.

Following your idea, what would be a good way to change the visual aspect of the webpage as a function of the currently selected configuration macro? ( i am thinking title, color theme, to avoid confusion)
Ideally I would put a different resistor in each effector (toolhead) and use that as a configuration selector. I have used that in the past in different projects and it was good enough up to 20 different calibrated modules.

Thank you again for giving us such a nice tool to play with.

sga

The first bed report will always have the z offset in it, this is normal and I do get the same. you can change it my modifying the value in the config, but I understand it is not recomended because you want some margin for the first probing (just in case sth moved in your bed or so) the second third etc will be corrected for z offset.
What is your M665 and M666 responding?
Maybe try probing points closer to the bed rim if you can.
Try making a 32 point calibration and maybe try a 7 factor.
Despite the recommendations that 7 factor shall only be used if you can probe distances far from the tower. I found that my arm length was "evaluated" 4 mm longer than what I carefully measured (which is strange admittedly) but resulted in my overall flatness suddenly getting better (in theory and in practice).
And that only measuring from a 300mm bed on a 500mm tower distance.

I will report on that. It definetly doesn't like nozzle crashing into it.
I upped the temperature with edge filament to 240°C and I am doing a print tonight first layer adhesion is actually better ( I used too low temperatures due to some wrong indication on the e3d sticker spool box and also because I was lacking experience)
I still get a lot of goo around the nozzle which I need to babysit clean every 5-10 layer or so… I wonder what is wrong in my slicer settings. The ngen (colorfab) didn't do that.
problem with the goo is that it detaches and hardens always at the worst place and then you get a nozzle crash...

Update on IR mini differential. I just started to print after running a few calibrations on WHITE BUILDTAK

second calibration results
 -0.040 -0.026 -0.037
-0.081 -0.067 -0.028
0.031 0.062 0
0.021 -0.047 -0.053
0.018 -0.01 0.037
-0.02 -0.087 -0.081
-0.009 0.008 -0.04
-0.072 -0.038 -0.061
0.022 -0.029 0.022
-0.008 -0.042 -0.027 -0.032 0.01

bed check:
0.027 -0.021 0
0.042 -0.009 -0.021
0.069 -0.021 -0.011
0.003 0.04 -0.007
0.013 -0.018 -0.012
0.021 -0.016 -0.008
0.018 0.041 0.004
-0.036 -0.039 0.009
0.058 0.001 0.006
0.039 -0.013 0.016 -0.011 0.04

it's night and day… essentially my first layer is just perfect now the deviation is under 30microns... and as for my impression about the filament I tried the ngen (copolyester) vs edge (pet+) and the first is so much easier to work with perfect layers with default setting and no fideling.

so the answer is WHITE BUILDTAK

Also a friend lent me a seek thermal camera so I took a few shots and a thermal movie of the bed and duet in action.
https://goo.gl/photos/Pwpu314hspv86Nvv8

the probing target would have to be moved on the bed manually I guess but that could work.
The problem with such a solution is that you lose the advantage that the autocalibration provides for positional drift (tilt) of the bed with time. And for a delta that could be the bed, a column or anything.
I am pretty sure now that the white buildtak would actually work much better so I am going to order some and report here.

I am not sure because my M558 command doesn't specify it:
M558 P1 X0 Y0 Z0 H2
so it must be the default for firmware 1.15c
It is quite slow I would say 1-2mm/second looking at it and counting 3seconds plunging time for about 4-5mm depth.
thank you for the G92.

update: added F60 which slowed down the calibration a bit still acceptable if you don't have to run it 10 times…
Anyway I was able to print the panel due case overnight (not perfect but still ok after 2-3 false starts and messing with Z height)
and now when I

-0.047 0.009 -0.043
0.004 0.011 -0.026
0.178 0.196 0.268
0.032 0.111 0.060
-0.009 -0.064 -0.041
-0.137 0.041 0.014
-0.327 -0.311 -0.020
-0.038 -0.028 0.261
-0.053 -0.132 -0.011
0.080 -0.268 -4.601 -1.808 -1.718

I removed the bed and it is certainly rotated since last time but the problem has gone a bit worse due to the rotation it is hard to say if it has spread actually.

my "new theory" (yes I can have many per days) is that the buildtak top surface gets smoother with use ( only a few prints so far) and that changes the IR reflection.
I think I shall have taken the white one because black certainly has less pigment (you can see through) and the top surface would reflect less light.
But those number are too much off for that…

update 2: removed the 3 culprit points => bed is now perfectly flat and printing. https://goo.gl/photos/zgDXPbGYmcGGwq3G8