Page MenuHomeAleph Objects Inc

Create test/acceptance record for Quiver
Closed, ResolvedPublic

Description

We will need a checksheet for calibration for quiver.

Event Timeline

kent created this task.Oct 15 2018, 8:48 AM
kent triaged this task as Normal priority.
kent added a subscriber: nickp.
nickp changed the edit policy from "All Users" to "LulzBot Hardware Products (Project)".Oct 25 2018, 12:01 PM
DaniAO claimed this task.Nov 30 2018, 11:59 AM
DaniAO added a subscriber: west.Dec 4 2018, 1:46 PM

@west a TAZ 6 copy has been pushed to Branch T4119. Can you please go through and update to use on Quiver?

Thanks!

west added a comment.Dec 5 2018, 11:33 AM

@DaniAO I've updated the test acceptance record. Let me know what you think

Made a few edits and updates.

@kent Please see if there is anything else you would like to add or change.

Thanks!

I have a few notes on the record.

Page 2:
We can remove the box for making sure the second t-nut is there sine we are attaching two spool arms.
We can remove "idler retainer, taller side on left"

Page 3:
under x-axis, the last box we want to change it so say something like :x-axis is level to the frame"
under z-axis we can remove both boxes that ask if the belts are in the collar and flush
under tool head, we can remove the box for feeding 100mm of filament. I think we could also remove the box for making sure the gears move smoothlt and making sure cables are secure out of the way since we have the cable chains now they cant really get in the way by design.

Page 4:
Under electronics, we can remove the check firmware with a checksum.
under test and verification results, we want to change " does LCD function normally" to "does touch screen function normally"
we want to verify both heat sink fans are spinning not just one.
we do not need to calibrate the e-steps.
we want to add :check nozzle offset"

under x-axis, the last box we want to change it so say something like :x-axis is level to the frame

Would it be better to say something like "X-Level completes successfully" since the x-axis being level to the frame depends on that condition and isn't an adjustment that can be made manually?

since we have the cable chains now they cant really get in the way by design.

If you're talking about the tool head still on this line that doesn't really apply I don't think. The cables can still get in the way. Specifically the right side of the tool head and the blower fan wires, currently.

Add a check that the LCD screen is straight per T4876

This has been created and is in master.

@kent please review. This can probably be moved to Beta as well, and we can get feed back from the calibrators as they build betas.

kent claimed this task.Feb 22 2019, 7:39 AM
kent added a subscriber: DaniAO.

The file was removed from the repo and is now saved in the NPI/Printer files on Own.

Some notes:

1st page:
Maybe add in backlash values, as those are going to be different for each machine and generated from calibration

4th page:
A lot of the test and verification results tests can be removed and replaced with the tester testing the functions in the LCD.
-running "auto home" (verifying z end stop switches)
-running "clean nozzle" (verifying it wipes in the center of the pad)
-using "move axis" to verify movement of x, y, z, and extruder
-verifying "motors off" gives free movement of x, y, and z axis
-changing the temperatures of the bed and hot ends, changing fan speed
-verifying "change filament" can change hot ends, temps of each, and move the filaments
-lastly, running calibration to enter values for page 1

-printing the test octopus should be higher on the list, after calibration and before "flat of nozzle contacts with all four bed corners"

Also need to mention the redundancy of the belt tension checks. Page 1 has the tester measure then tensions, then for each axis the tension is checked again, then the second to last check is another check of all tensions.

Probably can be reduced to one measurement before calibration.

Where are we at with this one?

DaniAO added subscribers: Steven, paulette.

Per discussion we had in R&D, loctite was not used on the pulleys for the Alphas nor the Betas as far as we are aware. Unless we've seen a reason to continue to put loctite I think we leave it out for the pulleys. (update from T6267 that needs to be rolled in.

kent added a comment.Fri, Mar 29, 2:00 PM

This is what it looks like currently. Do you think this is ... acceptable?

kent added a comment.Fri, Mar 29, 3:58 PM

I added some new qa records that are split out by subassembly. This is what they look like:

Is the control box internal section at the end of the calibration QA sheet supposed to be there? Are we opening the CB to check these items?

kent added a comment.Mon, Apr 1, 10:07 AM

@paulette, the proposed final qa I posted here doesn't have the control box internal on it. That stuff is in the control box qa record which would happen in pilot.

Oh I see, I assumed that was for final assembly.

So far my only questions for the final calibration checksheets are should we check the pin states for the filament sensor at cal, since having the wiring wrong can cause a failure, and that can happen during final assembly?
My other question is where will the loctite for the idlers be applied, and is that something we need to check for?

kent added a comment.Mon, Apr 1, 10:53 AM

We decided to remove the thread locker because it was only there to address an issue that we haven't actually seen and it was not used during the alpha or many of the beta units and we did not see an issue.

I don't think we need to check the pin states menu, since a failure of the runout detector would stop the test print and give an error message. The pin states menu is available for helping with troubleshooting, but it is not required in the final QA part since it is already being functionally tested during the test print.

There is this checklist item:

The cable connectors fully engaged and oriented correctly.

So, that would be a good time to check that the runout sensors are plugged in correctly.

kent closed this task as Resolved.Tue, Apr 2, 8:44 AM

The original goal of the ticket is accomplished, any future issues with the checksheets can go in a new ticket.