Page MenuHomeAleph Objects Inc

SL/Dual E2 Misses wiper pad entirely
Closed, ResolvedPublic


Running an SL tool head on Quiver yesterday I noticed the nozzle was to the left of the wiper pad mount during the wipe sequence. It was wiping over the bed, with the right side of the nozzle barely tapping the left side of the wiper pad mount.

Running m.80, CuraLE 3.6.4 fresh from yesterday.

Event Timeline

logan created this task.Feb 7 2019, 7:41 AM
logan triaged this task as Normal priority.
logan created this object with edit policy "LulzBot Hardware Products (Project)".
marcio added a subscriber: marcio.Feb 7 2019, 2:08 PM

I don't have a SL toolhead, but if you get me one, I could look into this.

karrad added subscribers: adam, karrad.EditedFeb 7 2019, 2:40 PM

@adam Please get Marcio a production SL for this testing. I have had some missed probes on my alpha SL (front left corner), and would like to ensure the firmware is probing correctly with production units.

EDIT By missed, I mean the center/lower portion of the nozzle does not make contact with top of the washer. The hexagon "wrench" section of the tool head will make contact, but makes a very uneven plane calculated by incorrect point.

adam added a comment.Feb 7 2019, 3:05 PM

@karrad there is now a production SL on Marcio's desk to test with.

logan renamed this task from SL Misses wiper pad entirely to SL/Dual E2 Misses wiper pad entirely .Feb 8 2019, 9:16 AM
logan added a comment.Feb 8 2019, 9:35 AM

After reinstalling the standard dual extruder I noticed that E2 is missing in the same manner; not even inside the wiper pad. E1 hits on the left of the pad, rubbing on the mount also.
I removed and reinstalled my Y axis to verify no measurements have changed, I have made no modifications to start gcode. I am running m.80.
I am missing the right front probe point, the nozzle is hardly aligned with the washer and the blower shroud hits the wiper pad mount.

What changed?

@logan @kent is this the printer that has been shown to have drag in one of the axes that is over tolerance? If that is the case, that issue needs to be fixed first before continuing to post tickets on other issues.

logan added a comment.Feb 8 2019, 11:01 AM

@Steven I don't know what you mean, we were not provided with set drag tolerances as far as I am aware, nor has testing been requested to determine drag tolerances for Quiver AFAIK.

Compression bushings are loose, I am able to get good prints now that backlash compensation is actually on. But I have to remove the right wiper pad because of the missed probe point, and still have to scrub the E1 nozzle by hand due to it not wiping correctly despite having default start gcode and the same Y axis placement as everyone else.

logan added a comment.Feb 8 2019, 11:04 AM

Since someone will suggest it anyway, I'll go ahead and clear cache, update my local build, flash to the latest quiver fw, redo auto calibration and retry.

@logan I ran into this issue a few weeks ago, have you restored factory defaults after updating firmware? (it solved my issue)

logan added a comment.Feb 8 2019, 11:07 AM

@karrad I will do that too

logan added a comment.Feb 8 2019, 11:35 AM

Cleared cache
Updated local build
Flashed quiver to, restored to factory defaults
cleaned nozzles and performed auto calibration
sliced a fresh cube gcode with polylite PLA high speed defaults

No change in behavior; hits on left flange of left wiper mount (first outside the wiper mount, then pops over the lip as it moves forward/wiggles), misses right wiper pad entirely, and misses the front right probe point.
Y Axis placement verified
1st alpha blower shroud
stock alpha wiper pad mounts

tutley added a subscriber: tutley.Feb 8 2019, 12:29 PM

@logan is your x min bump stop fully seated and the correct length? should measure 40mm. mine is measuring about 39.5 when installed

logan added a comment.Feb 8 2019, 1:10 PM

@tutley Confirmed, it is and has been fully seated. Measures 40mm, I get 39.5 from right edge to X motor printed part mating surface when installed measuring with calipers.

tutley added a comment.Feb 8 2019, 2:18 PM

@logan i inspected the x min bump stop and it was printed with a ton of oversquish. it measures about 39.5 off the rod, and was measuring just under 38mm when installed. I replaced the xmin bumpstop with one that measures 40mm. Also i compared the y axis position to @marcio's machine and yours was slightly to the right, so I shifted your y axis 1mm to the left. After these two changes, the machine has no probem wiping or probing. I will bring the machine back to you now.

logan added a comment.Feb 8 2019, 2:22 PM

@tutley That Y-Axis was set with the same jig as all of the other alphas, I confirmed this today with the same jig used for all of the alphas. That means @marcio's machine is different.

logan added a comment.Feb 8 2019, 2:43 PM

After setting it back with the jig it probes but is too far to the left in the wiper pad. So we should be seeing this on all of the alphas, no?

tutley added a subscriber: anolen.Feb 8 2019, 2:56 PM

@logan well the alphas all have the older style xmin bump stops that are hard to get fully seated. So @anolen had me look at hers since they were all wiping too far to the right. All the xmin bump stops werent quite seated (about 2-3mm off) and i seated them properly and hers are all wiping correctly now.

logan added a comment.Feb 8 2019, 3:26 PM

@tutley So in theory, if I had the alpha x bump stop I'd be wiping center?

logan added a comment.Feb 11 2019, 8:13 AM

@tutley Really I am trying to figure out if I need to change the Y-Axis alignment jigs, or if we need to reset @marcio and @karrad machines with the jigs (again), install the new bump stop and fix all of the FW/Start gcode.
@Steven please advise

@logan i just confirmed that the spacer jig fits both yours and @marcio 's machines

@logan the only difference between yours and @marcio's machine that i can see now is the xmin bump stop. You have the beta part, and he has the alpha part. We may want to just adjust the beta y spacer jig so that firmware and start gcode wont need adjusted, and that way both alphas and betas will work with the same firmware versions

logan added a comment.Feb 11 2019, 9:53 AM

@tutley From my perspective that is the more efficient solution because changing the model for the jig is far less time consuming than modifying FW and start gcode. I'd be happy to implement this change if that is the decided route. Do you have a recommendation for a new measurement? I think it would be about the average difference between X-min positions of machines with alpha vs beta X bumps stops but I'm not sure how much that is.

i dont have a measurement, but your machine has a properly seated, and correct length beta xmin bump stop. if yours is wiping 2 or so mm to the left, then the jig should be made an additional 2mm or so longer. (2mm may be too much)

@tutley You mean shorter, right? I will place the nozzle at the start of the wipe sequence, bump it over until it is centered, adjust the jig by that amount and try it out.

lol yea you are correct, *shorter

logan moved this task from Report Issues Here to Needs Review on the Quiver board.Feb 12 2019, 2:49 PM
logan assigned this task to kent.

I have shortened the jig by 2mm, printed and tested it. There are 2 on the printer cart at my desk, they are green. My wipe sequence is now pretty well centered.

@logan have you confirmed this modified jig will work with other Betas or has it only been tested on the one machine?

logan added a comment.Feb 25 2019, 9:08 AM

@Steven I have no idea what was done while I was out of office or why. Betas were apparently built with the 145mm jig?

Betas set firmly against the 143mm jig are working as expected. The 145mm jig will not work with betas.
This branch is ready to merge with master

logan added a comment.Feb 27 2019, 8:04 AM

Just for clarification purposes: the 2mm difference is because of the x bump stop. R&D machines set to 145mm have the alpha X bump stop, not the beta x bump stop.

kent added a comment.Mar 6 2019, 4:31 PM

@Steven The first few beta units were built with the 145 jigs that I distributed on 2-13 because that is what was in the beta tag and that is what matched the rd machines. On 2-25 @logan collected those jigs, disposed of them, and replaced them with 143 jigs as a result of the above discussion. This is concerning to me because it is an un-validated deviation from the beta tag and was a surprise to me when I found out about it, however, it does seem to be working where the other spacer does not.

I am not sure if there is another reason that we are not aware of for why the spacer has to be 145mm. If not, my recommendation is to merge these changes.

kent reassigned this task from kent to Steven.Mar 6 2019, 4:32 PM

@kent I'm not certain but I think the 145mm came from firmware defined on a machine with an old version of the x bump stop. All of the betas have the new bump stop that was corrected in Alphas. If the 143 is working, lets go with that.

kent claimed this task.Mar 7 2019, 12:58 PM
kent closed this task as Resolved.Mar 7 2019, 1:27 PM