Jump to content
Ultimaker Community of 3D Printing Experts
  • Sign Up


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

3 Neutral

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Ouchies. I dont use the solder pads, my eyes cant cope with that small. I put a bridging wire across pins config1 and gnd, and i'm assuming from the results i see that i am getting spreadcycle mode. Certainly feels like more torque
  2. Ive hacked about with these machines quite a bit over time. They both run Flex3Drives with a suitably modified firmware but none of the changes caused the issue. I may have had an accident at some point tinkering where the board switched off but then reset, so I don't know if maybe there was a damaged component on the board, or partial failure of a driver. Having said that I have reverted to "from scratch" firmware to make sure no old late night forgotten changes playing tricks, mapped to the spare driver chip, and plenty other tests and checks, and replacement of donor parts to no avail. Going to off board driver was instant fix for me so maybe board component, but i cant recall ever getting such print quality out of the machine. Defo the best I have had, and i'm very satisfied with this level of output now.
  3. A quick before and after photo. I think something might have been seriously wrong with the drivers on board, or maybe i'm just used to the finer prints from my other machines, but I swear my UM2's used to print better than the result on the left side. But I have same issue on both the machines. Piece on the right is after TMC mod. I think the stepper carrier approach is a right royal PITA, it took a while to get the second TMCdriven axis to work, testing different remapped pins. However I think the result is pretty conclusive, at least in my case. This machine is now back to producing production parts once boxed back up. When the 2.1.5 board arrives I will fit this to the other machine, if all goes smoothly, I will order another for this machine to keep things as tidy as possible and recover the carrier boards back into my spares bin. For reference the printed item is just a thin walled hollow item similar to the cylinder, but with some straight edges, rounded and sharp corners. Printed in black (ABS) so as to highlight surface striations, 0.8mm wall thickness, 0.2mm layer height. I think that is a wrap !
  4. Well i'm almost there. Got each axis running when mapped and connected individually one each to on-board, and off-board driver. When I map both axis to off board drivers, i get odd behaviour from one axis. Calling it a night for now, as one of the off board driver carriers blew the voltage regulator, through plugging in an old blown driver (4988), it happens when tired. The odd axis behaviour might be down to how I was grounding both carrier boards (as per manuf' instruction), and sods law just when I'm about to eliminate that concern with separate ground wires, the magic smoke escapes. It didn't help that I had a whole pack of faulty 8825 drivers throwing me off track, maybe the plane from China took a lightning hit The intention is for a relatively straight forward documented method of circumventing the 4988 related print quality issues once and for all, whilst retaining the original board. From where this "idea" was a few days ago, it has come along pretty far. Of course the other option is that 2.1.5 board fitted out with TMC drivers. I have one on order. Certainly the off board driver carrier approach is being a lot more hassle but once finalized, some documentation will make it pretty straight forward. at least thats the plan.
  5. Hi tinkergnome and good shout on inverting the enable and step signals. I am (perhaps dangerously) assuming that because the drivers i'm using are "usually" drop in replacements for 4988's, that I shouldn't have to make changes to those. But I will certainly keep this in mind now that you mention them. Using the analogue pins seems to be working, although I am having a bit of trouble. In diagnosing, if I fit just one external driver, and set the pins accordingly, I have both X and Y running (one from the offboard driver, one from the original onboard 4988). But if I wire in both off-board drivers and set pins accordingly, I get one axis running.works. Just working my way through a few tests. Do you think the inverting Enable and/or Step is going to be necessary? I wouldn't have thought so given the "drop-in" replacement nature of these. I am so close to my goal.
  6. OK so I think I have worked out what to do with those analog pins to define them as digital pins. Its so easy. I now have motion on one axis testing with some spare 8825 drivers (instead of blowing tmc2100's). I have to recheck the other axis closely as it is lifeless, might be wiring, might be a dud carrier board. @neotko yea but does it have the bed levelling routine? @halfie seems to be having probs with it. Ill check it out once I have these drivers sorted, but taking one step at a time, too many changes in one go is dangerous. For now just using the Ultimaker/Marlin from their github repo
  7. Some sort of progress. I have remapped pins in pins.h, and now have 2 external driver sockets wired in. I am using 6 pins from connector J25 (ADC0 ADC1 ADC2 for X axis) along with (ADC5 ADC6 ADC7 for Y axis) for STEP DIR and ENABLE signals respectively. Firmware has been flashed and I have managed to not let any magic smoke out, but i'm not quite there yet. The Y axis motor seems to get enabled, but wont move, the X axis has no response. The 2560 data sheet appears to indicate these pins can be analog input, or signal output. I am not sure if or how I set these pins to become signal outputs. Anyone shed any light on these? I envisage/hope this will be an excellent and easy upgrade once it is resolved, transforming the level of print quality achieved. Thinking aloud, I may remap one axis back to the onboard 4988 and the other to 3 known digital pins in the area of these headers to verify all circuitry and the off board drivers. @halfie yea that's the problem with using the general Marlin release, its updated but may miss some of the UM functionality. I have one of those board in my alexpress cart, just waiting on the seller to get back to me about supplying with TMC drivers.
  8. I am looking into that board and have contacted the seller to request TMC drivers with it, along with some spares. I suspect you may well have had the voltages set incorrectly on the drivers, and cooling them helps as they can get hot. Also if you had them in stealthchop (silent) mode, you get less torque, so possibly cumulative unfavourables working against you. Putting them into spreadcycle mode with a bridging wire increases available torque, but also noise, although my experience tells me you can get them pretty quiet with some tuning of the vref, especially when compared to original 4988 drivers. I will also be sticking with the original UM2 firmware, but might explore tinker fw aswell. So Neotko's post threw my train of thought toward remapping pins with off-board drivers that I have laying about, and drop the TMC drivers onto those. Now my stumbling block at this moment is some uncertainty on remapping pins for the X and Y motors. Can someone possibly advise if the pins on J25 (ADC1) and/or J24 (ADC2) can be remapped and used as STEP/DIR/ENABLE pins. I read that they are analog port pins but can also be used as digital I/O pins. If not, which pins can I use? I need six of them. If not, I notice a combination of 2 available pins on J23 + 3 available pins on J24 + 1 available pin on J26, if J24/J25 wont work.
  9. OK so I wont be doing that however I think you just altered my train of thought and pulled me out of a rabbit hole. I will update more shortly but I think I have a solution. Thank you for your response.
  10. Maybe this should be a new thread, but posting here as it is directly relevant to this thread. I am Suffering the same issues on my 2 x UM2 machines. Want to finally do something about it. Done all the tweaks and mods, shorting ROSC pins, diode smoothers etc, none really "FIX" the issue. I have Duet boards available to upgrade like Neotko above, but kinda thinking I would like to retain as close to original as possible ie keep existing LCD. I also have a couple spare Arduino/RAMPs boards to hand. So my thinking is use a RAMPS board with TMC2100. I have these drivers on my UMO and it prints wonderful. I have other RAMPS based machines with TMC2100 and they too print same great level of quality. I have a E3D thermistor cartridge, to replace the hotend thermistor, and will also replace the bed thermocouple with a thermistor and run new wires along the loom. This should take care of the main sensor differences. But has anyone fitted a RAMPs board and retained the UltraLCD? or to put the question another way, Has anyone compiled the UM2 firmware to work for a RAMPs board using the UM2 LCD? Ive tried compiling the UM2 Marlin, with the board #define set to RAMPs EFB but as was expected, compile errors occur, for motor current variables, which of course are set via LCD, but not available on a RAMPs board. If someone could help me around the compile errors, or point me in the direction where something like this with TMC drivers might have been done before (I'd be surprised if it hasn't), or suggest another approach in case im looking at this from the wrong perspective, I would be eternally grateful. Thanks in advance.
  11. I go away for five minutes and look what happens. This is very nice. How can I not do this to one of my machines? baahaawaaa
  12. Guys, Real intereting stuff in this thread. Im around but just incredibly snowed under so trying to clear backlog. Sorr i havent added much here...yet! @Macua85 can probably work something out Ive got a couple interesting titbits on the way too will update as son as i can
  13. Just seen this thread for first time - foehnsturm thanks for bringing it to my notice. Let me digest and consider the options. 30x30 easy - possibly a bit smaller depending on how its attached. Macua85 - dont be shy plus, all the parts in the Flex3Drive will be interchangeable into anything developed here. Have also been looking at nema8 solutions - got a couple on order from a couple weeks back, waiting on delivery. Ill be monitoring here closely from now on.
  14. I also found turning up material flow to around 120% made a lot of difference with some filaments. Ill soon write a new post dedicated to Flex3Drive as I dont want to steer this topic, off topic
  • Create New...