Jump to content
Ultimaker Community of 3D Printing Experts
Sign in to follow this  
Dim3nsioneer

Why mixing up axes?

Recommended Posts

Due to some tests I did today for checking a faster way of the retraction and priming procedure (cf. http://umforum.ultimaker.com/index.php?/topic/4094-raised-edges/page-2&do=findComment&comment=33433) I had a look into the Marlin planner (planner.cpp).

Maybe I got it wrong... is it true that there is only one velocity (I'm aware of nominal speed vs. initial speed vs. final speed of the block) calculated per block for all four axes (X,Y,Z,E)?

What kind of strange reason is there to prevent parallel independent actions of e.g. the x/y axes and the extruder?

If you use a G0 or G1 with both X/Y and E specified, the lower jerk value (which is the one of the extruder) slows down the x/y movement!

If I look at this part of the Marlin code I get the impression it is somehow a bit crappy difficult to understand (edited due to inadequate wording). It definitively has not the same level (also in terms of documentation) as other parts of Marlin which are well commented und well structured.

I.m.h.o. blocks (the trapezoids respectively) should be calculated individually for each of the four dimensions X,Y,Z,E with a coupling between X and Y. But to implement this properly, it would need quite some effort I fear...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is VERY IMPORTANT for the X,Y,Z,E axis to all 4 move linearly. In a straight line. If the extruder ran max speed for a block it would finish early and you would get overextrusion for the begining and zero extrusion for the end of every line segment.

One way to think of this is that all moves are in a straight line in all 4 dimensions.

Even the acceleration is matched in all 4 axis so that it is a straight line even during acceleration and deceleration.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By the way there are many contributors to Marlin including some very smart people. That code you looked at has been looked over by me and probably 100 other people. It seems strange at first but it is pretty well done. It even looks 12 segments/blocks ahead of time so that it doesn't have to stop. For example if printing a circular path the old firmware (before marlin, before sprinter) would come to a complete stop at every vertex. The new software hardly slows down at all due to the "jerk" setting which isn't jerk but more maximum instantaneous velocity change at a vertex.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I appologize if I offended anyone... :oops: I didn't mean to...

I see the way it is written has some serious background. But some more comments in the last third of planner.cpp (they are really great in the first two thirds) might make it a bit easier for a stubborn Marlin-greenhorn like me to understand...

So, maybe I can get along with tweaking the jerk settings. Otherwise retraction and priming along travel movements look not very nice. Thanks and sorry again!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the reasons the code is as it is, is because it was derived from grbl. Which had only 1 acceleration setting for all axis.

Also, you need a coupling between X/Y and E for printing. As you want a certain amount of material evenly spread over a line.

What you want, is retraction/prime independent of X/Y. A way to properly implement that would be to make a difference between G1 and G0, where G1 has the axis coupled, and G0 not.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the reasons the code is as it is, is because it was derived from grbl. Which had only 1 acceleration setting for all axis.

Also, you need a coupling between X/Y and E for printing. As you want a certain amount of material evenly spread over a line.

What you want, is retraction/prime independent of X/Y. A way to properly implement that would be to make a difference between G1 and G0, where G1 has the axis coupled, and G0 not.

 

I fully agree! Thank you for this nice formulation.

I'll have to do some homework checking how Marlin comes from the G0/G1 command to the planner routine. This will take some time, I guess.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These gcodes are from long before 3d printers existed. G1 is supposed to be linear I believe and G0 is just supposed to move the axes in any order (uncoupled). But for Marlin it just does them both the same way. But Cura seems to sometimes use G0 and sometimes G1 as needed.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These gcodes are from long before 3d printers existed. G1 is supposed to be linear I believe and G0 is just supposed to move the axes in any order (uncoupled). But for Marlin it just does them both the same way. But Cura seems to sometimes use G0 and sometimes G1 as needed.

 

At least for the last few versions I had the impression Cura uses quite strictly G1 for printing and G0 for travelling. Daid might prove me wrong.

So the task would be to write a routine for G0 separately... quite a big task.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At least for the last few versions I had the impression Cura uses quite strictly G1 for printing and G0 for travelling. Daid might prove me wrong.

 

Yes, but that's mostly to increase readability of the GCode. There is no technical reason to do so right now.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Our picks

    • How to 3D print with reinforced engineering materials
      Ultimaker is hosting a webinar where we explain how you can achieve and maintain a high print success rate using these new reinforced engineering materials. Learn from Ultimaker's Product Manager of Materials and top chemical engineer Bart van As how you can take your 3D printing to that next level.
      • 0 replies
    • "Back To The Future" using Generative Design & Investment Casting
      Designing for light-weight parts is becoming more important, and I’m a firm believer in the need to produce lighter weight, less over-engineered parts for the future. This is for sustainability reasons because we need to be using less raw materials and, in things like transportation, it impacts the energy usage of the product during it’s service life.
        • Like
      • 12 replies
×

Important Information

Welcome to the Ultimaker Community of 3D printing experts. Visit the following links to read more about our Terms of Use or our Privacy Policy. Thank you!