UMO / UMO+ Firmware

Topics related to printer firmware
User avatar
LePaul
Reactions:
Posts: 3966
Joined: February 7th, 2016, 10:26 pm
Location: Bangor, Maine USA
3D Printer(s): 24 - Yes I have a problem!
Contact:

Re: UMO / UMO+ Firmware

Post by LePaul »

Does it use the bottom one? I did the heated bed upgrade and remember replacing the top limit switch...but I also haven't cranked the bed all the way to the bottom
User avatar
Amedee
Reactions:
Posts: 599
Joined: February 15th, 2016, 11:10 am
Location: Brussels, Belgium
3D Printer(s): UMO / UMO+
Contact:

Re: UMO / UMO+ Firmware

Post by Amedee »

antiklesys wrote: Better to rely on the top end-stop only for this to be compatible with both UMO and UMO+
I have an UMO but I actually don't use the lower Z endstop...and with the mods I have in place I couldn't even if I would.
Yes indeed. And on the original UMO the Z is quite slow, so homing at the bottom would take ages ;)
LePaul wrote:Does it use the bottom one? I did the heated bed upgrade and remember replacing the top limit switch...but I also haven't cranked the bed all the way to the bottom
When you have and UMO+ or an UMO with the official HBK, the firmware (official one and mine) is setup to use soft limits. so lower Z is not used.

Now I need to run some tests to confirm, but setup with offset should be possible with the top end-stop if we set the switch 'low enough'. A bit like the UM2 setup procedure, but with the first step manual:
- Rough setup: set the switch to home at about 1mm from the nozzle
- Fine tuning: use the offset to bring the bed at the right place.
But I need to dig into the code to see how the offset works, as having the actual home above the physical one may introduce negative physical coordinates.
User avatar
drayson
Reactions:
Posts: 254
Joined: February 15th, 2016, 5:04 am
Location: Graz, Austria
3D Printer(s): UMO with mods :-)

Re: UMO / UMO+ Firmware

Post by drayson »

Has somebody already tried the new Marlin RC from the official Git?
User avatar
antiklesys
Reactions:
Posts: 183
Joined: February 13th, 2016, 8:01 am
3D Printer(s): UMO

Re: UMO / UMO+ Firmware

Post by antiklesys »

Amedee wrote:
antiklesys wrote: Better to rely on the top end-stop only for this to be compatible with both UMO and UMO+
I have an UMO but I actually don't use the lower Z endstop...and with the mods I have in place I couldn't even if I would.
Yes indeed. And on the original UMO the Z is quite slow, so homing at the bottom would take ages ;)
LePaul wrote:Does it use the bottom one? I did the heated bed upgrade and remember replacing the top limit switch...but I also haven't cranked the bed all the way to the bottom
When you have and UMO+ or an UMO with the official HBK, the firmware (official one and mine) is setup to use soft limits. so lower Z is not used.

Now I need to run some tests to confirm, but setup with offset should be possible with the top end-stop if we set the switch 'low enough'. A bit like the UM2 setup procedure, but with the first step manual:
- Rough setup: set the switch to home at about 1mm from the nozzle
- Fine tuning: use the offset to bring the bed at the right place.
But I need to dig into the code to see how the offset works, as having the actual home above the physical one may introduce negative physical coordinates.
Accordingly to Marlin soft limits are set for both the standard UMO firmware and the one for the HBK Upgrade and the UMO+.
The difference is that the soft limits for HBK/UMO+ are "bigger" as the building area gets "slightly" larger with the bed upgrade.
User avatar
Amedee
Reactions:
Posts: 599
Joined: February 15th, 2016, 11:10 am
Location: Brussels, Belgium
3D Printer(s): UMO / UMO+
Contact:

Re: UMO / UMO+ Firmware

Post by Amedee »

antiklesys wrote:
Accordingly to Marlin soft limits are set for both the standard UMO firmware and the one for the HBK Upgrade and the UMO+.
The difference is that the soft limits for HBK/UMO+ are "bigger" as the building area gets "slightly" larger with the bed upgrade.
Which Marlin???

From the official Ultimaker repo:

- UMO: soft limits = false
- UMO with HBK: soft limits = true
- UMO+: soft limits = true

I do exactly the same in my 'unified' build (There is no particular reason to keep hard limits on UMO, but I wanted to guarantee full compatibility with Ultimaker's build)
User avatar
Neotko
Reactions:
Posts: 1142
Joined: February 7th, 2016, 7:02 pm
Location: Madrid
3D Printer(s): UMO+ x2.5
Contact:

Re: UMO / UMO+ Firmware

Post by Neotko »

Maybe you should keep the Umo stationary just wondering) because ultimaker has stop selling them, they are cleaning that stock by selling the umo kit at 790 or so.

That would allow for a 'basic' build, and more progress for the experimentals? Just thinking out liud
User avatar
Amedee
Reactions:
Posts: 599
Joined: February 15th, 2016, 11:10 am
Location: Brussels, Belgium
3D Printer(s): UMO / UMO+
Contact:

Re: UMO / UMO+ Firmware

Post by Amedee »

There is a very good reason to keep UMO current: I have one ;)
User avatar
Neotko
Reactions:
Posts: 1142
Joined: February 7th, 2016, 7:02 pm
Location: Madrid
3D Printer(s): UMO+ x2.5
Contact:

Re: UMO / UMO+ Firmware

Post by Neotko »

I was just pulling your leg XD
User avatar
antiklesys
Reactions:
Posts: 183
Joined: February 13th, 2016, 8:01 am
3D Printer(s): UMO

Re: UMO / UMO+ Firmware

Post by antiklesys »

I wasn't referring to the fact they were enabled or disabled, but more to the bed-area size defined in them as you can see below in this snipped from configuration.h :

Code: Select all

// Travel limits after homing
#ifdef ULTIMAKER_HBK
#define X_MAX_POS 210 
#define X_MIN_POS 0
#define Y_MAX_POS 210 
#define Y_MIN_POS 0
#define Z_MAX_POS 210
#define Z_MIN_POS 0
#else
#define X_MAX_POS 205
#define X_MIN_POS 0
#define Y_MAX_POS 205
#define Y_MIN_POS 0
#define Z_MAX_POS 200
#define Z_MIN_POS 0
I found them rather useful as I'm currently running with a MK2B bed mounted on a UMO+/UMO2 Z building platform and a customized XY gantry, so having the limits active is a good thing for me (I had to shrink a bit the build area :P)

I believe the only reason the limits are disabled on a UMO is due the building platform being made of think plexiglass rather than glass which easily shatters when heated :P
User avatar
Neotko
Reactions:
Posts: 1142
Joined: February 7th, 2016, 7:02 pm
Location: Madrid
3D Printer(s): UMO+ x2.5
Contact:

Re: UMO / UMO+ Firmware

Post by Neotko »

Ohh having a panel for that on the builder would be quite superb, ofc it would be a blast to have it on the printer, anyway I always define the limits on the slicer so it's quite weird to print outside the limits.

Ofc it would be great to have, specially since I plan to install um2 shafts next week on my beyond slide blocks to finally test it.
User avatar
Amedee
Reactions:
Posts: 599
Joined: February 15th, 2016, 11:10 am
Location: Brussels, Belgium
3D Printer(s): UMO / UMO+
Contact:

Re: UMO / UMO+ Firmware

Post by Amedee »

It is a design decision: UMO was designed with limit switches in all directions so there was no reason to perform software checks; the min/max from the config file are only used by the controller.
In later versions (UM2, UMO+ or HBK upgrade) they decided to use switches only for homing and do software limits.

Now this is what is is, and this is how Ultimaker configures its firmware. You are free to do whatever you prefer with your printer.

I am not arguing here, just saying that by default UMO and UMO+/HBK handle limits in a completely different way and if one want to do software bed leveling like @neotko was suggesting one must disable the limit switches on UMO.
User avatar
antiklesys
Reactions:
Posts: 183
Joined: February 13th, 2016, 8:01 am
3D Printer(s): UMO

Re: UMO / UMO+ Firmware

Post by antiklesys »

Amedee wrote:It is a design decision: UMO was designed with limit switches in all directions so there was no reason to perform software checks; the min/max from the config file are only used by the controller.
In later versions (UM2, UMO+ or HBK upgrade) they decided to use switches only for homing and do software limits.

Now this is what is is, and this is how Ultimaker configures its firmware. You are free to do whatever you prefer with your printer.

I am not arguing here, just saying that by default UMO and UMO+/HBK handle limits in a completely different way and if one want to do software bed leveling like @neotko was suggesting one must disable the limit switches on UMO.
True, still it doesn't seem a major issue to disable the hardware limit switches and use the software ones instead.
As you said it was a design decision, but we can see the UMO+ works perfectly fine without half the switches and thus this could be considered an "Upgrade" for the UMO, while gaining the additional functionality of doing the bed leveling via the controller :)
User avatar
Neotko
Reactions:
Posts: 1142
Joined: February 7th, 2016, 7:02 pm
Location: Madrid
3D Printer(s): UMO+ x2.5
Contact:

Re: UMO / UMO+ Firmware

Post by Neotko »

We could upgrade the hardware to be able to do it:

https://ultimaker.com/en/community/2212 ... mit-on-umo
User avatar
Amedee
Reactions:
Posts: 599
Joined: February 15th, 2016, 11:10 am
Location: Brussels, Belgium
3D Printer(s): UMO / UMO+
Contact:

Re: UMO / UMO+ Firmware

Post by Amedee »

I think there is enough free movement in the switch to use it as such... we may loose accuracy by having it the other ways around.

(Looks like each time you tag me I am earning points, as I just reach a new level on the UM forum without doing anything :lol: )
User avatar
Neotko
Reactions:
Posts: 1142
Joined: February 7th, 2016, 7:02 pm
Location: Madrid
3D Printer(s): UMO+ x2.5
Contact:

Re: UMO / UMO+ Firmware

Post by Neotko »

I'll run some test today if I can. I think the sensibility of the sensor should be just fine.
Post Reply

Return to “Firmware”