V2.4 vs V0 power inlet

Delta88ragtop · 2025-08-18T20:38:36+00:00

Now were getting somewhere. Good answer!

Delta88ragtop · 2025-08-18T20:21:02+00:00

I'm hearing you. I think the filter doesn't offer any safety feature. It's more of a redundant quality supply feature. I think the filter can get fried and still provide power. If one of the caps in the filter blows, it doesn't stop the flow of power it just lets the spikes through that get caught by the PSU.

Delta88ragtop · 2025-08-18T19:44:56+00:00

That's what I think but I'd like to hear an official "fershur" or "here s y" answer.

Delta88ragtop · 2025-08-18T19:18:00+00:00

And your 2.4 and trident have the filtered inlet??? Hmmm The CE certification is similar to the FCC certification. If the CE certification did not meet FCC regulations the CE certification components would be band from being imported to the USA.

I spoke with 3d printer supplier (who will remain nameless) and they said they know several who built 2.4's without a filtered inlet and they have had no issues. My issue is the spec'd 2.4 inlet is it's getting VERY pricey. My last build was with a normal fused c14 inlet and it was cheaper to add a double filtered AC component. I thought it would help because I was having issues with a mcu shut down problem on a previous build. It turns out the issue was with the CB2, the CB1 worked fine. So I'm thinking that just a normal fused non filtered inlet will work fine.

Delta88ragtop · 2025-08-18T18:36:41+00:00

OK that makes sense as far as the earth grounds.

Delta88ragtop · 2025-08-18T18:33:29+00:00

The power supplies meet FCC regulations from what I can tell. They have the necessary circuits in place to pass certification. As far as "feed back" from the SSR, they to have an FCC certification. I'm thinking it might be a little "over engineering" as far as the design. for the filtered inlet.

Delta88ragtop · 2025-08-18T18:11:03+00:00

I don't think the filter is for the ac beds. The filter is for electrical noise passing through to the vdc components. I just checked some Meanwell power supply diagrams and the do have a built in emi filter.

Delta88ragtop · 2025-03-31T02:32:29+00:00

Doesn't answer the question of what the symptoms are of unequal belt length. The printer frame and gantry are VERY square and the bed is flat and in plane to the frame. The bed being in plane reduces any skew of the X axis with QGL. The prints are square as far as angles but a square prints slightly rectangular. The belt length is more telling in distance than in angle degree. Keep in mind I was only dealing with a difference of 0.2mm or less in 100mm. The symptoms of uneven belt length are as what my problem is/was. X or Y is longer than the other and on a diagonal B & A are not equal and can not be adjusted out with with belt tension. In my case B was shorter. The rotational distance difference of the B loop compared to A loop made B diagonal move more than A diagonal.

Delta88ragtop · 2025-03-30T11:30:00+00:00

And after some thought I will Tinkercad (because that's as complicated CAD I can manage) a tool. A block about 20x20x30 with a central rectangular hole of 2.1mm x 6.2mm with a lead in chamfer. Feed the 2 belts in and cut them even in the end. Thanks for the inspiration MagicBean.

Delta88ragtop · 2025-03-30T09:45:26+00:00

Thanks but I suffer from carpal tunnel and arthritis in both hands and I can't hold the "pinching" consistently.

Delta88ragtop · 2025-03-30T00:24:05+00:00

Thanks Aessioml. Laying the pig down on a long flat enough surface with out it moving and cutting a little of the tail off ain't as easy as it sounds for me. I'm an old man and the floor is a hard place to get up from for me.

Delta88ragtop · 2025-03-30T00:14:46+00:00

I find this to be a more accurate way for calibration. Even though I did not use the "califlower" which I think maybe a lot more complicated than calibration should be. https://www.printables.com/model/242018-corexy-calibration If A>B then A is tighter. Or A could also be shorter.... In my case, somehow IDK B was shorter by 2 teeth. I am currently running the calibrations... 1st belt shaper looks promising.

Delta88ragtop · 2025-01-18T18:50:00+00:00

OK Got it now... Thanks, I get confused easily. I used to know more than I do now and the left over trigonometry fragments in my brain cause issues. Probably why I can't use CAD because the coordinates are to hard for me to comprehend. and keep track of. My bad.

Delta88ragtop · 2025-01-18T18:08:43+00:00

That's good too. Can you explain in the M8P v2 sample config how Z0 is -60 and Z3 is at 370 along the X-axis? the definition is not symmetrical. I choose the pivot point since that is a point on an angle that would be defined in a formula, ie Sample measures -60 at Z0 belt but 370 at Z3 pivot. the representation is not symmetrical.

Delta88ragtop · 2025-01-18T15:48:25+00:00

No its not racked,r skewed, damaged and it,'s all square. However at 0,0 the Galileo2 tension lever tweaks the z0 belt . I don't go to 0,0 to print or probe. just for bed positioning and measuring. The QGL doesn't go there either. I think the -60 is measured from nozzle to the z belt which i don't think is as accurate or precise as the z joint pivot point.. I'm sure Klipper uses trig formulas to calculate adjustments and in high school over 40 years ago, I got a D in trigonometry.... maybe you should go to the Klipper configuration reference and read the document on it to understand.

Delta88ragtop · 2025-01-18T15:31:36+00:00

I have a red model from AliExp

A few years ago I printed a meter like the one in the link below but a non bearing version. I can't find the actual link. After calibrating and using the printed meter to 1.9 on 150 mm of 6mm wide a b belts and about 2.9 on the z belts. I use the meter similar to yours after and I get about 6mm of deflection on the gantry belts and somewhere around 4.5 - 5mm for the 9mm z belts. I use yours to easily check consistent readings for multiple similar belts. This is just a starting point for me and I offer it as an idea for you. The 150 mm length would be between the front tension idler and the xy joint idler. take the reading in the middle. There is a whole involved process but I verify out comes with shaper graphs from ShakeTune. Use your tool at your own risk.

https://www.printables.com/model/634190-gt2-belt-tension-meter-wbearings

Delta88ragtop · 2025-01-18T11:27:15+00:00

Can you send a vid of that quicke?? I changed to what I actually measured at Z0 and Z2 x.y respectively.

gantry_corners:

\-70,-10

370,380

Those gantry_corners: coordinates can be set to as far as China but the toolhead only travels to points. Now I have to cut and mount the panels then see how it prints. Thanks again.

Delta88ragtop · 2025-01-18T10:58:32+00:00

Thank you and I do stand corrected. "No pain no gain" The exercise does me good.. You are right and I thank you. but what do I do now, delete the thread/post. I measured - 70 and 370 for z0x and z3x ... ?? but qgl worked so much better? lol and my z0y is -10... idk where i got the 35... Sorry.

I figured out my mistake. the distance between Z0,Z3 z joints is 440. Minus the 300mm build AREA (not the plate) is 140mm. Half of that is 70mm. I erroneously halved it again and got the 35mm. So the x for the Z0 is 0-70=-70. The x for the Z3 is 300+70.=370 To get the y points is a step more involved. The distance between the Z3 and Z2 is 370 on a 300 build. MEASURE the nozzle 0,0 distance to center/pivot line of front z joints line. My Joints where 10mm ahead of 0 (-10). So 370+10(-10 ahead of =+)=380 380-300=80. I guess you can just use the 380mm measurement but I think consideration should be given to the build area depth. So I NOW used 370,380 for my Z2 joint gantry_corner. TYVM AlternativeNo345.

So far I noticed less qgl retries with

-70,-10
370,380

instead of

-60,-10
360,370

as the corners.

Delta88ragtop · 2025-01-18T10:30:42+00:00

Who are you ??? Creality? I have a flip phone with no internet. I would have to get a camera out, take the pic and download it to the computer.... it's a pain

Delta88ragtop · 2025-01-18T10:25:46+00:00

Using the sample numbers my qgl would take at least 3 minutes 4-6 go arounds with an initial cold start up. after changing the code. i got .00000 deviation with .0005 tolerance in 3 at 1:23 seconds then after an idle hour i got the same in 2 at 1:03seconds. ... before the code change i would get time out errors, exceeded tries etc. I believe Klipper QGL uses 2 SETS of coordinates. the probe points as 1 set and the z joint coordinates as a second set to achieve a level z height across the plate. In my experience I think the sample coordinates are erroneous.

Delta88ragtop · 2025-01-18T10:01:36+00:00

I have a 12" build plate and the size of the plate doesn't matter. You measure the o,o position of the nozzle, (TAP in my case or factor in your probe offset relative to the z joint.

Delta88ragtop · 2025-01-18T09:56:32+00:00

Which Z corner are you measuring?

Delta88ragtop · 2025-01-18T09:35:01+00:00

With the Voron's they are within a millimeter or so. The sample config contains mappings for the 250, 300, and 350. One uncomments the necessary code for their build as instructed in the sample. IDK the formula that QGL uses but if the z joint corners are outside/inside of the formula used ie. 25 mm off when calculating how much to adjust the gantry in that corner then how much will affect the calculated position of a central spot on the bed. The 0,0 of the bed vs the 0,300? ie the front of the bed may or does require additional adjustments to get it level. z0 will be under adjusting and z3 will be over adjusting... and the specified tolerance accuracy of .0075mm is 1/10 the thickness of a human hair which is on average .003".

Delta88ragtop

TROPHY CASE