Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Various small fixes/tweaks #26502
Various small fixes/tweaks #26502
Changes from 7 commits
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 filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This includes UBL but unfortunately UBL is rarely a one step leveling process. It usually requires an auto leveling step followed by a manual leveling step. So some additional checking must be done to ensure that UBL is actually one-step (i.e., it can reach all mesh points with the probe) or additional UI must be developed to guide users through the following steps.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
so then it makes sense to be
HAS_AUTOLEVEL?as far as I understand it, UBL doesnt have to be followed by manual leveling. the auto level option usually probes all the points, and any points not able to reach, it fills in the unprobed values based on the surrounding probed points, and in my experience with great accuracy.
for Bilinear or UBL, its usually the default, and one and done kind of thing. and if they wanted to check the points or do it manually they have that option as well.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
UBL only fills in the un-probed values when commanded to do so by a call to
G29 P3. I don't think this old Creality screen implementation does that.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We should keep this define. If you've modified the LCD code to call
G29 P1\nG29 P3for UBL then UBL can be considered "one step" but the ABL options withPROBE_MANUALLYare definitely not one-step leveling procedures.PROBE_MANUALLYrequires user interaction with the encoder to measure each point and proceed to the next point on click.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I do not see anywhere in ProUI that
HAS_ONESTEP_LEVELINGis being utilized. its currently defined like this in two seperate files. even the current repo at mriscoc's ProUI doesnt have that and it has no use forPROBE_MANUALLY. when UBL or ABL is used, its automatically understood you have that option...to use it as a "one step" or not. just like Mesh Bed Leveling.which is also called Manual Mesh Bed Leveling right? since its manually probing the bed without an actual probe.
what is confusing is the
#define PROBE_MANUALLYoption in configuration.h:it sounds like if you have
MESH_BED_LEVELING, you would want to also enable this. yet in inc/Conditionals_LCD.h:but besides that, a user having ABL or UBL should always have the option to "Probe manually" regardless.
that is how the menu is currently, except for maybe JyersUI. that is a bit confusing to have UBL, but also being able to not having any bed probe defined?
in summary, I think this should be left specifically for
MESH_BED_LEVELING; if you dont have a probe, that should be your only option for mesh leveling.and in regards to Auto bed leveling w/probe, it should always give you that "probe manually" option anyway in the menu/gcode. in otherwords, if it
HAS_LEVELINGthe "probing manually" is always an option.I'm just saying this is how it is set up with ProUI right now
UBL, or ABL
Mesh Bed Leveling, or None
I'm also able to compile using
MESH_BED_LEVELINGwhile having a probe enabled. is that supposed to be?It seems that things aren't what they used to be, or meant to be anymore. or maybe I have it all wrong. like was
AUTO_BED_LEVELING_UBLsupposed to be used without a bed probe like it can be in JyersUI? if so, why not just useMESH_BED_LEVELINGinstead?on a side note, even Mriscoc is phasing out using Bilinear auto bed leveling in favor of UBL. I know their code is different, but on the surface its the same thing. you probe, and you get a mesh.
plus apparently there seems to be some issues with saving the mesh. it doesn't load properly, and you have to manually load settings otherwise you get an invalid mesh.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Currently the paradigm is different, due to the addition of AML 2.0 support, now all mesh parameters are saved in the UBL slot, so you can have slots with different mesh sizes and mesh densities. You can know how it is working now and the new way of use UBL in the Professional firmware here: https://github.com/mriscoc/Ender3V2S1/wiki/Mesh-Leveling-Menu#ubl
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I picked this line at random to comment on the define, but the general idea is to keep using this define in code that currently uses it, wherever that is.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes, that option is specifically for a machine that has no probe. You can also use
PROBE_MANUALLYwith any ABL option (other than UBL) for a machine that has no probe. In both cases, you send aG29command to get each point, and keep doing this in a loop until the procedure is completed.See
menu_bed_leveling.cppwithin theANY(PROBE_MANUALLY, MESH_BED_LEVELING)block to see how this is implemented from the UI.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Good that you have a wiki to cover the topic. My aim with ABL Bilinear was to make a leveling system that can be done all in one go based on a mesh that only covers the area of the bed that the probe can reach. It actually is "adaptive" in that you can set the boundaries of the mesh that you want to probe, but it always probes the same number of points.
We have a PR pending to make all leveling systems runtime-configurable in both the boundaries and the number of points in X and Y, but of course it's slow going because every LCD implementation wants to do things its own way. I cannot stress enough how important it is to work with the main Marlin project to standardize these things in the core and not to keep "going it alone." So anything you can do towards that effort would be much appreciated. I would do all of this myself, but daily tasks take up most of the time I would otherwise spend making awesome new code.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
this quote 😂
oh good, I'm not alone