KevinOConnor
KevinOConnor
Thanks. The change looks fine to me, but does this printer really have 5 screws under the bed? @just-trey - do you have any comments? -Kevin
Okay - seems a bit unusual to describe a fifth location, but I don't really have a particular preference. (I don't own this printer.) -Kevin
Thanks. However, there was a long discussion on this at #3828 . My comments from that thread still apply - I don't think it makes sense to change the code...
> Everything I have seen points to the mechanics of a printer with this issue needing the z motion impulse from the first probe dive to "settle" the toolhead into...
@dmbutyugin - any thoughts on this bug report? -Kevin
Okay, thanks. Maybe I'm missing something, but the alternative implementation seems to negate the `if not header.startswith('freq,psd_x,psd_y,psd_z,psd_xyz')` check. -Kevin
Thanks. What advantages are there in making this change? -Kevin
Okay, thanks. However, I'd prefer not to introduce changes to the repo unless it provides some concrete feature that we need. Cheers, -Kevin
Thanks. Very interesting. I have two high-level comments: 1. On a procedural level, this PR is going to be hard to review and merge as it seems to be mixing...
Thanks for the additional information. > Generally speaking pid_v will almost always be better What does it mean to be "better" in this context? Is it better in the mathematical...