Firmware Retraction

[RogerWilco486]

OP here, still waiting for this feature.

[Eddiie]

+100 for a checkbox that does the search/replace behind the scenes.
Why is this so difficult to add this?

[alexspeller]

I found, at least on the latest version, that the M101/102/103 generated more retracts than would otherwise be the case.

I fixed this by using some bogus retraction settings and replacing that instead, e.g. 0.1mm at 6666mm/min. Make sure not to set Z hop as that will come out as a separate move.

Then I replaced the actual retraction gcodes with this script:

Code: Select all

{REPLACE "G1 E-0.1000 F6666" "G10"}
{REPLACE "G1 E0.1000 F6666" "G11"}

This resulted in 25% less G10 calls in a sample test print, which came out looking better for it.

[smoki3]

1+

Would be great if they can support this

[Wallabear]

I would really, really, REALLY like to see this feature add as well

[dwallersv]

Another vote for a firmware retraction option.

The problem with post-processing substitution
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Can't use wiping and coasting features. With these enabled, the retraction is not always contained in a single extrusion G1 with the set filament length and feedrate. It often (most of the time) will be split among more than one G1 line, with the retraction distance split between them. These are the coasting and wiping moves.

So while the unretracts can be found easily (say, 1mm 20mm/s search for and replace "G1 E1.0000 F1200" with "G11"). You'll find there are very few matching "G1 E-1.0000 F1200" lines, but a ton of things like "G1 E-1.6667 F1200" a few lines back, combining a retract with a coast/wipe. Problem is, the retraction amount is not always the same.

Haven't tried the M101/2/3 approach -- will try it today. However, I'm curious as to how that will interact with coasting and wiping -- could end up with insufficient extrusion after extraction (G11 won't account for extra retract from coasting). Maybe it doesn't matter.

[Leary]

+1 Please add support for FW retraction

[maker2]

+1 from me (and +several from my friends)

doing it with scripts is messy because you have to modify every single profile which inevitably leads to errors.

But Firmware Retraction is wonderful and is there really any other way to dial your hotend/filament combination in?

[th0mpy]

+1 for me too. I thought this would be kind of a standard thing.

[jonasholmberg]

+1 on this request.

I use M209 (auto FW retract) on my Marlin printers, which work great, but I need this for my Reprap printers aswell.

I really think an easy function like this shouldn't take years (reading this thread) to implement in a commersial product like this.