Ask the MakerGear community for assistance...
- Posts: 1166
- Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2014 5:34 pm
- Location: Halfway up the Hudson
insta wrote:Marlin looks in EEPROM for settings
Aaaaand just to confuse things, the layout of those settings can change unpredictably from version to version. Newer firmware verifies a version number in the EEPROM and, if the layouts don't match, it will discard the stored values and use compiled-in defaults.
Older versions didn't verify the EEPROM layout, so reloading a much older firmware version will simply misinterpret the newer EEPOM layout as random gibberish and produce exactly the effect you might expect.
- Posts: 298
- Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2015 4:16 am
- Location: Calgary, Alberta, Canada
My logic behind trying out the negative value for steps was that if it didn't work as I anticipated, that I could simply reverse the change that I had made (no pun intended) and there was no real risk to testing that theory out. What I find really strange (besides that the arduino is stubborn and would rather do what it knew last, rather than accept when I went to the trouble of flashing it....
), is that changing one parameter to negative seems to have had far-reaching negative effects. It messed with max acceleration settings on more than one axis, my jerk values, and maybe more that i'm not aware of...
Ultimately, I'm glad I had a fellow more knowledgeable than myself on the forum to lend a hand, and things seem to have worked out in the end. Printer should be back up and running this evening when I get home from work. I'll post pics of the new carriage setup and enclosure lighting.