You’re NOT getting the MOST out of Input Shaper
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 8 พ.ค. 2024
- Hey everyone! Today is a longer video. It to me almost two weeks to shoot and edit, so I hope you get some value out of it!
I think it's super important to understand the fundamentals of our printer. No one should be adding input shaper without having the basic understanding of what it is doing to their printer!
Slice Engineering Affiliate Link - Click this to support the channel!
www.sliceengineering.com/spen...
Products
ADXL345 - amzn.to/4alJpOV
Tools
Ferrule Crimp Set - amzn.to/49qJ3Ge
Crimping Tool Set - amzn.to/3v4mM2q
Wire Stripper & Crimp Tool - amzn.to/42uAWWN
5V → 3.3V Buck Converter - amzn.to/4afmpAN
Buck Converter w/ Screen - amzn.to/3T2Hcls
Momentary Switch - amzn.to/3ur5v33
Dupont Crimp Set - amzn.to/3OASsTn
Fork Terminal Set - amzn.to/49dFxzm
PET Wire Loom - amzn.to/3TeHdDa
Wire Wrap - amzn.to/3wukCJF
M3 Screws - amzn.to/4bMIh8p
Example Videos
Hanging Mass - • Input Shaping
Crane - • Input shaping control ...
Klipper Page
www.klipper3d.org/Resonance_C...
Mount Used on Bed
www.printables.com/model/3767...
00:00 - Intro
00:35 - Theory
04:08 - Examples
05:12 - Implementation
06:53 - Wiring
09:35 - Implementation (again)
10:31 - Configuration
15:43 - Testing
17:50 - Back to Testing
19:11 - The Cool Thing!!
23:06 - Diagnosing Your Printer (The Cool Part)
28:55 - Results! - วิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี
In terms of TH-cam analytics, this is my most successful TH-cam video to date. In terms of content efficacy, I dropped the ball on more than a few of these topics. So, be sure to read through the comments as there is some very valuable information. Thanks to everyone contributing!
I video this long could really do with chapters.
Sorry, I thought I added them! I forgot to add the 00:00 one. Should be working now
Be great if you could summarize the key points of correction here at the top as there are 191 comments now - that’s a lot to go through!
19:42 - That is not something we are aware of cause we had not used AC for decades just to avoid the costs that come along with that.
We have gotten AC in the past 2 decades but only those in cars which usually do not resonate hearable.
I bet this is the american perspective which even does not fit in central europe. kWh / household consumption is far lower in the EU and awareness of energy costs too cause they are higher. The higher the costs the more the people are aware of consumption and efficiency.
Therefore you will not find trucks.
@@typxxilpsSame thing applies to heat pumps, fwiw.
A pretty good video for beginners. But there is one little fault in the PSD graphs (min 26.30-28). You compiled multible resonace tests together what will lead to an incorrect PSD graph and subsequentely less optimal inputshaper. It is a common issue. To fix it reboot klipper after compliling one set of results.
Good shout! I didn’t realize it would mess the graphs up, just thought it was the titles. I’ll make sure to double check what I got. Thanks!
Funny thing is, the Artillery X4 Pro fails to start a second resonance test without doing a reboot 😅
There’s a pending PR to fix this in the docs too
That crane video finally made me understand. I use input shaping when I drive, or more specifically, when I brake. When coming to a stop, I release the brake to prevent the uncomfortable jerk you can get.
Hey, great point! Shaping the brake input definitely makes for a nice stop!
if youre getting jerk when braking you need an alignment or new rotors/pads lol
I think you're referring to a different kind of jerk. I believe they're referring to the uncomfortable sudden stop or start that comes from quickly pressing or releasing the brake. Changing the speed at which you press or release the brake would reduce this jerk. A jerk while normally using the brakes would point to an issue, obviously
@@noah_s906When you brake to a complete stop, the car will keep going forward (just a couple of centimeters) at the moment of "full stop". It will also lean forward. Then the springs will return the car back and you will get this bad jerk. If you brake real hard, you can actually hit the seat with the back of your head on "the return". If you release the brake just before coming to a full stop, this will not happen.
I discovered you yesterday, I'm looking in today and I see you're off to a great start. I really like it, keep it up! I've been following a number of 3D print youtubers for a few years now, but I haven't come across such a nice analysis of resonances yet.
I would highly recommend, don't say what you think, for example about those A, B, C subsets of SPI, but get the facts and say the facts, or don't say anything at all. ;)
I appreciate how you mentioned the obsolescence of the naming of MISO and MOSI without mentioning the background of it all, and just put forward the solution as it's being named now. Similar names have been part of the electrical and PC jargon for decades and it brings some confusion now, but I appreciate that people are thinking about it and looking for solutions.
Well, it's a good start to a nice analysis, lol! I really appreciate the feedback. Sometimes it's hard to get accross the voice saying (it's good enough). I want these videos to get to the point where they're fairly airtight and don't involve guessing!
Yeah, the MISO MOSI thing never stuck out to me until some high school students were touring a lab I worked in. We had "MASTER" and "SLAVE" written on a Raspberry Pi CM4 IO Board and one of the kids asked why we had that. A little uncomfortable, haha. I'm not bothered by a change to it so why not try to help the trend. And again, COPI (co-pee) and CIPO (kippo) sound way funnier anyway. Thank you for the support!
Finally someone explains what to actually do with the data. Helpfull video to improve my IS results. Thanks!
The examples for visualizing are awesome!🤩
That's a huge amount of info about all I want to know about, leaving a like and hope to see you get bigger on YT bcs you deserved it! Tysm
Elsewhere on youtube, I saw someone resting their printer on a heavy cement tile (about a couple of inches thick) itself resting on some foam, claiming some improvement with input shaper and overall accelerations. Anyway, I really enjoyed this video, and hope you make many more. Thanks!
Spencer, first of all - you did a really great job with this video and you earned a subscriber! Almost brought a tear to my eye as an engineer. Some "into the weeds" details are given below, which may help as a second layer to what you already said, for posterity:
In terms of dampening and tolerance to error, MZV is looser than ZV. And EI is even looser still. As such, a lot of people prefer to use EI on the Y axis for a bed slinger, because the moving mass will inherently increase as the print progresses. This gives you some flexibility at the expense of the theoretically ideal shaping scheme.
For the X axis, you obviously picked up on this already - but something should be addressed if you have 2 major resonances modes as shown. Is your filament spool on the top of gantry? I would be looking for decoupled masses like that, etc. On my machine, moving the spool to a holder off to the side really cleaned up my shaper results and I am back to 1 discrete peak.
Somewhat related to the above - a trick in the Klipper community is to 'pin down' the Y axis when you are measuring the X axis, and vice-versa when measuring the Y axis. This is usually done mechanically with some sort of clamping or interference fit piece to stop it moving in an orthogonal axis during the measurement. Especially useful on a bed slinger.
As a physicist, I’m humbled that I made an engineer proud😂 I’m definitely new to video making and honestly the entire field of 3D printing, DIY etc… I expect to make loads of mistakes and learn a ton!
I remember hearing of your first point somewhere. I wish I would’ve mentioned it! I have no clue where the second peak came from honestly. In my last video I stripped everything from the printer. Drawers, electronics, everything! No spool attached, no uncoupled masses (as far as I can tell). I assumed that maybe the z-axis was super unstable or something. As for the 3rd point, is it a good idea to clamp the masses down? In my head, they affect each other while printing so wouldn’t you want to have them affecting each other while measuring?
Thanks so much for your comments!
@@SpencersDesk For tbs. just remove the whole toolhead, and mount the accelerometer directly to the backplate.
Then you will know if its the motion system itself, or something on the toolhead that is making the extra peak.
A very good next step! Thanks for the tip!
@@SpencersDesk that's a really fair point about the last point, i.e. 'pinning down' the orthogonal axis to isolate just the tested axis. It makes sense that they are not restrained during printing, so this deviates from real conditions.
This would be a great question for the Klipper community. If I had to speculate - perhaps it's something to do with how Klipper implements the negative interference. Both axes are obviously prescribed different (and inherently discrete) modes, so the "composite" commands to the steppers may work the best when these are also purely discrete in the testing? Again... 'speculation' being the operative word!
Another theory could be related to the 2nd point in my original post - maybe people were getting dodgy results due to interference from other SMD systems on the machine? Whilst the steppers should be frozen in place on the other axes during this test, the reality is of course that there is some decoupled mass movement.
For what it's worth, I've never actually pinned down the other axis and have never had a problem. I'm pretty sure that the largest source of error is the quality of the ADXL345 itself. When I query the current accelerations and noise, it's not very consistent. But it generally aligns with what I am expecting, comparing to global gravity constant in Z. But usually +/- 10% around this supposed constant! Cheap Amazon parts...
Very good quality!!! Congrats!😊
very underrated channel
Thank you!!
Agreed. Couldn't believe the subs count was so low!
For now :)
very new channel
Kupi resin printer🎉
This was an really well put together video!
Thank you so much! (:
Great video, thx! Really informative and helpful.
Great video!! Really needed this, much appreciated.
Thank you!! I'm so glad it was useful!
Great work! Thanks for sharing👍
Thanks for the explanation!
Thank you so much, I knew the theory more or less behind input shaping but i didnt knew how to read the graphs and/or choose what shaper I would use.
Now lets see if i can get bet print quality and higher speeds
I’m glad this helped!
Great video! A suggested video turned out to be a real gem!
I have been thinking about sand filling the frame of my Ender 3 to dampen resonance and increase mass. A common practice in heavier tools such as lathes, mills and bench drills.
Even cars have resonance dampers for specific frequency mounted on suspensions, exhaust, engines and gearboxes.
I'm sure theres a specific amount of mass which will be optimal for best perfomance on a 3D printer which would be seen on klippers resonance curves. Also in video Y axis had more resonance when placed on floor instead of the shelf. Got me thinking, what if printer was placed on rails? Which made printer movable.
You earned a new subscriber just by this video! Keep it up
Thanks for your kind comment! I hadn't heard of filling the frame with sand but I like the idea! I'm curious how the printer would respond if it was sitting on a free moving platform (rails in the x and y direction). My intuition tells me that the lack of dampening wouldn't be great for it? I think skyscraper do something similar where their supports are allowed to move, but the motion is dampened. Cool idea!
Very good and thourough explanation. Great watch!
Thanks! Really trying to up my game on the videos I make. Really jealous of your Voron btw!
Also worth mentioning, that input shaper on small parts such as gears can result in artifacts! So in case you are printing something small and precise set low speeds and maybe disable IS.
Wow good stuff sir! I thought I pretty much knew input shaper… turns out I had no idea.
great stuff bro!
An informative video. Great watch.
Off the top of my head, your shelf material is likely to be flatter than the floor. So the printer base will be equally supported on each corner/foot. So the printer may wobble more even on a hard floor.
On the other hand a lot of shelving isn't level, indeed some brackets encourage a slight rearward slope, which may give uneven results. It might be revealing to experiment with thicker or heavier shelving material, or even rubber mating. There may be a sweet spot between damping or encouraging wobble!?
Thank you! I remember someone (Tom from Made With Layers?) did a video on it. I think he landed on using a concrete paver stone as the base then using some foam padding at each corner. It gave the printer a sturdy base and the foam uncoupled the printer from the surface. Definitely something I plan on looking into in the future!
Jut as an additional input:
Marlin also sports input shaping since a few minor versions.
I had very nice results by printing a test-print and measured the position of best edges and calculated the frequency. Added this f to Marlin config and perfect :)
I like to have no additional Raspi and have all done in Marlin. Also a pro: No sensor needed ;)
Great video! One important note about shorting out / damaging your electronics. The only thing that is ever critical with those communication signals is power and ground. If you triple check those, you can have any other mistake with clock and data lines - nothing bad will happen. It just won't work. You can try another combination and correct it. I'd mention that clearly not to scare people. Paying attention to that simple rule I never destroyed anything in 10 years of tinkering with electronics (at least when dealing with simple connections like that). Keep on making great videos :)
That's a great point! I just know from my own experience that once, a mixture of exhaustion, frustration, and impatience made me make some very silly errors and I destroyed a Pi. So, the extra layer of protection is nice! Thanks for your support!
Great video, subscribed and can't wait for more 😁
Thank you so much!
Great video and explanation of the graphs. Did you make the power cables for your printer or did they come with it?
Hey! Thanks!! If you’re referring to the orange cabling, I did that in my last video! If you search up PET wire loom on Amazon or something you can find it! Orange is my personal favorite color so that’s what I went with but black is the most common! I have a link to the orange loom I used in the last videos description!
@@SpencersDesk must have missed that part in your last video, I’ll take a look. Did you make your own cabling for the printer? Looks like the cabling fit it is super long.
Only asking because I have a ender 3 pro and I don’t like how short the cabling is and I want to rewire the machine
I sure did! I rewired every single electrical component. Steppers, limit switches, print head, PSU... I made them each super long because I plan to one day print high temperature plastics with this printer. Moving the electronics out of the printer enclosure is a must so I went ahead and installed the extended wiring I will need.
I will say, the steppers were a bit frustrating. On the Vyper, all the wires were black. This made figuring out how to wire them to the controller board a bit of a guess and check process. It also requires some extra tool for crimping the connectors. Let me know if you have any other questions about it!
Nicely done .. ThankYou for sharing .. Cheers :)
I just did this a couple of weeks ago, along with hooking up a Bltouch to it 😀
Super cool! Any other mods you're planning on adding?
@@SpencersDesk as far as the pico, I did Bltouch, accelerometer and relays, but then dug more into finding ways to utilize spare gpio pins on the actual printer MCU and started making a video on that. Then I got sucked down a rabbit hole of converting my artillery sidewinder X3 plus to Klipper after they finally decided to send me the official information on the pinout and bootloader offset I needed. Now I need to circle back around to the gpio stuff and finish up that video.
Very cool! Make sure to share the configuration you use with the community! I think you can share the example config on Klipper and they will ad it in!
@@SpencersDesk I've got two pull requests sitting in their inbox
Very interesting, Thanks!
I was always surprised at how little resonance my printer had during all the tests, considering it was an Ender series. Worked out over time it must be due to it being the Ender 5, which has a cube frame and doesn't use the bed slinger method for the Y. I still ran the input shaper. It did improve how quiet the printer and a slight improvement in speed, but I think the Input Shaper is most useful for the "bed slinger" style printers.
This video appealed to me both on the geeky nerdy level with the data, but also on a level where it was simple enough to understand and not have to think about htings too deeply.
Nice to see you again! Input shaper will have the great effect when your printer is at higher speeds. If you’re weren’t pushing the ender with high speeds and accelerations, it’s possible there wouldn’t be too much of a difference!
Thanks! I’m definitely trying to tow the line between exposing people to new ideas while still keeping the experience enjoyable.
Hey Spencer, great video, I appreciate the detail in the electronics section, and the recommendation to use a sacrificial pico; that will no doubt save heaps of frustration! I'd have loved to see a more detailed review and comparison of the results - seemed like you introduced and then skipped it? is there a section missing in the edit?
Thanks! In all honesty, the video was originally 12 minutes long. I decided that it wasn't good enough for me and spent an extra 4 days filming and editing. Towards the end of it, I had a mindset of "no one is going to see it so just get it done". Clearly I was wrong, haha. I'd just assumed no one would care by the end of it I guess. Don't worry, videos from here on out will not be approached with that attitude!
Love the video! Would have loved an in depth overview of the print results, I didn’t really understand the print quality comparison between them.
Thanks! Definitely something I'll be doing a better job of in future videos.
the new prusa slicer version also has the input shaper implemented, turns my mini+ from 40mm/s² to 140mm/s² !
I recently got a Mini and it does move a lot faster than I expected! It's cool as long as you never change anything about the Prusa machines. Otherwise, there's nothing you can really do to adjust the input shaper parameters
Hey, that's a great video.
It would be possible, that the PSD peaks you saw on the bed were the back an forth movement (typically printer y axis). I'm somewhat convinced, that the "loudspeaker" theme is not the obvious answer to that measurement. Maybe there was a mix-up of printer vs accel axes - or what could happen is, that your mount vibrated a lot, since the breakout board hangs off of the printbed itself. Just as a reference, a flat aluminum sheet of decent thickness has audible resonances in the highest of Hz, I would assume kHz - range. It's very stiff compared to your belts and the large frame with bolted connections etc :)..
I know that the ADXL was aligned with the printer properly, but maybe it could've been messed up in the configuration? I definitely agree that the z-axis is the likely culprit. In the future I want to add those rods that help support it and see if that solves the issue! Thanks for the info!
Great Video. Thanks. What about the cross correlation with Pressure Advance? When I did the input shaping I had to repeat my Pressure advance calibration. And I found pressure advance to be very sensitive to the acceleration I am using. Did see any impact to your pressure advance setring when you have changed the acceletions?
After input shaping I was able to run with 3500 mm/s2, but only for the generic calibration test. When printing real parts the print quality was6not good, and I think because of the cross correlation between acceleration and pressure advance.
Hey, great thing to point out! I did recalibrate pressure advance after all of my benchy’s. I should’ve pointed that out. I wouldn’t call it a cross correlation as it’s kind of a one way relatiknship, but yes, changing the accelerations requires you to recalibrate PA. Thanks!
I would like to mention for other people you can just get the newer adxl345 with usb c and you dont need to do all of the fancy wiring as it is just ran usb c to usb A via Raspberry Pi or whatever Ive ran it through a raspberry, and laptops. Also if you get the BTT adxl345 you can screw it in where the nozzle goes as they provide a hole and a screw to tie into the hotend directly.
Your description of the wiring is good, but there are some efficiencies to simplify things.... there is no real need to use two different SPI busses for the sensors, whilst not an issue with the Pico example it's not really the most effecient thing when using SPI long term (that is to say, wastes pins that could be used for other things if you had a different project using SPI devices I the future).
You can use the same power, data in (MOSI), data out (MISO), and clock lines for all SPI devices... just attach different controller pins to each sensors Chip Select pins. An SPI device will only communicate of the MISO line if it's CS pin is high (or low can't remember off top of head). So using different pins for CS allows the MCU to select which device it's talking to. In your Klipper example it's just a case of putting a different cs_pin in the config for each accelerometer. For other projects using SPI in the likes of arduino or other IDE (or coding language) again it's just a case of defining the pin used for CS for each device .
You're spot on with that! There are two reasons I recommended wiring separate buses. The first is, simplicity. I didn't want to go in depth to SPI and how it works and its capabilities if someone only wanted to get input shaper. I just tried to give enough to give some context in a digestibleish manner. The second reason is it "complicates" the wiring. Sometimes splicing two wires together can be a hassle, and the idea of having multiple chips on the same wires while another wire had to be different didn't seem like a digestible topic in the amount of time I had. If you were wiring directly to a Pi or something and wanted it to be a permanent implementation, I'd say your way is the best. For me, I'm not planning on using the Pico for anything else at the moment, so no worry of running out of pins. Thanks for your comment! There's so much great information coming from people, I wish I could pin multiple comments...
Hi. Just a 'litlle' hint to 'ALLl' You Tube presentators (NOTE! Just in general): When you hold your item in your hand to show the thing and explane something of it at the same time: Please hold Your hands 'STILL', don't 'swift' 'flap' 'move'... or whats the description of my meaning (I'm a FIN so my gramma in english doesn't cover so well the thought), I hope you know what I mean. I certainly like the stuff on Your video ;)
thx, well done
Think it's the first time I see any explanation at all about smoothing. Klipper docs just throw the term, everywhere else is, well all over the place.
Great content, you did a pretty good job introducing it. I'd suggest a follow up to go more in detail for the diagnostic part and understand all the chart lines.
I would also point out that the input shaper is a great way to tune belt tension. It's very easy to get it wrong and can have a dramatic impact on print quality, acceleration and even layer shift odds at higher speeds.
Thanks! Yeah, I wish they had areas where they explained the actual kinematics equations, how they implement things, etc. While this video was a bit of a fail, I'm happy that people are at least thinking about it now!
For belt tension, this is a lot easier on a CoreXY as you can see the peaks not aligning properly. For me, I'd have to test, adjust tension, test... repeat. They can help identify relative belt tension, but not absolute belt tension. So I think they can tell you if your relative tension is off, but not if you have the correct tension. Do you agree? In all honesty, I know very little about belt tension. I'm not sure how one does it properly!
@@SpencersDesk I don't think of it as a fail at all. Don't be hard on yourself. About belt tension, I have a cartesian printer (not bed slinger) and input shaping was instrumental to tune belt tension. You will see that the indicative max acceleration will increase or decrease depending of how far you are from the ideal applied tension. Of course this method only works if the print is already reasonably calibrated for other factors that may affect rigidity.
When you say Cartesian, do you mean CoreXY? So you suggest running the test over and over, adjusting belt tension in between? Until you find the highest suggested acceleration?
@@SpencersDesk, no, cartesian is one of the kinematic types you can use in klipper. It has independent X and Y axis, in contrast with corexy where they both work together. Yes, I start with some tension, measure resonances, increase tension and measure it again, until I find the sweet spot. Ideally you should take note of it and I think the easiest way to do it is to use a guitar tuner (yes, you heard me right, you can play your printer like a musical instrument), it produces different sound notes, when you fiddle with it that are related to the tension applied.
Edit: It is not about finding the suggested accelaration, but instead, observing the suggested acceleration and observing when it starts to decrease (too much tension).
I see! So more like a CNC machine. Haha, I had never thought about using a guitar tuner! That is some solid information, thank you!
Could this be what saves delta printers after all??
I never heard of this before and it was very interesting. As a total neewbie, I didnt quite get, how this gets applied. If I understand correctly, this get measured once for the printer and then acts as a correction function. But as what point is it used. For example I use oftoprint with a raspberry pi on my artillery sidewinder.
Is this correction something that gets applied in the slicer or does it need a totaly different way of controlling the printer directly with the pi?
Hey, great question! Klipper itself dictates how the printer will move. The slicer says how fast, and what direction to go, but the actual motion is determined by Klipper. So, Klipper takes the gcode you give it, and determines how the printer will move. If you’re not on Klipper, then other firmwares can also do this. For example, prusa machines have input shaper built into their firmware (depending on which version you have) Hope that answers your question!
Build my first Prusa MK1 9 years ago. Then build same concept on my own steel cube frame - big improvement. Now own Bambu Lab X1 - Carbon and no matter what I do with frame will never match performance of X1. Sophisticated software which check rezonans on 1st calibration. Extruder adaptation. 1st layer scanner. Carbon X rails with external extruder makes it very fast.
Print quality definitely starts with the construction of the printer. What is the 1st layer scanner? Is it similar to that "Beacon" ABL sensor? Thanks for your comment!
Pico & pack-o-sensors ordered!!! Now I just have to get back to trying to make Klipper work! :)
I'm working on a long form Klipper installation video! Hopefully you get it figured out before that comes out though!! Best of luck
@@SpencersDesk - hope so! My PiOS install is pretty gimpy, so I might flatten it and just start over. Not that hard to put in KIAUH and MC, and all that now that I've done it once. Pi won't even see my machine now, so maybe I gimped the USB ports, or... who knows!! :D
You should use the recommended input shapers for your outside perimeters, you can bump up your speeds and accelerations for most other print features, just test your max speeds and accel don't cause stepper skipping.
Good shout! Just make sure the outer walls are printed before the inner walls!
What extruders you all use for these speeds? You'll hit volumetric flow (melt capacity) sooner than any mechanical speed limits.
I've got an Orbiter V2.0 on my current setup. I'm currently planning a video that looks further into flow and what the biggest factors are for it (temperature, extruder motor current, etc...)
I think you should "dive deeper" into cooling prints, which is kinda strange topic when it comes to pla.
can you elaborare ? I'm very interested for a tldr and/or ressources 😇 I curently just have the biggest fan I had hooked up tonmy printer
I think that's a cool idea. Honestly, cooling for PLA is strange if you are printing at low speeds, no crazy overhangs, stuff like that. But (as you can see in my benchy's horizontal lines) when you begin printing at higher speeds, cooling can become a very difficult task.
Beyond that, the amount of cooling you have can seriously alter the mechanical properties of your printed parts. I'd really like a setup similar to Tom (Made With Layers) so I can begin to test things like this!
I don’t have something off the cuff, just things I’ve seen. On speed benchy printers, I’ve seen “auxiliary cooling” where there are ducts on the side of the printer pointing towards the middle of the build plate rather than the ducts being on the print head. I’ve even seen a hose being connected to the print head and a turbine off printer blasting air through the hose.
As to the mechanical properties changing, this is a pretty common trend in material science. There are all these cool graphs and plots that show how changing how fast your materials cool changes what crystalline structures they form. Rule of thumb is to go hot and slow for strong parts. Helps the parts fuse together. Going fast with lots of cooling makes parts less strong as the layers don’t have time to melt together.
great video. the theory is similar to active noise cancellation
Hey, yes sort of. The way I described it was a little wrong. We aren’t “canceling” the oscillations but instead “preventing” them. Noise canceling is definitely the canceling version!
Great video from the start but you flew by the results, (the 3d printed parts). For someone who delved into details I was expecting for a detailed analisys of the parts. It deserves a brief follow up video imo.
Subscribed.
Hey, thanks for the feedback! In all honesty, it was a combination of being lazy, tired, and thinking nobody would actually want to watch it, haha. But, I promise I won't be bringing that into my future videos. There will definitely be a followup video in the future that will better address this complex topic! Thanks for your support!
You're getting your vyper to cook at this speed wow, im going to up the speeds of mine i thought from the thumbnail you were going to talk more core xy than bed slinging. I have been printing at 75mm/s at 3000 accel
In all honesty, I’m gonna try to push it a little faster later on. I still haven’t maxed out the flow rate of my mosquito! Look up 2 minute bed slinger benchy on TH-cam and check it out! Someone did a 1:59 benchy on the bed slinger! Thanks for your comment!
I see you are also a user of the coin pusher style desktop environment. I'm about to hit a jackpot.
Haha, I've never heard it described that way, but it's too accurate! Hope you don't lose your slicer!
Can i use this with 8bit board?
What a well organized video!
If possible, can you add a video chapters?
Thanks! It's my first longer video. Looking back at it, there are plenty of improvements I could have made, but that's okay! Chapters are added now.
@@SpencersDesk Thanks 😉
Your explanation of IS was really intuitive and informative. Can't imagine how much time would have put into this video
Thanks for the video. Just a bit of errata with the pin labeling for the pico within the klipper config file. While the cs wire is connected to the physically second pin on the pico, it is labeled as gpio1, not gpio2, so the cs line should read cs_pin: pico: gpio1
Thanks! And nice catch!
increase your accel per hz and you'll get cleaner graphs. the power spectral density is only scaled up to 1e3, which is usually an indicator that you're measuring a lot of non-data
Is that a parameter in the resonance testing sections? I’ll look into that. From what I’ve seen the 1e3 is pretty typical. What do you mean by non-data? If you mean noise, I don’t think the smaller peaks I’m seeing are noise
@@SpencersDesk yeah, it's in the tuning parameters, though it's used less. it's real data but the actual impact on printing is next to nothing, so while not noise, it's not as useful as the major peaks that will show up better with higher accel per hz. I guess you could call that noise if you wanted, but it's not reaaally noise in my estimation. it's still useful data, especially since you found loose bolts, but not what I would base my input shaping on. most of the machines i see have at least 1e4, but that could just be the types of machines I'm used to seeing
I see what you mean. The small peaks are real data, and have some cause, but you’re not taking them into consideration when determining an input shaper. But yeah, I think e3, e4 is normal range
Thank you Spencer for the deep dive.
My ender 3 v3 se without input shaping can do fine at 300mm/s but i usually print at 150mm/s
I would definitely love if you could dive a bit into the limited cartesian kinematics. From what I have seen it allows you to have a separate x and y axis acceleration which allows you to fully utilize the maximum input shaper speeds without being limited by a certain axis.
For example, at around 23:25 If I wanted to use the input shaper EI with an acceleration of 3000, I wouldn't be able to utilize input shaper 3HUMP_EI to its full 3300 acceleration.
I may be misunderstanding your comment, but for Cartesian printers, you are able to define different input shapers for the x and y axis. The same goes for Delta and CoreXY or CoreXZ printers. I don't believe there is any printer out there which behaves the same in both the x and y direction. So, you will need to assign different input shapers to each one. You definitely can have 5,000mm/s^2 on one axis and 1,000mm/s^2 on the other, it shouldn't matter
@SpencersDesk my apologies, haven't done a ton of research on it. It more on setting independent acceleration limits for x and y axes. I can't sent links in comments but if you Google "limited cartesian klipper" it's the first link!
Hey, I checked out some links and it seems to say that Klipper, while letting you define separate values for the 2 axes, still only uses the lower value. I saw that someone developed a method to change this? But it isn't officially supported yet.
@@SpencersDesk Gotcha! Yeah someone made their own python script for the kinematics. Would you see any benefit of doing this or should I do more research before implementing?
I can't speak to it honestly. If you're not satisfied with your printer's current state then I'd say go for it. But, I don't know how much benefit it brings. Maybe others can speak to the difference it makes?
thanks a lot - subscribed
Not sure if that would improve bambulab printers too
Hey, I’m pretty sure that Bambu has this in their printers already! I think it’s tuned when you first setup the printer
I don't have a printer but how about this technique. Draw/print the line then stop the printer at the corner then proceed downward. Would that make for sharper corners?
If your printer was moving slowly yes. At higher speeds, the corners aren’t sharp anymore due to the printer not being perfectly rigid. The advantage of input shaper is that it can create these sharp corners at higher speeds!
Input shaper is just one part of good print quality. If you print fast, the nozzle and linear advance has a much bigger impact on what looks like ringing or ghosting. Accelerometer input shaping can also give pretty poor real world results, as it doesn't measure the tip of the nozzle. The amlitude is always to low or even completely off depending where the accelerometer is mounted. Therefor the dampening values are set wrong over an average of printing speeds.
Hey, thanks for your thoughts. I totally agree, input shaper is just one of the 10e6 moving parts that determine the quality our printers can deliver. Your comment comes across as if you're saying input shaping for 3D printing is useless.
I'd argue that the accelerometers do a very decent job for our use case. While it would be ideal to mount an ADXL in the exact same point in space that the nozzle is at, we just make the assumption that the print head is rigid enough so that resonance at one point is similar to any other point. Also, I don't think that resonance depends on print speeds. Resonance is a result of the construction of your printer, how rigid it is, what materials it is composed of, the surface the printer is sitting on. From what I can tell, the same input shaper works across different speeds
@@SpencersDesk IS is important. I don't know why my comment came across that way. I meant exactly what I said. IS is just one part of a good print. However I would not use an accelerometer to dial in IS alone. The dampening values of IS can throw off linear advance with different nozzles. The amplitude of the resonance is very important at the nozzle and not the accelerometer. Therefor dampening values are to low or too high. Depending on speed printed. This can than be amplified by the pressure advance settings. You can see ringing artifacts produced on all auto calibrating printers - with accelerometers, unless tuned to the exact print speed and pressure behavior of the nozzle/filament. Not even considering the impact of acceleration and jerk settings on IS.
As the print grows higher, the mechanical oscillator for the X axis changes. Can the filtering be done for the whole range?
Hey! I really like that question. I’d argue that oscillation along all 3 axes change. I didn’t think of it until you mentioned it. I would say that the oscillations don’t change an insane amount though. As they mainly come from the resonance frequencies of rigid bodies, I don’t think the change should be too great. So my short answer is yes, input shaper will be effective at all heights. In the future I plan to add supports to the zframe and I’ll be sure to test the resonances at different heights to get a more concrete answer to this!
This is a lot of work. Are there printers that come standard with this?
Yes! Prusa recently added input shaper to their printers. Bambu labs does it a bit better as I think they can measure the resonance when you set it up whereas Prusa does it at the factory. Maybe that makes it account for the work surface better? Or maybe the Prusa is hand tuned and better that way?
So - no rigid mounting to shelf?
How much of compliance? Rubber feet or floating platform?
Nope! Nothing fancy here (yet). Right now it's just the stock rubber feet. In the future, I'd like to test out different options
there is or was a problem.. not sure if still present. the very first query to accelerometer after firmware restart on a pico will always fail. the second will succeed. dont give up to soon. (has todo with late spi initialization)
I'm not 100% sure but I don't remember this happening when I did it. I definitely should've mentioned that the first step is... try again. Thanks for the comment!
I liked the video and the info; I thought it was well done. However, I would have liked to see more of the actual print results.
Future videos will have this! Sorry that this one did not :/
Only 7 minutes in but the entire time I was wondering how do you input shape on a bed slinger printer. With the bed moving in the y axis and the print head moving in the x axis where do you put the senors in order to capture both oscillations. Honestly I felt like input shaping was only for CoreXY printers where the print head moved in both the x and y direction. I'll continue to watch.
in classic fashion less than 2 minutes after commenting, you can just use two input shapers.
Well enjoy the free engagement
Haha, thank you for the free engagement!
I would've really liked to have seen before & after prints sitting next to each other.
I know :/ I was so tired by the end of this video that I got lazy and didn't add it in... I promise, future videos will be nothing like that!
I found that title a bit misleading, a good intro to input shaping, but I was left hungry for more info on interpreting the graphs and the meaning of those numbers.
I've come across statements saying things like "if your recommended shaper isn't ZV or MZV there's something wrong with your printer" - what do you make of that?
Another thing I'd like to mention regarding that Z resonance you're complaining about: I've had similar problems due to the bed belt not being parallel to the Y axis, the angle it had on both ends of the carriage was introducing a vertical component to the forces, I modified the carriage model so the belts became parallel which fixed the problem.
I think the title is fair, as most are just inputting the recommended shaper and moving on. Introducing the idea that you can improve the resonances is what I was trying to convey. I would like to go more into the graphs, but I'm not confident that I could do it justice yet. I'd like to get some more experience and do more testing before I make an in depth video on it!
As to the quote... I have no idea why someone would say that. ZV is the "ideal" shaper as it lets you achieve the highest accelerations and does the least amount of smoothing. As another user mentioned, if you have a bed slinger, zv is fine on the x-axis, but ei is recommended for the bed.
For my graphs, as others mentioned, I kind of screwed them up as I was blending results from multiple tests. I can't confidently say the adjustments I did didn't remove that extra peak. As far as I know, my y-axis belt looks fine? It's parallel to the extrusion it moves over. I'll take a closer look though! Thanks for the feedback!
How do I get input shaping on my ender 3 ke, I spend 20 bucks and plug in the sensor that should have came with the printer in the first place.
Hi, I’m not familiar with the E3 V3 KE but I just looked it up. It mentioned input shaper but I have no clue if it has an accelerometer or not. It may be like the Prusa machines where input shaping values were found at the factory and are built into the firmware already on the printer. You may already have it activated by nature of having the printer. Hope that helps!
@@SpencersDesk yes and no, I have an option to adjust values on the adjust page , however when I tap it, I get a prompt telling me that I don't have the available for mentioned "sensor", vibration sensor. Some call it a G sensor.
Odd. Could also be something like a firmware issue? I'd at the very least reach out to customer support for some help!
@@SpencersDesk no no no I've got the input shaping finished, I literally had to buy the sensor, a sensor that comes factory on some models.
I feel like you skipped over the physical results. They were only on screen for a couple seconds each. Algo is picking your videos up, keep going!
Thanks for pointing that out! I definitely felt like I rushed it a bit. I’m still grappling with how much of what to include. When I first sat down to edit it, it was about 12 minutes long. I felt like I skipped over so much though and it turned into 30 minutes. I guess I was afraid that viewership would tank if I just started comparing benchys. I’ll make sure to do a better job in future videos and at least do a bare minimum amount. Thanks for the support!!
@@SpencersDesk When it comes to educational content, don't worry too much about how long the video is (other than ad rolls if that is something you care about). Honestly, the longer ones generally do better when it comes to learning, you just want to make sure you include all the important bits. You're doing good, man. Your channel will take off soon
But it's AN input shaper, not input shaper. It does input shaping. It's like saying you are not getting the most out of car or toaster. Marlin has an input shaper , duet's have an input shaper, klipper has an input shaper. Actually they all have many variations of the input shapers to use (MZV, ZVD, EL, etc.). Outside of annoying wording good video overall. People for some reason think klipper is the only solution.
Klipper is the only solution to all my problems. And beer.
Just nagging. I'm with you here. Wording is important in tech. ❤
Please do a video for Marlin firmware and getting data from the adxl with arduino board
I'm unlikely to do this. I'm not familiar with Marlin firmware. I'll be making a long video on how to get Klipper! If you make the switch, then you can come back here ;)
vibr refers to the residual vibration % should that particular model be applied--lower is better. sm is how much smoothing will result with that model or how much input shaper will cause the actual movement to deviate from its requested path in order to achieve the vibration reduction--lower is better and higher leads to rounded corners, loss of fine details, etc. only use this to rank the available models, outside of this, the number has no purpose. accel is maximum acceleration for that model beyond which there will be ADDITIONAL smoothing effect. it does not mean your machine is actually capable at that acceleration--you have to print the model to inspect for ringing for this. smoothing is probably not a big deal if you print artistic parts but if you are modelling walls with circular holes that need to be circular, smoothing will make them ovals which is going to be terribly annoying for functional parts. klipper's recommendation for you is based on an internal calculation to rank the models based on these values, details of which i dont know of, but is usually close to spot on. ZV ("zero vibration") is going to the the best model for an ideal printer (one resonant frequency with infinite power spectral density). since such a printer can't exist, other models will probably perform better and this is due to the printer having multiple resonant frequencies that ZV cannot handle but other more complex models can.
higher frequencies are better because this means the shaper can work at higher frequencies to counter it. low frequency is worse because if the shaper can only work at lower frequencies, your accelerations will also be lowered. that said there is little you can do to majorly alter the major resonant frequencies of your printer without serious modification. but you can improve it a little with screw tightening:
tightening screws everywhere is a good idea in general:
it can really eliminate certain small peaks as shown in the video. for example if the fan shroud screw is loose, this means the mass of the shroud becomes its own oscillator causing a small peak other than the main one (the printer frame, the toolhead). tightening it down eliminates the peak as it truly becomes one with the toolhead, creating a new, larger mass that resonates at one, new frequency, probably a higher one.
resonant frequency is proportional to the root of stiffness so if you tighten all screws in the frame, the major resonant frequency contributed by the frame should shift right as shown in the video. it will also reduce internal damping which will squeeze the peak making it taller and thinner (become more like a tuning fork, which is easier for input shaping to counter). less damping is not good but if you tighten the peak, the shaper will work better at its sole job which is to add damping.
the peaks which didn't move are probably not related to stiffness from screws.
just a warning on screw tightening in the frame. this can create skew in the frame for any printer making it lose squareness.
where you sit the printer also matters. if the table or shelf has a different resonant frequency as the printer, it is going to show up as its own peak. meanwhile the solid ground has infinite mass but also infinite stiffness, meaning it does nothing to the printer--it doesn't actually make the printer worse per se---it just reveals the true resonance of the printer itself where previously the table or shelf you had it on was simultaneously providing noise as well as damping (in most cases the damping effect more than compensates for the fact that it introduces a noise frequency which sometimes at least one of the shaper models can also compensate for). but ideally the best place to put the printer is on a stable and stiff furniture (no noise) but with damping from stiff foam. you don't want the printer to sit on foam directly because the frame needs a solid and flat surface to prevent flexing from its own vibrations. so what people have come up with is to place it on a stone/granite/cinder block slab with stiff foam below and the sturdy table underneath. this gives you a massive, stiff and flat surface for the printer while still providing damping.
last note: input shaper will alter the behavior of PA/LA. do input shaper early or else redo PA tuning after.
at around 4:15 you said the 2 videos are linked in the description? I cant see them anywhere?
look at the bottom of the description, or you could click the little "i" circle at the top-right of the video player. happy printing!
Hey, thanks for pointing that out. I forgot to add it! It's now in the description.
Does it really tell the printer to go BACK? I thought that it "cuts the corner", since frequencies are REMOVED and not added: going backwards involves adding high frequency movements. But in general the results are the ones you mention
Imagine using a Yo-Yo. When it gets to the bottom of the string, you do a jerking motion to get it to come back. It's similar to that, where it pulls a little extra back in the other direction to cancel out the move. It's more of a controlled stop then just slamming on the brakes. It isn't just cutting the corner, as you wouldn't need to measure frequencies to round a corner. Think of the ripples in a pond when there are splashes in two separate locations. The ripples cancel out in places where they have opposite amplitudes. Input shaper guesses at what the opposite of the result would look like, and does that to try and cancel it out.
@@SpencersDesk I understand what you say and I also see that that's what they do in the video of the object hanging from strings, but I thought that klipper just band-blocks the resonating frequencies and that implies smoothing the motion, not adding a high frequency compensation (the "pulling back").
After all, excessive compensation causes smoothing of the corners, which is a confirmation of my interpretation of the correction applied.
Let me ask the devs on the klipper discourse. If you look for new threads in few hours you'll be able to participate to it.
I will say, by adding two identical waves that are phase offset by 180 will result in no oscillations. In other words, adding more, but opposite vibrations will lead to no vibrations. But yes, as others have confirmed in here, it is a changing of accelerations. The ZV smoother splits acceleration into 2 steps, while other shapers add more and more steps, becoming more robust against error and change, but cause more smoothing. I don’t thinks it’s a band pass of any sort. And sounds good! I can’t wait to see what comes of it!
@@SpencersDesk The main developer of the IS module answered on the Klipper Discourse, you find the thread in the section Features. You are right that there is no direct band-stop filtering, the filtering is the result of splitting the motion in 2/3/... moves which results in the same effect. However Klipper does not use negative coefficients (just like the videos you incorporated), so the carriage is never actually pulled back. Only the timing of the movements is adjusted.
Yes, through other's comments and some more reading I've figured that out. I guess in my head, by pull back, I meant a deceleration. But I definitely did not represent that in the video, haha. I will try again one day when I'm ready to create a more airtight video on the topic!
The "after" graphs are an average of three measurements (see headlines). Where did you probe for the final measurements?
Hey, nice catch! Unfortunately, I didn't think it mattered at the time and rolled with it. Others have informed me that's not the case. The probe point did not change between tests.
Request: clearer side-by-sides. Both diagrams and print tests
Diagrams: pick out just the 2 relevant columns from the CSVs, label them properly (e.g. "floor" and "shelf", instead of "before" and "after"), put them in the same diagram instead of next to each other
Print tests: photographs side by side, same angle on both objects, clear labels
Thank you for the video, I know it's a lot of work, I recommend using a checklist for the production. There are plenty out there for you to combine and adapt
Great feedback! Thank you! Yes I’m still learning a lot about the production process, how I want videos to look, etc. this is very helpful to hear. While normally I would do the combined graphs, I think I’ll keep them separate. They’re just busy as is, and auto generated. I’ll definitely label them better in the future. Thanks for your support!
Marlin nowdays has both pressure advance and input shaping as well
Is it strange that Marlin is more intimidating to me than Klipper? While Marlin is cool, I don’t see any firmware catching up to Klipper in terms of complexity and amount of features anytime soon
@@SpencersDesk well, marlin is intended to run on printer's board, while klipper is ditching that and runs on full-fledged pc, thus it can do a lot more
Only thing intimidating about marlin is that to enable some new feature you might need to recompile it, since marlin is trying to be as small as possible
@lonesimba great point! I forget about not needing a Pi lol. Just to clarify, Klipper doesn’t ditch the controller board. The Pi does the calculations while the controller board handles all of the movements. I do see the appeal of marlin, especially when it comes to people that print to print (not to tinker) and for Maker Spaces where no one cares about Klipper features, they just want good prints
@@SpencersDesk well, in a farm klipper might be useful dur to it's network features, but that can be negated by octoprint and alike
And some printers nowdays incorporate klipper (like Creality K1, bambu machines), and trasition to klipper does yield better performance (i was unable to run Ender 3 S1 Pro higher than 100mm/s, but on klipper i am able to run it all the way to 240mm/s), but true, transition to it IS tinkering
Speaking of tinkering about it - I've changed hotend (stripped it while changing nozzle) and quality dropped drastically, any suggestions? I'm thinking it might be that hotend is not straight 90deg relative to hot plate
I totally agree! So you’ve installed a new hot end and quality has dropped. Is it the same type of hot end or a different one?
Graphs and IS recommendations should use only the latest CSV file. Delete or move away old ones, or use named file instead of * 😉
Haha, yes I've learned this the hard way (as I always seem to). In the future this won't be a problem. Thanks for pointing it out!
@@SpencersDesk Klipper instruction is kinda misleading :D
Kann ein Input Shaper auch für Audio-Wiedergabe (20Hz bis 20kHz) genutzt werden? Kann ein Verstärker mit vorgeschaltetem Messmikrofon die Trägheiten eines Lautsprechers korrigieren, dämpfen oder sogar kompensieren ?
Tut mir leid, ich spreche kein Deutsch, aber das ist von Google Translate. Denken Sie daran, dass Input Shaper ein Steuerungssystem mit offenem Regelkreis ist. Also modellieren wir unser System mit Messungen und wenden dann die Korrekturen an. Wir messen und reagieren nicht. Es ist eine sehr coole Frage, auf die ich keine Antwort habe. Ich stelle mir vor, dass der größte Teil des Bewegungsmanagements durch die Konstruktion des Lautsprechers erfolgt. Aber ich bin mir sicher, dass es proprietäre Möglichkeiten gibt, Lautsprecher anzusteuern?
Prinzipiell ja, aber ich denke damit geht auch das Spektrum des Lautsprechers verloren.
hi, Marlin also has an input shaper feature I have a pretty fast ender3 benchy on my channel (my only video, just wanted to share)
Just checked it out, nicely done! You said you didn’t like the barrier to entry with Klipper? What part do you think is stopping you?
Rewatch this video pretending you are not a developer or systems or hardware guy. SSH? Adding new boards to your printer? Complex config files that you have to know what to add to make it work rather than adjusting existing configurations? I am a systems and hardware guy and switching my Creality CR10 to Klipper is daunting. I want to print, not rebuild and maintain printers.
Do you think a long form video on implementing Klipper is worthwhile? I’d be interested in making one where I don’t assume someone knows what SSH is or anything about configurations. Really kind of spelling it out or at least pointing to a resource for each step is how I’d go about it. Thanks for pointing that out!
I don't know if anyone else asked this. If you have the capability maybe you could look at Marlin's new Input Shaping capability.
Hey friend, I have no plan on checking it out. I found this for you though…
th-cam.com/video/7VLuz3hReYw/w-d-xo.htmlsi=ZPM53NoyDPowkaPz
what if i have a delta (flsun q5)
You can definitely apply input shaper! It can be applied to anything really, printers, CNC machines, as long as there’s a software ready for it. On the Klipper page, linked in the description, they have images of it and a much better explanation than I can give. You’ll only need one accelerometer which is nice!
@@SpencersDesk thanks man!
Deltas are hard to calibrate proppely. If you are happy with the base line result of your inputshaper it is a good idear. But if you want to push your printer to the limit you will have to do some experiments yourself. Due to the overall lack of information for compex inputshaping of Deltas. I am currently working on that topic and i can tell that the flsun q5 is not the best printer for printing high speed. I would not go over 10000mm/s acceleration with inputshaper enabled. Some dampening feet on the bottom of the printer can be pretty good for the start. In my tests they mostly effect the 50Hz range or the 75Hz range depending on the type of matterial and construction.
Hi,
small suggestion for improvement on video production: The background music during the introduction part was really distracting to me, so it was harder to follow you. Firstly it was a bit too loud and secondly - way more important - it had a lot of sounds in the same frequency range as your voice. So as a result your voice is competing with the background music. To resolve this you could either choose music that avoids these frequencies altogether or eq them out.
Other than that - great video! I'm going to re-assess my input shaping
Hey, thanks for that! Music is something I've struggled with. Completely removing it makes it feel like something is missing. I'll be taking this into account, thank you!
If the communication fails on the first time, try a second time. Sometimes it doesn't work on first try.
Haha, a great point. I should’ve mentioned that as the first solution. Sometimes unplugging and plugging back in is the solution
Hey man, I enjoyed the video but your autofocus is a little distracting, especially when looking at the background. Keep up the good work!
This is a solid tip. I applied it to some of my recent filming. Thanks!
For the final results you forgot to clean up your tmp folder and the plot used 3 runs for drawing which can become misleading result
Hey, nice eye. I doubled checked it when I made this and it looks like it only affected the title! I’ll be doing plenty more of the plots in the future so I’ll be sure to clear tmp next time!
Very good explanation. Please lower the music level or drop it.
I put extra effort into getting my audio straightened out on my most recent video. Hope I got it right this time!
@@SpencersDesk good audio makes a huge difference to the quality of a video - really worth making that effort. Generally it’s better to not have music and keep the audio track simple.
Honestly, maybe tighten your belt first of all and that might solve it 😮
It's your printer that rings not the belts :) Even people with screws instead of belts have ghosting.
Yes, I mentioned the frame is also a large contribution. To say the belts aren’t involved is incorrect. You can see the response curves change as the relative tension of the belt changes
please clean that fan... i am itching
Haha😂 I was hoping no one would notice. I’ve been ignoring it as it’ll be “addressed” in a video in the near future
Hi Spencer, nice video. The theory was neatly explained. But... (right? ha ha) you created an expectancy 0:24 about showing something for people familiar with input shaping that would "change how we approach 3D printing" - so I stayed... (I wanted to know "why I am NOT getting the most out of Input Shaper") and... where is it? If that's the charts and understanding how they work... well, that's nothing people familiar with it don't know already. By the way, having two distinct peaks at your X axis means the printer needs mechanical attention. A mechanical healthy printer has a more distinct single peak, not two as yours are showing. Finally, the printed results are still quite wobbly - a LOT of 3D Printers can do better than that without input shaping at all. Hope you can improve the X-axis and try it again. Good luck with the channel!
Thanks! Unfortunately, the theory isn't quite correct, so there's still a lot for me to learn. What I did learn changed how I approached 3D printing personally. I never knew the curves had a lot more information that could help you diagnose printer issues. Loose belts, loose screws, problematic wire looms, motion issues, etc... This will change how I test whether future projects are worth it or not. I've implemented input shaper a time or two and was familiar with the process, but didn't know about this side of resonance curves. So, I was "familiar" with input shaper. 99% of the printing community (myself included) has no idea what is going on underneath the hood. This is me looking underneath the hood of a car and attempting to explain how it works after watching a few Top Gear episodes.
As other comments pointed out, my last charts are inaccurate due to the way they were generated, so I'm not sure if the second peak is even still present. This would of course influence the input shaper recommendation and possibly lead to smoother prints. I will however say, the before and after result I show in the thumbnail, moving twice as fast and with over twice the acceleration, on a bed slinger, are very good results. The ringing towers are made to accentuate resonance issues, were in silk PLA, and exposed to very harsh light, showing every little artifact there was.
Anyway, I will be making a video in the future to replace this one that is based in fact and not my guesses, and I hope it will serve as a useful tool for others. Thanks for watching
This is a bit harsh IMO, it may not be relevant or additional information to you, but going on what is on YT this video indeed puts out additional information.
Incorrect explanation for what the input shaper actually does in your paper example. It splits up the acelleration part into multiple steps, each step is timed so that it cancels out the oscillation of the previous step. Kind of what a crane operator does, he doesn't speed up instantly, he accellerates half speed first which creates a pendulum effect and then exactly as the pendulum swings forward and is vertical he accellerates full speed to catch up with the pendulum and cancels it out. MZV splits the accels/decels into three steps for example.
Hi, after reading more in depth on some published papers, I can agree that you are correct! I won’t say that the accelerating at half speed then full speed is correct. I think you mean to say velocity not acceleration. It is still a sinusoidal pattern, but yes ZV does only consist of two main input commands. Thanks for pointing this out! Checkout a dissertation by John R. Huey from Georgia tech, 2006. Has some great info!
@@SpencersDesk The crane operator (I've been one BTW) will not be as fast as an input shaper, usually you have two speeds on the joystick and you wait one full cycle before applying full speed to cancel it out but you need to time it exactly. The input shapers do this faster, ZV has two, MZV splits into three segments and they are done at half cycle for ZV I think and 2/3 on MZV. The other ones do it differently. The problem is if you have different frequencies and shapers the corners that are not pure x or pure y will be messed up because you are commanding the toolhead to go outside the proper path.
@@sabahoudini woah, cool! I don’t see why corners not aligned with X or y would be worse off? Input shaper applies to each axis separately. So it shouldn’t depend on what the other axis is doing (approximately)
@@SpencersDesk Think of it like this: What happens if you command the printer to go in a straight diagonal 45 degree line but you have two different accelleration speeds? The line will be an arc during the accelleration portion. Therefore if the input shaping segments are not lined up exactly the print head will not move in a straight line but a zig zag. This is why you see smoothing in klipper when going too fast, I think they average it out. In reprap they use a single input shaper for both axis but one that captures a wide range of frequencies so you don't get smoothing of corners.
But these arcs are extremely small are they not? Also, do you have any resources I could read up on?
3:30 you described it absolutely wrong
Yes, this has been discussed in other comments. Btw, if you know something is wrong, try to provide an explanation as to why. No one wins when people just point
Wanna go fast? Get rid of bed slinger! 😁
th-cam.com/video/7lJmkTSoWLc/w-d-xo.htmlsi=JM1dToHeTQ9jnhX5
I’m going to ask you to watch this video. We can sling some beds these days
@SpencersDesk I did. That's not a Benchy, more looks like a Flying Dutchmen! You simply can't print on a large bed with proper quality on a bed slinger with speeds compared to CoreXY, don't you agree? Although the video is great and explanation is very detailed. Good job! 👍
Haha, yes I totally agree. If we want quality prints and speed at the same time, CoreXY is definitely the way to go. I personally really want to build a Voron one day. But it’s definitely fun to push printers beyond their limits!
My main reason for the bed slinger is that it’s the most common type of printer! I want the videos I make to be accessible to everyone. Not requiring tools or anything majorly expensive. Thanks for your kind words!
@@SpencersDesk Voron goes brrrrrr: th-cam.com/video/Vso0oCUuQCU/w-d-xo.htmlsi=AhA0HCNqgz5AFRaE
Just buy an accelerometer with a usb onboard
What’s 3D printing without the risk of a fire? Jk, this is a very valid way forward. Personally, I wouldn’t want to use a USB if I was keeping the accelerometer permanently installed
I need to stop being a lazy bones and actually add my ADXL to my printers.
You got this!!
@SpencersDesk - a very informative video - thank you. You have a terrible cursor moving habit which can induce nausea in some viewers.
Thank you! Haha, I'll make sure to chill out on the gamer mouse in future videos. Thanks for pointing that out!