Is less damping factor (larger value) better for input shaping?

[jltx]

I tightened up my printer and increased peak frequency from 45 to 65 hz. I also lowered the magnitude to where I can get a very low (< 0.005) value with a 0.4 damping factor, instead of the default 0.1.

I have been assuming that not having to damp as aggressively is better for retaining details in the print. But I see recommendations in other threads to push it down further, like 0.05, to get a very flat response. I don't want to do any more than is minimally necessary to manage overt ringing. Am I thinking about this correctly?

[dc42]

@jltx the selected damping factor doesn't greatly affect fine details on the print. It should ideally match the damping factor of the ringing that you are trying to cancel. It's most useful when you have a single well-defined ringing frequency that you want to cancel using one of the simpler forms of input shaping such as ZVD. When using the higher order input shaping methods such as EI2, EI2 and ZVDDD to cancel multiple frequencies, it's probably best to set it to 0.05 or even 0.

[jltx]

@dc42 glad I asked. Would love to see the LaPlace transfer function because I am thinking about this wrong. I ended up with MZV @50 Hz with 0.05 because my X and Y have separate peaks and I can kill both.