Input Shaping feedback
-
We've just completed what we believe is the final revision to our printers which focused on rigidity. Based on the results, we are extremely pleased and have some questions that we are hoping the community and @dc42 will weigh in on as we haven't found clear answers.
What is the amount of resonance where input shaping should be enabled? There are obvious trade-offs in using input shaping and we're not really sure where the line.
For example, the strongest resonance now found is on the X axis at Y10 Z155 of .014 @45.08hz. This can be brought down to under .003 across the entire graph by enabling input shaping with a dampening amount of .0001. Is this even worth it? If not, what is the general consensus for the amount of resonance needed to correct with input shaping?
Thanks
-
@oozeBot InputShaping allows for less ringing and faster printing -- but if your machine is already rigid as yours appears to be, it's upside is maybe limited?
I would suggest to do some comparative test prints. That said, there may be some interaction between IS and PA (see https://forum.duet3d.com/topic/27855/input-shaping-pressure-advance-artifact/4) so until that has seen some clarification I would hold off on IS for production machine unless an operator determines it helps with a given print.
-
@oliof Yes - I should have elaborated that the issues we've run into are between IS and PA. With IS enabled, we've had to slow down acceleration to achieve good PA results..
