It's kinda mindblowing what we nowadays consider a print of unacceptable quality, which few years ago was just straight up amazing quality. To get a print looking alright close up was impossible to get without hours of sanding and painting.
Right? I know that the pursuit of perfection is a thing, but even a short 5 years ago to get a decent-looking print in less than 10 hours and (after spending hours fiddling with settings) would have been a grail. Nowadays printers out all sorts of amazing things requiring very little work. So, logically, we complain it's not quite good yet :)
I'm regularly blown away by the quality of prints some of my friends get. Like, I'll be thinking I have my printer set up to perfection, and these folks don't even know they showed me up. 😂
to be completely fair, a short 5 years is still 5 years of innovation from a few very good companies and a very dedicated community. its insane what voron guys can do these days with a literal kit printer and their own tweaks. @@actualreplyguy
to be completely fair, a short 5 years is still 5 years of innovation from a few very good companies and a very dedicated community. its insane what voron guys can do these days with a literal kit printer and their own tweaks. @@actualreplyguy
You and Makers Muse have kept me printing for a decade now. When I had problems with my WOOD Printerbot, I came to RUclips and the two of you saved that thing from the trash. I am now on my 8th printer and you are still talking about what is most relevant. Thank you.
I still have my wooden Replicator Dual from 2012 🥰 A bunch of my own custom designs to fix flaws in the machine, prints incredibly nice. Arguably on par with my new machines. And I'm thinking about klipperising it, as it's actually supported 😈 that old 8-bit board limits printing to 45mms on fine movements or prints up to 160mms if I lower the print resolution enough to prevent buffer issues. I've rarely used it in the last two years, but I'm really thinking of modernizing it for good dual material use. With a bump cutter like on the Bambu machines. Edit: One thing that completely changes the machine to make it's frame incredibly better was to add washers to all the screws. But also a small amount of impact resistant super glue (or thin epoxy to soak in) to where the washers mount to strengthen the wood.
@@MrHeHim I still have two Printrbot Metal Plus machines. I Plan to Klipper one of them because I love how Klipper works on my Voron. The other is dissembled and in storage until I figure out what to do with it. May turn it into a small CNC Mill, or not. Don't know. I just hate the Klipper/Voron communities. There are SO many toxic people in those communities. Granted a lot of good, but that whole one bad apple thing applies.
I'm thinking about tossing out my wooden printrbot jr finally. Got a lot of use out of it but I dont use it anymore and it needs maintenance @@ajosepi1976
@@ajosepi1976Interesting to hear about that toxic community! But also a bit sad. I also noticed: you went through 8 (?) printers in 10 years, so nearly every year a new machine?! That's one kind of a development! I would have thought that modding one machine, using it for 5 years and maybe than do the next bigger step would be the usual way people went with this hobby! Now I fear that if i finally do get a printer ... i'll never be satisfied. ;)
It's really a testament to Prusa that their old printers are still good printers. My mk2 is still working. Sure, it's got the extruder and heatbed of a mk3, and has had the belts and half the moving cables replaced, but it's good enough that I hesitated to jump to the mk4. And I was wondering if the bandages were bike injuries. Both hands at once, light bandages...I hope your face gets better too; swift healing, and thank goodness there's no worse injuries.
Thanks for the thorough investigation! I'll stay at the stock firmware with my Mini for now. I also have small extrusion issues, especially with top surfaces. I will try the hotend fix.
Hey, TY for making such a comprehensive video! I would like to add that "quality" does not nessearly mean bad or good. I am running a MINI with the IS firmware, and for me, the quality is is just fine. The reduced print-time is way more important to me, than the finish. To be honest, I only noticed it once so far. The surface finish is not great, but since I only print functional parts, looks is not in my requirements. The dimentional tolerances are good and I had no failed prints so far. Thats all I care about!
Ive been using the IS firmware on the mini for a couple weeks now and im quite happy with it. Prints that used to take 10 hrs now take 6. I normally print functional mechanical bits and bobs and havent seen much discernable difference in quality. Interesting to see the comparisons youve made though. Thanks for the video.
"It's never gonna "Hoon" like those printers." Low key.... best homage to our lost driver so far this year. Ken Block, rest in peace. You changed the world. Also, Thomas, you have changed the world. For the better. Thank you for all you do making these great videos.
I installed the IS fw on my Mini, and I agree that the print quality suffered a bit, but I mostly use my Mini for functional parts where perfect print quality isn't required and II love the extra speed. I use my Mini a lot more than my MK3s+ at the moment.
Same here. We print PETG on our Mini+'s, and they do a great job, but now at 2 x the speed. It also helps that PETG isn't pretty to begin with, so aesthetic expectations were not high. Sometimes 'good enough' is all you need...
The real killer feature for me was that the Mini/+ now has full PrusaLink, not the weedy barely usable interface it had before. It's great to be able to just print straight from the slicer and watch the progress from a web browser or HomeAssistant plugin. Honestly that to me is more useful than the input shaping.
just upgraded my mk3 to 3.9. the 4 is really great update. the nextruder saves the whole first layer hassle. And all parts are just way better, stronger and more silent. input shaping saves a ton of print time. Only downside is that i miss the easy nozzle change from revo that my mk3 had. Would really recommend upgrading for anyone in doubt.
Thanks for a really detailed and informative video. After seeing your results I don't get why Prusa won't just ship the MK4 with an accelerometer and indeed offer upgrade kits with sensors for both the MK4 and Mini.
Great video, I appreciate the thoroughness in testing. Hope your hands get better soon! As for 16:24, I suppose the new firmware just had a tweak that changed the results you were seeing, since not only Input Shaping changed from 4.7.2 afaik.
It's not true that you can't tune input shaping without an accelerometer. You can always print the test model and measure the resonances manually, like what Michael over at TeachTech did maybe 2 years ago. And I'm pretty sure the MK4 allows you to enter the X and Y frequencies via the control panel.
@@BeefIngot I'm guessing it was never planned for the Mini. Frankly I can't understand not having accelerometers on the Mk4, considering it's a very similar hotend to the XL, which does have accelerometers.
@@BeefIngot There's an accelerometer port on the new mainboard so this might happen with a future upgrade. But I guess that they already do some measurements with the current detection of the motor drivers, the same feature used to detect home, step skipping, and now to detect the difference between mk3.9 and mk4 (since they share the exact same firmware)
Thanks for your thorough, in-depth investigation. I think it also helps to demonstrate that there are MANY factors that affect print quality, from physical attributes of the printer to slicer and firmware settings. Sometimes I can be running around in circles before I realise that it was something (I thought was) totally unrelated causing my problems.
Thanks for the evaluation. I may be biased, but I think prusa evaluations are generally insulated from talk about similar printers. Considering the 3D printing zeitgeist, I would love to see how the mini compares to similar sized cantilevered printers with input shaping installed. Even the ender 2 pro can have input shaping with some small edits.
I'm totally not seeing the bad results on the old, gray parts in the video. I'm not sure how they look like in person but are you sure it's not just subsurface light scattering that is making the lines look blurry?
I got a MK4 at work and put it in the Prusa enclosure. The enclosure has a sheet metal bottom that is only supported by feet at the 4 corners so it's like the printer is on a metal trampoline. This definitely isn't taken into consideration with the input shaper. I ended up taking a 1 inch thick piece of scrap sound attenuation foam from our assembly department and setting the enclosure on that. now the floor is supported and the ringing has been reduced but still not like it was before putting in the enclosure.
Great video! I replaced the heat break and PTFE tube on my Mini, per your video tips. Printing much better now, like new. Thank you. Also, I don’t expect my Mini to print as well as the newer and more expensive machines with better technology.
I did not expect those problems on the Mini would be from the extruder. I would have been hyper focused on the belts and axes. I learn so much from this channel and now I've learnt another useful thing. Thank you!
The mini very famously has a really annoying filament path with its pseudo not quite all metal hotend. I'm sure >f you googled it you'd eventually find posts complaining. Thats not to say this channel isn't definitely still useful though. I do miss the more interesting projects he's done like the filament measuring thing or the multi bed Voron. I really liked projects like those.
Given the vertical integration that Prusa has and time period the mk4 came out, it's actually now baffling to me they didn't add any accelerometer on the print head. Can't see a reason why it wouldn't only add like $2 to the BOM cost.
You'd need another one on the bed too, so a lot of inputs to the main board. Only need one on core xy. But yeah, would be good to have on board tuning capabilities.
the mk4 board actually has ports for a accelerometer. I think they figured that since every mk4 or mini is exactly the same, input shaping results or data on one printer will be the same on another. Its easier than a novice person trying to figure out a accelerometer
right? include 1 on the toolhead and 1 on the bed (wires are already running to both), and have it calculate either once, or for every print, based on some setting
The mass on the bed will still change throughout the print, so while you can measure the actual resonances on X, they will change on Y throughout the print. Those adjustments will have to be pre calculated still. Although it seems like they have gotten it close enough on the MK4.
Tom, fantastic video as usual! This video must have taken a long time to produce due to all the tests! Thank you for all the hard work! Hope you can recover fast from your bicycle accident!
Thanks Thomas for your videos. I have recently watched both of your videos on Input Shaping, and if you choose to do another one, I would like to suggest one thing. Some static pictures with a side by side comparison. I absolutely trust what you are seeing, but I don't know what exactly you are looking at when you say something isn't quite right. The models are constantly moving, probably to catch the light differently, but I just don't see what is wrong with some of the poorer Input Shaping models...I can't tell what you are looking at. If you had some static pictures with circles or arrows, then I could see what you are seeing and understand a bit better. Keep up the great work.
I build laboratory CNC machines that actuate at a resolution in the microns for a living and last week built myself a MK4. I wish the lab machines were half as solidly engineered as the MK4. Like i built a MK4 and nothing went wrong during construction, tuning was stupidly easy and the first set of inaugural test-prints all came out without a single little flaw with IS on. I expected some tiny little artifacts, but nope. It is perfectly fine. A BBL would have been cheaper sure, but i highly doubt it would have left me feeling like i acquired a device designed to outlast me if given the chance. I am impressed to see a company that actually delivers on promises even if later than intended.
Hi, I work for a small printer farm and we ordered like 10 preassembled minis from prusa. We had a horrible time with them. Most of them had the wrongly installed ptfe tube FROM PRUSA directly so it might not have been the person you got it from. (Half of the minis also had faulty pinda probes so it was bad bad)
It appears that input shaping is always active on the MK4 starting with FW 5.0.0. When I compared gcode sliced with both IS and non-IS profiles, I couldn’t find any indication that the IS profiles actually enable input shaping. Similarly, I found no evidence that the non-IS profiles disable input shaping. That being said, it seems input shaping is both enabled and configured solely at the firmware level. The slicer does not generate any gcode related to input shaping. The “non-IS” profiles are really more like “quality” profiles. They still provide the benefits of input shaping without also pushing the printer to its limits like with the IS profiles.
I’ve found if you reset the mini hot end first by pushing it all the way up to hit a stop then snug down the top brass fitting it gets a better squeeze on the ptfe tube then just pushing it up by hand.
The v5.0 firmware for the Mk4 has many known issues, including some blocking ones like not being able to home on Z. For the affected users rolling back to v4.x firmware works fine.
I wish you had tried the Prusa Mini+ with a Revo Micro. I've got Revo Micro installed in mine, but I haven't gotten around to trying the alpha firmware on it yet. What I've noticed with the regular firmware is that there is an improvement in print quality with the Revo Micro, including less stringing than with the default setup, so I wonder if it'd also fare better with input shaping.
Those improvements SHOULD transfer. I had 2 minis. 1 with revo micro and 1 without. The one with the micro did not receive the alpha FW, and the other one did. The one with the alpha FW had pretty bad print quality. I had made a profile called 0.2mm SUPERSPEED on the regular 4.4.1 (I think) FW where I basically doubled the print speeds. It was fast, but not alpha IS fast. The print quality was still really good, but there was some stringing since I didn't adjust retraction or z hop, those stayed normal. My takeaway was that the alpha IS was just not very reliable so I reverted back. When I did that, I think it reset all my settings IIRC. TLDR: probably wait for the official release. Now... let me watch Tom's video.
Thanks for another deep dive into some printing nuances. Glad to see Prusa was able to wrangle in the new features for the Mk.4 and hope your recovery is nearing completion.
ouch hope your hands heal soon. yes nothing worse than meeting a bike path the hard way.. done a few of them down mountains. get better soon. and another great video.
Of course, I typed too much... Good to see you revisit this, and reminder "alpha and beta firmwares are not finished programs... use them to give feedback to the devs, not as review targets or production systems". I had my own experimentation like this. I installed the IS ALPHA on the Mini... it plasters labels that indicate it's an alpha on basically every screen. I did a small test not unlike the low poly wolf. The quality was nearly identical... but that wasn't what impressed me, what impressed me is that it didn't get louder. They managed to do a 20-40% speed increase with, for that test, no real quality changes... and it didn't get louder. Compare that to the MK4 which has rubber paddings between every bearing and mount (and is pretty quiet itself when printing at speed). I had a larger decorative print (2+ days without IS, 1.5 days with IS) and I opted to print the base (8h with IS) on the Mini before I dropped the big print on it... needless to say I went "ok, ALPHA is not ready to do the big print" because it had extrusion issues along the way and I didn't want that on the big print, which is currently printing on the MK4 instead. My expectation is that they're going to keep tweaking things on the MK4... a new firmware with features but also a slight adjustment to IS. Some extra settings in PrusaSlicer 2.6.2 and later. Etc. I did not have "Prusa Mini gets input shaping" on my bingo card, so it's impressive in and of itself since it's a lower-power 32 bit board compared to the MK4 and XL without the stepper cooling and physical parts to reenforce it. I will be curious to see future firmware on it (and the eventual final addition of power panic which has been "coming soon" since 2019 but has recently gotten actual code additions and configurations). Please keep contacting support on issues. The more they get, the more they either update their processes to include IS prints, but it gives real reason for them to do some code changes in the slicer and firmware (no really. Make a ticket on Github saying "there's ringing because I can't calibrate IS against my surface my printer is on", IF they ack. it, it just goes to a list that they may or may not get to. But if you contact support, and a trend comes up that ringing is happening, and support can't produce but you can, and they get photos and other things showing "yes, it's happening here. With proper belt tension, etc." then eventually managers review it and say "yo, fix this" and the engineers will be required to do such a thing and may eventually go "ok, we're gonna send you an accelerometer and instructions to run it. Please use it and send us the numbers back" and take those into account. It's hypothetical scenario, but people vastly underestimate contacting support for any company. If you ever read "why do they keep adding features we don't care about?! They need to listen to their customers!" yea, they listen to them via support channels... not random shoutings on Twitter and Facebook) I will have to look at that filament as it looks nice. Last on the accelerometers... , I don't see it in the current set of top comments, additional reminder that the accelerometers are used for calibration, not when the printers are running (as you seemed to discuss it). Also, I've mentioned it in Maker's Muse video (and others added onto it): there's been many "traditional" reviewers and commentors who have commented about recalibrating printers on different surfaces, but "klipper" reviewers (biggest being Nero) have commented that you don't need to and that the differences will be minimal at best on a properly tuned machine. Key words "properly tuned", such as belts. I know at least one Bambu user who swears on the recalibration fixes print quality issues when moved to new surfaces and such... but after poking them with questions, they admitted the only times they've moved the printer is when moving house, doing system repairs, etc. and that they often need to readjust the belts. So every time they had print quality issues, they adjusted belts, and then recalibrated and the issue when away... commentators on Maker's Muse video pointed out that it keeps being missed that the calibration is less to do with the surface it's on and more to do with the gantry's motion relative to the bed, so hanging it from rafters, hanging it upside down, etc. and other arrangements that will change that relative interaction, not unlike belts having more slop or backlash or stretch. I do hope they eventually either sell the accelerometers or at least indicate what senors they're using so 3rd parties can [provide them + firmware update so we can run it locally. It may not be needed, but having the option available is still useful. If anyone is wondering: the connectors Prusa uses on the MK4 and XL are Molex CLIK-Mate. So normal JST connectors won't do it.
What I don't get is that the "input shaping" is coming as an apparently uneditable setting in the firmware? From my experience with a voron those built machines, which are a similar animal to prusa (built from printed parts) the numbers from machine to machine would have some variance. Maybe someone with more expertise could counter that it wouldn't have that much effect, but I would think allowing some users to edit their own settings would be better.
thomas... i love your channel... i really do, so please take this feedback the right way... to show all these prints and talk about how bad they are and then about 8 minutes in explain that the printer you are using was borrowed and the guy before you wrecked the hot-end... man... hopefully you could understand how a viewer might have a problem with that. Again, love your channel.
I am so glad that Prusa is getting back to the standard it used to have. Now I still have the confidence to recommend them to others other than "if you want to support open-source or the community" but now it is as goof as usual!
Once the Prusa Mini gets its finalized input shaping firmware, it would be good to compare it with the Bambu Lab A1 Mini (focusing on the base printer, not the AMS multi material system). That seems like it will be the Prusa Mini's best competition for people who want a cheap printer that just works.
Gloves! I always wear mine when cycling, having saved my hands twice I won't stop wearing them any time soon. If you came down directly on your hands you're lucky you didn't damage a collarbone. Be safe. GLOVES!
Excellent channel, very good information and analysis. I am from Argentina, unfortunately the recurring crises make it very difficult to have a fleet of printers updated, in the case of our only mini (original, but with a mod on the extruder and barrel) the alpha version with input shappe practically revived it, the speeds and The quality is excellent and the difference with the impressions you got is quite obvious. Do you think there may be other inconsistencies that cause the artifacts seen in the prints of the mini with the alpha version?
Is the new firmware available for the older Mk3 printers, or is it dependant on the 32 bit board, which would make a HW upgrade necessary on the MK3 to a MK4 (at least partially)? Also does Prusa Slicer now support other printers that have input shaping and pressure advance (printers running Klipper, or converted to run Klipper) such as Voron?
Did you do an Input Shaping resonant frequency test on the mini and set the values? If the machine does not have an accelerometer I'm not sure how else you could address IS issues.
Thank you for the insightful review. You did a lot of work to get the answers people are looking for regarding the new Prusa's and especially input shaping. The big question is will the Prusa mk4 or the Bambu Labs X1 Carbon be your go-to printer when you want something fast and reliable?
I just got a MK4 and have been using Input Shaping on it since I got it and man is it fast. Great for rapid prototyping. And the quality is great in my experience.
We run large structural parts once in a while where speed matters more than perfection. A real life example for a part taking 19h46m on mini+ 0.2 speed: with input shaper, we cut the time to 9h45min on the mini+, but here is the mind-blowing thing: Printing the same part on our new Bambu Lab in standard mode takes only 6h45m, and speeding up to ludicrous mode cut the print time to only 4 hours. It is mind-blowing that we have gone from 20 hours to 4 hours in a few months, it is a world of difference in the propotype phase!
I never heard about u were running input shaping for these 2 Prusa printers. May I ask if Input Shaping feature in Prusa machine is actually no needed to be tuned but pre-built into firmware in one-size-fits-all basis?
I have to disagree on the mini. Granted my mini has a Revo hotend and Bondtech extruder, but my print quality increased to amazing with the input shaping alpha fw
Do I have to adjust the speed myself in Prusaslicer? I am using FW 5.0 on my Mk4 with the latest version of prusaslicer. I used the MK4 IS profile, but somehow it seems no big difference. My be my prints were to simple and short. Do I have to adjust speeds myself to print faster? Some how I can't find a good description by Prusa of the input shaping option? I am happy with a link or a hint, my Google-Fu was pretty weak here...
I'm really curious about the mk3.5 upgrade and if that would be worth it. Especially with a revo hotend. While the mk3(s+) is older I think it still holds up to most printers out there. Feature wise too. So would the upgrade be a good idea and is therr any chance of input shaping working on it?
On the mk3.5 the mechanical parts are not upgraded and some of them might cause problem with input shaping, for example the heavy extruder motor and the slim Z rods. On the mk3.9 and mk4 the extruder is now a pancake motor and the Z rods are about 50% thicker, probably to handle better the fast accelerations needed for input shaping.
For a bed Selinger how do you even make the accelerometer work? In a CoreXY it's attached to only moving part which is the head, in deb singer it needs to know how head is moving (different nozzle, belt, belt tension) and how bed itself is moving..
As someone who has done what you talk about, it's actually really simple. Accelerometers are dirt cheap, and I me a dirt dirt cheap. You just use 2. One for the head, and one for the bed.
I have the mini with the e3d revo. I am looking to install the firmware with input shaping once it's confirmed i can use input shaping with other nozzle sizes.
I used to get all sorts of inconsistencies with my Prusa Mini+ and then I swapped the hottend for a Revo and the extruder for the Bondtech and now my Mini produces perfect, consistent prints time and time again. I can't fault it.
Prusa not putting accelerometers in the print head was a huge mistake. hopefully this will be an option in the future (even if it is just to do a calibration like how it is on my duet based Railcore). I'll be converting my Bear Mk3 with linear rails on all axis' to use MK4 hardware and I won't be able to use input shaping because of them trying to use their model to apply input shaping. This will go with anyone that modifies their MK4, input shaping will just have to be disabled because the kinematics will be different.
@@NohusBluxome It becomes an issue when you modify the tool head and the total weight changes. The only way to update the IS values for x is using an accelerometer. Prusa is using stock weight to determine the IS values.
Agree. An accelerometer on the print bed and print head would not cost much extra. They probably just hadn't thought of input shaping when they made the electronics. Maybe it will come in a Mk4s.
Hey Thomas, you've always been one of my favorite 3D printing channels. I've been running a 3D print farm for a few years. Even after I sold my printers, I still watch your videos every now and then. HOWEVER You shouldn't try to compare one printer to another while using different filaments. You know this.
Wait... Up to what I know structural profile is the profile for machines with input shaper firmware but that it DOES NOT use input shaper. It is like print it with turn off vr. And the speed is the one with input shaper on.
I've been struggling with the print quality of my Mini since day one. A lot of stringing, even with PLA, and bad quality over all. Because I am not willing to fix the QC issues by myself, I tried to sell the machine. But € 220.- was the highest offer on the selling-platform I can get so far. And my MK3S+ does not sell for € 400.- That's not a good sign for Prusa...
In fairness, 3d printers second hand now are pretty much unsellable. Im trying to get rid of my super modded Enders and people dont bother unless its aorund 100 Euros.
Impressive amount of prints. Wow. Great video as always 👍 Hope you are up and using your Bike again soon. Thanks for sharing your experience with All of us 👍😀
The audio of this video is way too low. I'd guess it's about 50% of other videos. Even at full volume on my tablet it's difficult to hear / understand ...
hey thomas , you might want to fix your sound levels in the edit. I have everything on 100% and the volume is still low while the mid-ads are blasting !
An awesome video. Just one small note. The in between notes (Like with the faulty stepper motors) bring a weird subtone to my head, the sounds are uncanny, and quite disturbing.
@21:51 it looks like you are comparing two complete different IS profiles. The old one, with a lot of speed changes, prints in 175 minutes whereas the new one, with a more smooth speed change, prints in 223 minutes. Seems obvious that a faster profiles uses a more aggressive speed change
Watching the Mini's hot end issues, recalibrating the Z height, and flashing the firmware, reminds me of how happy I was when I swapped to the Bambu Labs X1!
MY P1P jammed after half a dozen prints, and even after a significant amount of futzing around I couldn't get it printing properly again. Didn't have a new disposable hotend at hand, either...
I didn't really notice a decline in quality with the new firmware (I never tried the alpha). I was rather impressed though at the results from printing the Voronoy Lattice Benchy on the 0.20 speed profile.
I would really like to see a comparison between input shaping and no input shaping at the exact same speed etc. Because I honestly don't feel like Prusa's input shaping does anything, apart from turning the speed up. And given that the resonance frequency of the Y axis on a bed slinger changes as you print and the MK4 has no way of measuring the resonance frequency, I honestly have no idea how they think they can input shape the Y axis in any useful way in the first place. 🤷♂
I've been running the input shaper with my mini for a week now and have seen a massive drop in printing time. I did two prints one before and one after the update and the quality was actual slightly better and printed about 30 minutes faster. I've been printing minis for about a week now and all of them have came out really good for the most part (at least for a FDM printer printing minis). My mini is still running the first alpha release firmware.
interesting. I use a mini, and my quality didn't change, to my eyes. Though I do have the bond tech extruder. But, still - had no issues like yours with the alpha firmware.
i upgreaded my prusa mini with some 4040 extrusions that support the wobbly 3030 and run a dual extruder instead of the Standard one and used a adxl to determine the resonances , and installed a esp-01 so it runs wifi, and input shaper is great, it isnt as fast as a bamboo p1s or my V0.2, but it runs goot at 40mm/s wich is a huge improovement over stock but i had to change the part fan channel
Big recommendation for all users of the MINI: Get the BROZZL titanium heatbreak! The stock heatbreak just allows for too much heat creep. My hotend clogged up every 10-20 hours of printing, preceded by declining print quality like we see in the video. Super annoying. And obviously, I'm not the only one who experienced this issue. Swapped the heatbreak out for the BROZZL one a year ago, and not even once has my hotend clogged up ever since. There are a lot of possible upgrades to get for the MINI, but this one's essential in my opinion.
I wonder if we implemented input shaping differently we'd improve the results even further. Maybe doing a frequency sweep on each stepper axis on a 3x3x3 point cube of the entire print volume and interpolating accelerometer data across the volume. You wouldn't need an accelerometer mounted constantly or huge amounts of ram like klipper needs, only during calibration. Also if the extruder motor is on a trinamic driver you can indirectly do a reading of the force required to push filament by analyzing the current draw on it, which would tell you the pressure inside the nozzle and you could get better first layer adhesion and less globbing. That or just use a ten cent piezo crystal in it and read that, which would better eliminate backlash and friction noise from the data.
I can't imagine this being particularly impossible to implement either. Like cut a nozzle a quarter of the way down and make a piezo ring that fits inbetween the pieces, with a hole drilled in the heater block for the wires. What sucks it sourcing the piezo might be hard because I'm not sure you can just cut a piezo transducer and get readings radially.
Nice video and I love the panning timelapse in the beginning. I didn't click on this video to watch the mini maintenance and firmware flashing process, more interested in the experiment and results. So maybe those extra details would be better for a separate video. Just my two cents hope it's helpful
I think it's using input shaping even if you aren't telling it to. I LOVE the quality out of the 5.0 firmware with the quality profile. If I care about the print, I use the quality non IS profile. If I'm just making prototypes I use the IS speed profile.
The thing that's crazy to me is that you shouldn't at all ever want to turn IS off. On actual industrial machines that use this, no one actually has a reason to turn it off. I can't imagine wanting to turn it off on any of my printers. people talk about rounded corners like it's 5 years ago, but really, it's just like Prusa is forcing people to have to think about something that shouldn't even need to be thought about. Peoppe should have been able to just take this out the box, set it on the table, and get acceptable quality immediately. They should never be worried about finalgling with and switching back and forth between firmware versions or IS states.
@@BeefIngot Although to be fair the last time I did the higher quality IS profile, it was alpha firmware. Maybe the release firmware is better? But I don't mind waiting a bit longer for quality on a final print. For prototyping I don't give a shit as long as it's dimentionally accurate.
Hi Thomas, what I would really be interested in how the accerolometer is noticeable in reality. I don't think it makes much difference in terms of frequency. There is a test print at Klipper where the echoes are measured and the frequency is calculated. Marlin uses the same test print but does it differently. The print starts with 15hz input shaper and changes up to 60hz at the end of the test. So you can see very well the effect of the input shaper. And there you can see that it is not as extremely sensitive as many believe. There are other factors that play a role in the measurement at Klipper. Which input shaper, maximum acceleration or damping. But if these values are determined by an experienced team and it is ultimately only about the frequency, I do not necessarily see the need for a sensor. A video from you on this topic would be very interesting. It could be investigated what really affects the practice. Otherwise, I liked this video very much. Also please be critical when it is necessary.
The 8 bit board is not sufficient for Input Shaper. You would have to upgrade to 3.5 to use IS. Or upgrade to klipper which would be recommended from a low financial point of view.
They have enough parts and 3D printers at Prusa to build a Voron 0.2 in Prusa colors and with Prusa logo but I don't think they will sell it to you. 😁 I don't know if a small core XY printer would be such a good idea for Pusa. They have the most experience with Cartesian motion system printers or also called bedslingers. I think they need to gain experience with the Prusa XL before they go further in that direction.
For me it's a bit meh. I also have klipper on a Ender and there I can tweak it completely and it prints less ringing artifacts then the MK4. I hope we can change it ourselves in the future.
![Blox Fruits Dragon Rework Update [Full Stream]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/EqDAp8udhm0/mqdefault.jpg)
It's kinda mindblowing what we nowadays consider a print of unacceptable quality, which few years ago was just straight up amazing quality. To get a print looking alright close up was impossible to get without hours of sanding and painting.
Right? I know that the pursuit of perfection is a thing, but even a short 5 years ago to get a decent-looking print in less than 10 hours and (after spending hours fiddling with settings) would have been a grail. Nowadays printers out all sorts of amazing things requiring very little work. So, logically, we complain it's not quite good yet :)
I'm regularly blown away by the quality of prints some of my friends get. Like, I'll be thinking I have my printer set up to perfection, and these folks don't even know they showed me up. 😂
to be completely fair, a short 5 years is still 5 years of innovation from a few very good companies and a very dedicated community. its insane what voron guys can do these days with a literal kit printer and their own tweaks. @@actualreplyguy
to be completely fair, a short 5 years is still 5 years of innovation from a few very good companies and a very dedicated community. its insane what voron guys can do these days with a literal kit printer and their own tweaks. @@actualreplyguy
This is why I finally jumped into FDM coming from resin. The giant colorful stuff that comes off of FDM these days is beautiful.
You and Makers Muse have kept me printing for a decade now. When I had problems with my WOOD Printerbot, I came to RUclips and the two of you saved that thing from the trash. I am now on my 8th printer and you are still talking about what is most relevant. Thank you.
I hate having problems with my wood
I still have my wooden Replicator Dual from 2012 🥰
A bunch of my own custom designs to fix flaws in the machine, prints incredibly nice. Arguably on par with my new machines. And I'm thinking about klipperising it, as it's actually supported 😈 that old 8-bit board limits printing to 45mms on fine movements or prints up to 160mms if I lower the print resolution enough to prevent buffer issues.
I've rarely used it in the last two years, but I'm really thinking of modernizing it for good dual material use. With a bump cutter like on the Bambu machines.
Edit: One thing that completely changes the machine to make it's frame incredibly better was to add washers to all the screws. But also a small amount of impact resistant super glue (or thin epoxy to soak in) to where the washers mount to strengthen the wood.
@@MrHeHim I still have two Printrbot Metal Plus machines. I Plan to Klipper one of them because I love how Klipper works on my Voron. The other is dissembled and in storage until I figure out what to do with it. May turn it into a small CNC Mill, or not. Don't know. I just hate the Klipper/Voron communities. There are SO many toxic people in those communities. Granted a lot of good, but that whole one bad apple thing applies.
I'm thinking about tossing out my wooden printrbot jr finally. Got a lot of use out of it but I dont use it anymore and it needs maintenance @@ajosepi1976
@@ajosepi1976Interesting to hear about that toxic community! But also a bit sad.
I also noticed: you went through 8 (?) printers in 10 years, so nearly every year a new machine?!
That's one kind of a development! I would have thought that modding one machine, using it for 5 years and maybe than do the next bigger step would be the usual way people went with this hobby!
Now I fear that if i finally do get a printer ... i'll never be satisfied. ;)
It's really a testament to Prusa that their old printers are still good printers. My mk2 is still working. Sure, it's got the extruder and heatbed of a mk3, and has had the belts and half the moving cables replaced, but it's good enough that I hesitated to jump to the mk4.
And I was wondering if the bandages were bike injuries. Both hands at once, light bandages...I hope your face gets better too; swift healing, and thank goodness there's no worse injuries.
I'm absolutely impressed with the performance of the mini. The gain in speed is impressive and quality didn't suffer in my experience.
Thanks for the thorough investigation! I'll stay at the stock firmware with my Mini for now. I also have small extrusion issues, especially with top surfaces. I will try the hotend fix.
Thank you very much!
Last week I got Ender 3 and Chromebook . Unfortunately I am at stop sign. No TF Card on screen.
Please help me .
Fast printing allows to have faster CAD/print/test iterations, an absolute win if you do mechanical parts, jigs, etc.
Tom: "Someone messed with my printer. In a completely unrelated note, these taped knuckles are from a bike accident."
hahhahahaha
Hey, TY for making such a comprehensive video!
I would like to add that "quality" does not nessearly mean bad or good.
I am running a MINI with the IS firmware, and for me, the quality is is just fine. The reduced print-time is way more important to me, than the finish. To be honest, I only noticed it once so far.
The surface finish is not great, but since I only print functional parts, looks is not in my requirements. The dimentional tolerances are good and I had no failed prints so far. Thats all I care about!
Ive been using the IS firmware on the mini for a couple weeks now and im quite happy with it. Prints that used to take 10 hrs now take 6. I normally print functional mechanical bits and bobs and havent seen much discernable difference in quality. Interesting to see the comparisons youve made though. Thanks for the video.
Awesome study as always! Glad to hear the new MK4 firmware combined with the slicer updates prints better. This gives me courage to try the MK4 again.
"It's never gonna "Hoon" like those printers."
Low key.... best homage to our lost driver so far this year.
Ken Block, rest in peace. You changed the world.
Also, Thomas, you have changed the world. For the better. Thank you for all you do making these great videos.
I installed the IS fw on my Mini, and I agree that the print quality suffered a bit, but I mostly use my Mini for functional parts where perfect print quality isn't required and II love the extra speed. I use my Mini a lot more than my MK3s+ at the moment.
Same here
Sooooo fast 😭🤣🤘
Same here. We print PETG on our Mini+'s, and they do a great job, but now at 2 x the speed. It also helps that PETG isn't pretty to begin with, so aesthetic expectations were not high. Sometimes 'good enough' is all you need...
The real killer feature for me was that the Mini/+ now has full PrusaLink, not the weedy barely usable interface it had before. It's great to be able to just print straight from the slicer and watch the progress from a web browser or HomeAssistant plugin. Honestly that to me is more useful than the input shaping.
just upgraded my mk3 to 3.9. the 4 is really great update. the nextruder saves the whole first layer hassle. And all parts are just way better, stronger and more silent. input shaping saves a ton of print time. Only downside is that i miss the easy nozzle change from revo that my mk3 had. Would really recommend upgrading for anyone in doubt.
Thanks for a really detailed and informative video. After seeing your results I don't get why Prusa won't just ship the MK4 with an accelerometer and indeed offer upgrade kits with sensors for both the MK4 and Mini.
Great video, I appreciate the thoroughness in testing. Hope your hands get better soon!
As for 16:24, I suppose the new firmware just had a tweak that changed the results you were seeing, since not only Input Shaping changed from 4.7.2 afaik.
It's not true that you can't tune input shaping without an accelerometer. You can always print the test model and measure the resonances manually, like what Michael over at TeachTech did maybe 2 years ago. And I'm pretty sure the MK4 allows you to enter the X and Y frequencies via the control panel.
This is absolutely true, but I'm just annoyed they wouldn't spend the 2 dollars at most it would cost to add 2 accelerometers
@@BeefIngot I'm guessing it was never planned for the Mini. Frankly I can't understand not having accelerometers on the Mk4, considering it's a very similar hotend to the XL, which does have accelerometers.
@@skywardsoul1178 Oh no I just meant the mk4
@@BeefIngot Gotcha. Maybe there's some software / hardware configuration that made it more difficult for the MK4. Disappointing though for sure.
@@BeefIngot There's an accelerometer port on the new mainboard so this might happen with a future upgrade. But I guess that they already do some measurements with the current detection of the motor drivers, the same feature used to detect home, step skipping, and now to detect the difference between mk3.9 and mk4 (since they share the exact same firmware)
Thanks for your thorough, in-depth investigation. I think it also helps to demonstrate that there are MANY factors that affect print quality, from physical attributes of the printer to slicer and firmware settings. Sometimes I can be running around in circles before I realise that it was something (I thought was) totally unrelated causing my problems.
Thanks for the evaluation. I may be biased, but I think prusa evaluations are generally insulated from talk about similar printers. Considering the 3D printing zeitgeist, I would love to see how the mini compares to similar sized cantilevered printers with input shaping installed. Even the ender 2 pro can have input shaping with some small edits.
I'm totally not seeing the bad results on the old, gray parts in the video. I'm not sure how they look like in person but are you sure it's not just subsurface light scattering that is making the lines look blurry?
This was super helpful - thanks for taking the time to produce the video!
I think my mini will stay as-is for now.
I got a MK4 at work and put it in the Prusa enclosure. The enclosure has a sheet metal bottom that is only supported by feet at the 4 corners so it's like the printer is on a metal trampoline. This definitely isn't taken into consideration with the input shaper. I ended up taking a 1 inch thick piece of scrap sound attenuation foam from our assembly department and setting the enclosure on that. now the floor is supported and the ringing has been reduced but still not like it was before putting in the enclosure.
Sorry to hear about your accident. Hopefully you get better soon.
Great video! I replaced the heat break and PTFE tube on my Mini, per your video tips. Printing much better now, like new. Thank you. Also, I don’t expect my Mini to print as well as the newer and more expensive machines with better technology.
I did not expect those problems on the Mini would be from the extruder. I would have been hyper focused on the belts and axes. I learn so much from this channel and now I've learnt another useful thing. Thank you!
The mini very famously has a really annoying filament path with its pseudo not quite all metal hotend. I'm sure >f you googled it you'd eventually find posts complaining.
Thats not to say this channel isn't definitely still useful though.
I do miss the more interesting projects he's done like the filament measuring thing or the multi bed Voron. I really liked projects like those.
Tom, thanks very much for this in depth investigation of a question I've been asking myself.
Hope you get some downtime to recover your hands fully!
Given the vertical integration that Prusa has and time period the mk4 came out, it's actually now baffling to me they didn't add any accelerometer on the print head. Can't see a reason why it wouldn't only add like $2 to the BOM cost.
You'd need another one on the bed too, so a lot of inputs to the main board. Only need one on core xy. But yeah, would be good to have on board tuning capabilities.
This does not matter at all. First you measure X, then you measure Y with the same acerlorometer.
the mk4 board actually has ports for a accelerometer. I think they figured that since every mk4 or mini is exactly the same, input shaping results or data on one printer will be the same on another. Its easier than a novice person trying to figure out a accelerometer
right? include 1 on the toolhead and 1 on the bed (wires are already running to both), and have it calculate either once, or for every print, based on some setting
The mass on the bed will still change throughout the print, so while you can measure the actual resonances on X, they will change on Y throughout the print. Those adjustments will have to be pre calculated still. Although it seems like they have gotten it close enough on the MK4.
Tom, fantastic video as usual! This video must have taken a long time to produce due to all the tests! Thank you for all the hard work!
Hope you can recover fast from your bicycle accident!
Sorry to hear about your biking boo boo!! Had those myself. Thanks for such a comprehensive review and analysis.
Thanks Thomas for your videos. I have recently watched both of your videos on Input Shaping, and if you choose to do another one, I would like to suggest one thing. Some static pictures with a side by side comparison. I absolutely trust what you are seeing, but I don't know what exactly you are looking at when you say something isn't quite right. The models are constantly moving, probably to catch the light differently, but I just don't see what is wrong with some of the poorer Input Shaping models...I can't tell what you are looking at. If you had some static pictures with circles or arrows, then I could see what you are seeing and understand a bit better.
Keep up the great work.
I build laboratory CNC machines that actuate at a resolution in the microns for a living and last week built myself a MK4. I wish the lab machines were half as solidly engineered as the MK4. Like i built a MK4 and nothing went wrong during construction, tuning was stupidly easy and the first set of inaugural test-prints all came out without a single little flaw with IS on. I expected some tiny little artifacts, but nope. It is perfectly fine. A BBL would have been cheaper sure, but i highly doubt it would have left me feeling like i acquired a device designed to outlast me if given the chance. I am impressed to see a company that actually delivers on promises even if later than intended.
Hi, I work for a small printer farm and we ordered like 10 preassembled minis from prusa. We had a horrible time with them. Most of them had the wrongly installed ptfe tube FROM PRUSA directly so it might not have been the person you got it from. (Half of the minis also had faulty pinda probes so it was bad bad)
It appears that input shaping is always active on the MK4 starting with FW 5.0.0.
When I compared gcode sliced with both IS and non-IS profiles, I couldn’t find any indication that the IS profiles actually enable input shaping. Similarly, I found no evidence that the non-IS profiles disable input shaping.
That being said, it seems input shaping is both enabled and configured solely at the firmware level. The slicer does not generate any gcode related to input shaping.
The “non-IS” profiles are really more like “quality” profiles. They still provide the benefits of input shaping without also pushing the printer to its limits like with the IS profiles.
I’ve found if you reset the mini hot end first by pushing it all the way up to hit a stop then snug down the top brass fitting it gets a better squeeze on the ptfe tube then just pushing it up by hand.
The v5.0 firmware for the Mk4 has many known issues, including some blocking ones like not being able to home on Z. For the affected users rolling back to v4.x firmware works fine.
I wish you had tried the Prusa Mini+ with a Revo Micro. I've got Revo Micro installed in mine, but I haven't gotten around to trying the alpha firmware on it yet. What I've noticed with the regular firmware is that there is an improvement in print quality with the Revo Micro, including less stringing than with the default setup, so I wonder if it'd also fare better with input shaping.
Those improvements SHOULD transfer. I had 2 minis. 1 with revo micro and 1 without.
The one with the micro did not receive the alpha FW, and the other one did. The one with the alpha FW had pretty bad print quality.
I had made a profile called 0.2mm SUPERSPEED on the regular 4.4.1 (I think) FW where I basically doubled the print speeds.
It was fast, but not alpha IS fast. The print quality was still really good, but there was some stringing since I didn't adjust retraction or z hop, those stayed normal.
My takeaway was that the alpha IS was just not very reliable so I reverted back. When I did that, I think it reset all my settings IIRC.
TLDR: probably wait for the official release.
Now... let me watch Tom's video.
Thanks for another deep dive into some printing nuances. Glad to see Prusa was able to wrangle in the new features for the Mk.4 and hope your recovery is nearing completion.
ouch hope your hands heal soon. yes nothing worse than meeting a bike path the hard way.. done a few of them down mountains. get better soon. and another great video.
Of course, I typed too much...
Good to see you revisit this, and reminder "alpha and beta firmwares are not finished programs... use them to give feedback to the devs, not as review targets or production systems". I had my own experimentation like this. I installed the IS ALPHA on the Mini... it plasters labels that indicate it's an alpha on basically every screen. I did a small test not unlike the low poly wolf. The quality was nearly identical... but that wasn't what impressed me, what impressed me is that it didn't get louder. They managed to do a 20-40% speed increase with, for that test, no real quality changes... and it didn't get louder. Compare that to the MK4 which has rubber paddings between every bearing and mount (and is pretty quiet itself when printing at speed). I had a larger decorative print (2+ days without IS, 1.5 days with IS) and I opted to print the base (8h with IS) on the Mini before I dropped the big print on it... needless to say I went "ok, ALPHA is not ready to do the big print" because it had extrusion issues along the way and I didn't want that on the big print, which is currently printing on the MK4 instead.
My expectation is that they're going to keep tweaking things on the MK4... a new firmware with features but also a slight adjustment to IS. Some extra settings in PrusaSlicer 2.6.2 and later. Etc. I did not have "Prusa Mini gets input shaping" on my bingo card, so it's impressive in and of itself since it's a lower-power 32 bit board compared to the MK4 and XL without the stepper cooling and physical parts to reenforce it. I will be curious to see future firmware on it (and the eventual final addition of power panic which has been "coming soon" since 2019 but has recently gotten actual code additions and configurations).
Please keep contacting support on issues. The more they get, the more they either update their processes to include IS prints, but it gives real reason for them to do some code changes in the slicer and firmware (no really. Make a ticket on Github saying "there's ringing because I can't calibrate IS against my surface my printer is on", IF they ack. it, it just goes to a list that they may or may not get to. But if you contact support, and a trend comes up that ringing is happening, and support can't produce but you can, and they get photos and other things showing "yes, it's happening here. With proper belt tension, etc." then eventually managers review it and say "yo, fix this" and the engineers will be required to do such a thing and may eventually go "ok, we're gonna send you an accelerometer and instructions to run it. Please use it and send us the numbers back" and take those into account. It's hypothetical scenario, but people vastly underestimate contacting support for any company. If you ever read "why do they keep adding features we don't care about?! They need to listen to their customers!" yea, they listen to them via support channels... not random shoutings on Twitter and Facebook)
I will have to look at that filament as it looks nice.
Last on the accelerometers... , I don't see it in the current set of top comments, additional reminder that the accelerometers are used for calibration, not when the printers are running (as you seemed to discuss it). Also, I've mentioned it in Maker's Muse video (and others added onto it): there's been many "traditional" reviewers and commentors who have commented about recalibrating printers on different surfaces, but "klipper" reviewers (biggest being Nero) have commented that you don't need to and that the differences will be minimal at best on a properly tuned machine. Key words "properly tuned", such as belts. I know at least one Bambu user who swears on the recalibration fixes print quality issues when moved to new surfaces and such... but after poking them with questions, they admitted the only times they've moved the printer is when moving house, doing system repairs, etc. and that they often need to readjust the belts. So every time they had print quality issues, they adjusted belts, and then recalibrated and the issue when away... commentators on Maker's Muse video pointed out that it keeps being missed that the calibration is less to do with the surface it's on and more to do with the gantry's motion relative to the bed, so hanging it from rafters, hanging it upside down, etc. and other arrangements that will change that relative interaction, not unlike belts having more slop or backlash or stretch. I do hope they eventually either sell the accelerometers or at least indicate what senors they're using so 3rd parties can [provide them + firmware update so we can run it locally. It may not be needed, but having the option available is still useful. If anyone is wondering: the connectors Prusa uses on the MK4 and XL are Molex CLIK-Mate. So normal JST connectors won't do it.
What I don't get is that the "input shaping" is coming as an apparently uneditable setting in the firmware? From my experience with a voron those built machines, which are a similar animal to prusa (built from printed parts) the numbers from machine to machine would have some variance. Maybe someone with more expertise could counter that it wouldn't have that much effect, but I would think allowing some users to edit their own settings would be better.
thomas... i love your channel... i really do, so please take this feedback the right way... to show all these prints and talk about how bad they are and then about 8 minutes in explain that the printer you are using was borrowed and the guy before you wrecked the hot-end... man... hopefully you could understand how a viewer might have a problem with that. Again, love your channel.
Thanks for your feedback, I appreciate honest critique.
Will input shaping work on the mega prusa? Also, how does changing the nozzle affect it, does it work ok with a 1mm vulcan or something like that?
I am so glad that Prusa is getting back to the standard it used to have. Now I still have the confidence to recommend them to others other than "if you want to support open-source or the community" but now it is as goof as usual!
Once the Prusa Mini gets its finalized input shaping firmware, it would be good to compare it with the Bambu Lab A1 Mini (focusing on the base printer, not the AMS multi material system). That seems like it will be the Prusa Mini's best competition for people who want a cheap printer that just works.
Gloves! I always wear mine when cycling, having saved my hands twice I won't stop wearing them any time soon. If you came down directly on your hands you're lucky you didn't damage a collarbone. Be safe.
GLOVES!
super quiet audio, but aside from that, am loving the video
Sorry about low audio level, I missed to check the uploaded quality.
hapens to everyone @@MadeWithLayers not to worry
im curious if anything will trickle down to marlin ,for us old school DIY'ers that are stuck with just a arduino mega and a ramps
Excellent channel, very good information and analysis. I am from Argentina, unfortunately the recurring crises make it very difficult to have a fleet of printers updated, in the case of our only mini (original, but with a mod on the extruder and barrel) the alpha version with input shappe practically revived it, the speeds and The quality is excellent and the difference with the impressions you got is quite obvious. Do you think there may be other inconsistencies that cause the artifacts seen in the prints of the mini with the alpha version?
Is the new firmware available for the older Mk3 printers, or is it dependant on the 32 bit board, which would make a HW upgrade necessary on the MK3 to a MK4 (at least partially)?
Also does Prusa Slicer now support other printers that have input shaping and pressure advance (printers running Klipper, or converted to run Klipper) such as Voron?
Did you do an Input Shaping resonant frequency test on the mini and set the values? If the machine does not have an accelerometer I'm not sure how else you could address IS issues.
Thank you for the insightful review. You did a lot of work to get the answers people are looking for regarding the new Prusa's and especially input shaping. The big question is will the Prusa mk4 or the Bambu Labs X1 Carbon be your go-to printer when you want something fast and reliable?
Does it matter what table top you put it on? I would imagine that would effect the kinematics.
There an app from Prusa to check belt tension using your phone mic as well as 3d printable gauge for belt tension.. you don't have to eyeball it..
I just got a MK4 and have been using Input Shaping on it since I got it and man is it fast. Great for rapid prototyping. And the quality is great in my experience.
We run large structural parts once in a while where speed matters more than perfection.
A real life example for a part taking 19h46m on mini+ 0.2 speed: with input shaper, we cut the time to 9h45min on the mini+, but here is the mind-blowing thing:
Printing the same part on our new Bambu Lab in standard mode takes only 6h45m, and speeding up to ludicrous mode cut the print time to only 4 hours. It is mind-blowing that we have gone from 20 hours to 4 hours in a few months, it is a world of difference in the propotype phase!
I never heard about u were running input shaping for these 2 Prusa printers. May I ask if Input Shaping feature in Prusa machine is actually no needed to be tuned but pre-built into firmware in one-size-fits-all basis?
Amasing review of an old feature(but new on prusa) on an 10 years old technology :D
Gute Besserung!
So, how did it compare to the Mk3s? It was mentioned at the start, then forgotten and as an owner of two mk3s, I would really like to know
Hope your scratches and all that have healed by now. Awesome video and deep dive olimto the performances. And as always " 'tis just a flesh wound"
I have to disagree on the mini. Granted my mini has a Revo hotend and Bondtech extruder, but my print quality increased to amazing with the input shaping alpha fw
Do I have to adjust the speed myself in Prusaslicer? I am using FW 5.0 on my Mk4 with the latest version of prusaslicer. I used the MK4 IS profile, but somehow it seems no big difference. My be my prints were to simple and short.
Do I have to adjust speeds myself to print faster? Some how I can't find a good description by Prusa of the input shaping option? I am happy with a link or a hint, my Google-Fu was pretty weak here...
I'm really curious about the mk3.5 upgrade and if that would be worth it. Especially with a revo hotend. While the mk3(s+) is older I think it still holds up to most printers out there. Feature wise too. So would the upgrade be a good idea and is therr any chance of input shaping working on it?
On the mk3.5 the mechanical parts are not upgraded and some of them might cause problem with input shaping, for example the heavy extruder motor and the slim Z rods. On the mk3.9 and mk4 the extruder is now a pancake motor and the Z rods are about 50% thicker, probably to handle better the fast accelerations needed for input shaping.
For a bed Selinger how do you even make the accelerometer work? In a CoreXY it's attached to only moving part which is the head, in deb singer it needs to know how head is moving (different nozzle, belt, belt tension) and how bed itself is moving..
As someone who has done what you talk about, it's actually really simple. Accelerometers are dirt cheap, and I me a dirt dirt cheap. You just use 2. One for the head, and one for the bed.
I have the mini with the e3d revo. I am looking to install the firmware with input shaping once it's confirmed i can use input shaping with other nozzle sizes.
I used to get all sorts of inconsistencies with my Prusa Mini+ and then I swapped the hottend for a Revo and the extruder for the Bondtech and now my Mini produces perfect, consistent prints time and time again. I can't fault it.
Prusa not putting accelerometers in the print head was a huge mistake. hopefully this will be an option in the future (even if it is just to do a calibration like how it is on my duet based Railcore). I'll be converting my Bear Mk3 with linear rails on all axis' to use MK4 hardware and I won't be able to use input shaping because of them trying to use their model to apply input shaping. This will go with anyone that modifies their MK4, input shaping will just have to be disabled because the kinematics will be different.
Looks like the results are very good. So if it was a mistake, it certainly wasn't a huge one.
@@NohusBluxome It becomes an issue when you modify the tool head and the total weight changes. The only way to update the IS values for x is using an accelerometer. Prusa is using stock weight to determine the IS values.
Agree. An accelerometer on the print bed and print head would not cost much extra. They probably just hadn't thought of input shaping when they made the electronics. Maybe it will come in a Mk4s.
What real advantage does accelerometers add? Are individual printers different enough were each one needs to be tuned differently?
@@AllanBjerreAbbondioI believe the new boards have an unused accelerometer port
Hey Thomas, you've always been one of my favorite 3D printing channels. I've been running a 3D print farm for a few years. Even after I sold my printers, I still watch your videos every now and then.
HOWEVER
You shouldn't try to compare one printer to another while using different filaments. You know this.
I don't know if it has been mentioned yet, the sound in this video is horrible :-(
Wait... Up to what I know structural profile is the profile for machines with input shaper firmware but that it DOES NOT use input shaper. It is like print it with turn off vr. And the speed is the one with input shaper on.
I've been struggling with the print quality of my Mini since day one. A lot of stringing, even with PLA, and bad quality over all. Because I am not willing to fix the QC issues by myself, I tried to sell the machine. But € 220.- was the highest offer on the selling-platform I can get so far. And my MK3S+ does not sell for € 400.- That's not a good sign for Prusa...
In fairness, 3d printers second hand now are pretty much unsellable. Im trying to get rid of my super modded Enders and people dont bother unless its aorund 100 Euros.
Impressive amount of prints. Wow.
Great video as always 👍
Hope you are up and using your Bike again soon.
Thanks for sharing your experience with All of us 👍😀
Thank you for updating the state of the MK4. It's good to see Prusa is impoving stuff
Why did you not really show the Lilith Head?
VERY THOROUGH PRESENTATION. ARE THERE ANY VIDEOS ABOUT THE MMU3 UPGRADE ??
The audio of this video is way too low. I'd guess it's about 50% of other videos. Even at full volume on my tablet it's difficult to hear / understand ...
hey thomas , you might want to fix your sound levels in the edit. I have everything on 100% and the volume is still low while the mid-ads are blasting !
An awesome video. Just one small note. The in between notes (Like with the faulty stepper motors) bring a weird subtone to my head, the sounds are uncanny, and quite disturbing.
Sadly I had to back the firmware to 4.4.1 because the new 5.0.1 alpha was giving me lots of X-axis homing errors. I'll wait to the fix
@21:51 it looks like you are comparing two complete different IS profiles. The old one, with a lot of speed changes, prints in 175 minutes whereas the new one, with a more smooth speed change, prints in 223 minutes. Seems obvious that a faster profiles uses a more aggressive speed change
Watching the Mini's hot end issues, recalibrating the Z height, and flashing the firmware, reminds me of how happy I was when I swapped to the Bambu Labs X1!
MY P1P jammed after half a dozen prints, and even after a significant amount of futzing around I couldn't get it printing properly again. Didn't have a new disposable hotend at hand, either...
@@MadeWithLayers don´t they send an extra hotend with the printer anymore??
This makes me even more excited for my mk4 arrival. Hopefully in the next week according to the Prusa shipping table.
Just a note: the volume is really low compared to other videos on RUclips
I didn't really notice a decline in quality with the new firmware (I never tried the alpha). I was rather impressed though at the results from printing the Voronoy Lattice Benchy on the 0.20 speed profile.
I would really like to see a comparison between input shaping and no input shaping at the exact same speed etc. Because I honestly don't feel like Prusa's input shaping does anything, apart from turning the speed up.
And given that the resonance frequency of the Y axis on a bed slinger changes as you print and the MK4 has no way of measuring the resonance frequency, I honestly have no idea how they think they can input shape the Y axis in any useful way in the first place. 🤷♂
I've been running the input shaper with my mini for a week now and have seen a massive drop in printing time. I did two prints one before and one after the update and the quality was actual slightly better and printed about 30 minutes faster. I've been printing minis for about a week now and all of them have came out really good for the most part (at least for a FDM printer printing minis). My mini is still running the first alpha release firmware.
interesting. I use a mini, and my quality didn't change, to my eyes. Though I do have the bond tech extruder. But, still - had no issues like yours with the alpha firmware.
i upgreaded my prusa mini with some 4040 extrusions that support the wobbly 3030 and run a dual extruder instead of the Standard one and used a adxl to determine the resonances , and installed a esp-01 so it runs wifi,
and input shaper is great, it isnt as fast as a bamboo p1s or my V0.2, but it runs goot at 40mm/s wich is a huge improovement over stock but i had to change the part fan channel
Big recommendation for all users of the MINI: Get the BROZZL titanium heatbreak!
The stock heatbreak just allows for too much heat creep. My hotend clogged up every 10-20 hours of printing, preceded by declining print quality like we see in the video. Super annoying. And obviously, I'm not the only one who experienced this issue.
Swapped the heatbreak out for the BROZZL one a year ago, and not even once has my hotend clogged up ever since.
There are a lot of possible upgrades to get for the MINI, but this one's essential in my opinion.
I wonder if we implemented input shaping differently we'd improve the results even further. Maybe doing a frequency sweep on each stepper axis on a 3x3x3 point cube of the entire print volume and interpolating accelerometer data across the volume. You wouldn't need an accelerometer mounted constantly or huge amounts of ram like klipper needs, only during calibration. Also if the extruder motor is on a trinamic driver you can indirectly do a reading of the force required to push filament by analyzing the current draw on it, which would tell you the pressure inside the nozzle and you could get better first layer adhesion and less globbing. That or just use a ten cent piezo crystal in it and read that, which would better eliminate backlash and friction noise from the data.
I can't imagine this being particularly impossible to implement either. Like cut a nozzle a quarter of the way down and make a piezo ring that fits inbetween the pieces, with a hole drilled in the heater block for the wires. What sucks it sourcing the piezo might be hard because I'm not sure you can just cut a piezo transducer and get readings radially.
maybe you can tho imma try it lmao
How do I find out of my MK4 are "faulty" stepper motors?
Could you do the same print with a Bambu X1C and OrcaSlicer?
Nice video and I love the panning timelapse in the beginning. I didn't click on this video to watch the mini maintenance and firmware flashing process, more interested in the experiment and results. So maybe those extra details would be better for a separate video. Just my two cents hope it's helpful
I think it's using input shaping even if you aren't telling it to. I LOVE the quality out of the 5.0 firmware with the quality profile. If I care about the print, I use the quality non IS profile. If I'm just making prototypes I use the IS speed profile.
The thing that's crazy to me is that you shouldn't at all ever want to turn IS off. On actual industrial machines that use this, no one actually has a reason to turn it off. I can't imagine wanting to turn it off on any of my printers. people talk about rounded corners like it's 5 years ago, but really, it's just like Prusa is forcing people to have to think about something that shouldn't even need to be thought about.
Peoppe should have been able to just take this out the box, set it on the table, and get acceptable quality immediately. They should never be worried about finalgling with and switching back and forth between firmware versions or IS states.
@@BeefIngot IS is running all the time. I can tell the different between the firmwares with quality. The only difference really is the speed.
@@BeefIngot Although to be fair the last time I did the higher quality IS profile, it was alpha firmware. Maybe the release firmware is better? But I don't mind waiting a bit longer for quality on a final print. For prototyping I don't give a shit as long as it's dimentionally accurate.
Hi Thomas, what I would really be interested in how the accerolometer is noticeable in reality.
I don't think it makes much difference in terms of frequency.
There is a test print at Klipper where the echoes are measured and the frequency is calculated.
Marlin uses the same test print but does it differently. The print starts with 15hz input shaper and changes up to 60hz at the end of the test.
So you can see very well the effect of the input shaper. And there you can see that it is not as extremely sensitive as many believe.
There are other factors that play a role in the measurement at Klipper. Which input shaper, maximum acceleration or damping. But if these values are determined by an experienced team and it is ultimately only about the frequency, I do not necessarily see the need for a sensor.
A video from you on this topic would be very interesting. It could be investigated what really affects the practice.
Otherwise, I liked this video very much. Also please be critical when it is necessary.
Is it possible , are they (prusa) planning on an input-shaper-functionality for the MK3s?
The 8 bit board is not sufficient for Input Shaper. You would have to upgrade to 3.5 to use IS. Or upgrade to klipper which would be recommended from a low financial point of view.
I feel like prusa just needs to make a speed corexy enclosed printer that isn't huge
Yes, please more tiny printers. We all know that tabletop figurines are the only thing 3D printing is useful for.
@@MetalheadAndNerd um I didn't say tinny I said not huge
Me too! I’d love to have that for printing polycarbonate.
@@toddkerns4493 and nylon and abs there's so many plastics that print so much better with a heated chamber
They have enough parts and 3D printers at Prusa to build a Voron 0.2 in Prusa colors and with Prusa logo but I don't think they will sell it to you. 😁
I don't know if a small core XY printer would be such a good idea for Pusa. They have the most experience with Cartesian motion system printers or also called bedslingers. I think they need to gain experience with the Prusa XL before they go further in that direction.
How is the input shaping on the Mk3.5 and Mk3.9? I'm considering getting the upgrade.
I really love yor attention to detail, Tom!
Input shaping has been great on the MK4 in my experience so far
For me it's a bit meh. I also have klipper on a Ender and there I can tweak it completely and it prints less ringing artifacts then the MK4. I hope we can change it ourselves in the future.