Many thanks for sharing this backstory When I first saw them on MakerWorld, it was apparent to me that you put a lot of thought and love into this. There are few that dive deeply into vibration control, and even fewer approach it so methodically and with the inquisitiveness required for such a complex topic. Vibration control is never about right or wrong. It is always about achieving the best in a possible range with the means available/affordable.
Please keep up your enthusiasm and way of diving into questions that catch your interest. Your inquisitiveness is both rarer and more precious than you may think.
Just so you know, my experience is my own. I wouldn’t discourage anyone from giving them a try. I did enjoy building them.
Taking VoxelPLAs comments to heart, I may order some quality TPU and give them another try. May even use ABS or ASA, although neither are really needed.
Having seen 3D printers hung on bungie cords and print, as well as upside down while being held, I wasn’t looking for a print quality solution. I just don’t want my work surface to resemble a fault line shifting.
In thinking about it, HULA may not have been what caused the weird defects. It’s the only variable that was changed but I’ve seen stranger.
@EnoTheThracian Yeah, for some reason when I’m replying, it showed that I was replying to @thrutheframe , but when I do the post, that part mysteriously disappears. Seems like a failure in the forum software. Anyhow, I guess from now on I’ll just have to explicitly indicate in the post, as I’m doing here.
Of course, anyone is welcome to comment. I was addressing @thrutheframe, though, because he seemed to be taking credit as the developer of the feet in question, so I assume he has the most data, and the most pictures.
If I saw evidence that it worked (made a noticeable visible difference in prints), I’d just order from the voxelpla website, because the $3 difference in cost, why bother printing it yourself? Then you’d presumably be getting a known good thing, or at least as good as it’s ever going to be. Like I say, even if the results were the same, the lack of feet falling off when moving the X1C around might be worth it.
BTW, it’s great that we have both the inventor and the vendor replying on this thread. Nice jobs guys. I wish it were the same attention from all other 3rd party products out there!
As is so commonly said on the internet, “If there’s no pictures, it didn’t happen!”
A bit of text on TPU interface and my obsrevations of effectiveness
In my case, I limited the TPU pad’s for z-vibration reduction to just 2 solid z-layers to eliminate the risk of sliding while simplifying the vibration isolator to only act on the original excitation forces. Z-excitation is secondary due to moments induced by the XY-acceleration. With the HULA’s changing XY vibration transmission, I felt that z-transmission would already be significantly reduced. And I felt that it’d be pretty tricky to get the right k-value for the then changed z-Eigenfrequency.
While the 50% reduction in peak displacements in the videos may at first appear a bit meh, it is actually much more significant. In terms of vibrational energy it is a quadratic relationship per direction. Area under the curve and all that I my case, I can state with confidence that the transmitted vibration reduction is much more noticeable than the videos suggest.
As for print quality, since the 01.07. update I did not experience a print problem that new feet could solve. I only have a single printer.
and from that, I gather that’s what’s sold in the bambulab store is actually an upgrade from whatever was shipped stock on the X1C?
Anyhow, it’s great that HULA has a smaller min-max wiggle on its graph, but all I’m asking is simply to see a visible before-after difference in a real-life print. Why is no one else asking to see this? Am I asking for too much? Otherwise, maybe the X1C is simply doing a good enough job of compensating for whatever vibration/wiggle there is, and if so maybe the seemingly small difference (especially when comparing BBL upgraded feet to the HULA feet) doesn’t matter.
IMO, those plots don’t really say anything. I note the statement “Instrumental, felt by animals” on the graphs. No idea what that means, but it’s not pertinent to 3D printing far as I can guess. Maybe for people who let their cats sleep on their printers?
There are no actual details about the measurement. Is this the printer’s vibration? Where is the accelerometer mounted (ex: top or bottom is going to make a difference)? Or is this the surface the printer is sitting on? What is the surface made from? What was the printer doing when the measurements were made? Was the exact same print sequence run for each measurement? Were the measurements taken at the same time during the run? What is the number? Gs of acceleration? Displacement?
This image makes a claim to the effect that this data clearly shows how good HULA is, but the data doesn’t make that case at all. It just looks like it does…
Ideally, someone with arms length relationship like @johnfcooley would be telling us (and showing us) how great it is. But that’s in an ideal world, or at least a world that has yet to happen.
I bought anti-vibration feet for BLB x1c combo.Anti-Vibration Feet | Bambu Lab US I used them I could feel the vibrations of the machine on my desk. Then I put the feet on and I don’t feel the vibrations anymore.
Sorry, never thought it’d be necessary to keep them. When they work I wouldn’t imagine a lot of difference if any in print quality. That’s why I’m starting to second guess my statement.
The BL anti-vibration feet don’t really affect print quality. Like I said, I wanted less vibration on the work surface.
Since it was suggested my TPU could have been the culprit I have ordered some other to try again. Since I have good results with ABS I’ll use it instead of PETG. Likely attempt it again through the weekend. IF there’s a difference in quality I’ll happily post. Not sure how to test vibrations on the table top.
Edit: I just saw the CNC photo. I’ll print something similar.
@johnfcooley I see what you mean. Reading more carefully the bambulab store description of its upgraded feet, it only claims to reduce inter-machine vibration, not actually improve print quality on a single machine at all.
So, the HULA appears to be the only one making such a claim.
With high-speed printers, I believe the main advantage of the HULA is that it reduces the shaking of the table without having the machine rock back and forth, like you see with the upgraded Bambu lab anti-vibration feet.
Quality improvement might be minimal because the Bambu lab printers already print so well. Like the ringing test you showed above, it has to be something you look for; hard to see in day-to-day printing. What you will notice is the reduction in table shakes and noise.
@VOXELPLA Thanks for the clarification. I think maybe that settles it.
It’s great that you’re selling these kinds of upgrades, like the bento box, the AMS upgrade, and so forth. Yet more reasons to shop your store.
BTW, if you’re allowed to say, what kind of machines does your print farm run on? The folks with the most data points and the sharpest pencils would seem to be the print farms.
We run various machines to test our PLA+/PETG+ and other products like the HULA and Bento Box filter. Mostly consists of Bambu Lab printers (P1, X1, and A1 series), about 15 Prusa, 15 Creality, 15 Anycubic, and a selection of newly released printers. If a fun printer comes out, you can bet that we have it in the farm.
Our goal is to validate our products through large-scale real-life testing to make sure everything works as intended.
@NeverDie
This is the video I made showing of how HULA reduces the wobbling that conventional anti-V feet have. (Bambu’s in this case) Do not focus on the clock
This is a comparison video I made recently of HULA on the A1 mini.
While I do not always reply, I read and try to understand feedback. I will usually note them down and try to incorporate good ideas in the updates when possible.
@johnfcooley
HULA can be printed in ASA or ABS, but you need to do the X&Y compensation. Glad you like BentoBox.
With the updates to the BL printer’s firmware, the vibration/ghosting control is top-notch. After re-running the calibration sequence on the X1C+HULA. I too feel that there is no discernible improvement in terms of surface quality for Bambu printers.
My current focus for the HULA project is to finish the adaption for A1 and update the main user guides.
On aircraft, all electronic objects, that can have performance degraded by vibration, are isolated from the aircraft with vibration mounts. So, it may be better to think of placing the anti vibration feet on any printer that may be subject to external vibrations, not to protect the surroundings from it’s vibrations. Along that same thought process, you can theorize, that any sole printer not being subjected to external vibrations will probably not receive a benefit from anti-vibration feet.
So I reprinted. ABS shell, TPU “spring” and a new set of bearings.
Feet fit very tightly. So far I haven’t done anything of note. I have a few prints to finish before I can test anything.
On the surface they seem to be dampening the vibrations to my table and that makes me happy. I will have to admit at this point I was at fault somehow on the first set.
Hopefully I’ll have some prints I can run in sport mode in a day or so.
I bought two sets of HULA, one for each X1-C I own. Noticeable difference in table vibration reduction as well as almost no machine movement. I am very impressed. Was nice to get them for $9.99 on sale too
so, another solution is using a very stiff table/support, where your printer stands on.
The “decoupling” with this feet actually is just a workaround or fighting the symptome.
When I first saw them on MakerWorld, it was apparent to me that you put a lot of thought and love into this. There are few that dive deeply into vibration control, and even fewer approach it so methodically and with the inquisitiveness required for such a complex topic. Vibration control is never about right or wrong. It is always about achieving the best in a possible range with the means available/affordable.
when moving the X1C around might be worth it.
I my case, I can state with confidence that the transmitted vibration reduction is much more noticeable than the videos suggest.
