# Resonance Compensation - failure to accelerate **URL:** \ **Category:** General Discussion\ **Created:** [January 2, 2023, 5:44pm UTC](https://klipper.discourse.group/t/resonance-compensation-failure-to-accelerate/5675 "2023-01-02T17:44:25Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 14\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![tocguy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/5f9b8f/32.png) [@tocguy](https://klipper.discourse.group/u/tocguy)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2023, 5:44pm UTC](https://klipper.discourse.group/t/resonance-compensation-failure-to-accelerate/5675/1 "2023-01-02T17:44:25Z")
### Basic Information: Anycubic Mega Zero 2 ATmega1284p & R-pi4B V1.4 w/4GB Klipper: v0.11.0-41-g9b60daf6 Octoprint 1.8.6 Python 3.7.3 (although line 146 in Klippy.log reports Python 2.7.16) Octopi 0.18.0 Superslicer 2.4.58.5 [klippy.log](https://klipper.discourse.group/uploads/short-url/wgDiFIrlWRZAmhTw0McyWitqgs0.log) (1.8 MB) ### Describe your issue: The subject calibration procedure has been performed 3-times and each time the printer movement acceleration was never incremented after completing each 5mm section. Acceleration remained constant throughout the entire print. Before the third print I halved the height of the stl (to save filament) and changed the command increment from 500 to 1000 just to get Ringing into the ballpark if the acceleration did indeed increment. It didn’t though. Is the Tuning command post-processing the gcode to establish the correct accelerations, e.g., G1 F1000, G1 F2000, G1 F3000, etc. Can these be verified somehow prior to starting the print? To check this, after starting the print, I downloaded the gcode file from Octo and compared with the original. Notepad++ found no alterations. The files are identical. Before starting the 3rd run I manually verified that both X and Y respond as expected to terminal movement accelerations from 1000 up to 10000 in increments of 500 so it doesn’t appear to be anything in the command or print movement chains. How to troubleshoot this issue? Sample Terminal output at layer change. ```auto Send: N7684 M117 Layer: 133 of 150*108 Recv: ok Send: N7685 G1 F1171*116 Recv: ok ``` I see in the Klippy.log that MAX\_ACCEL is being incremented 6 times as expected for my shortened stl version so I’m left scratching my head. Pic from second run… ![20230102_095058](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/free1/uploads/klipper/original/2X/4/48f2fda3b3c640c02f7be5dd379ff41fa2922cf5.jpeg) TIA, Greg ---
**Author:** ![EddyMI3D](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/free1/user_avatar/klipper.discourse.group/eddymi3d/32/1981_2.png) [@EddyMI3D](https://klipper.discourse.group/u/EddyMI3D)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2023, 5:54pm UTC](https://klipper.discourse.group/t/resonance-compensation-failure-to-accelerate/5675/2 "2023-01-02T17:54:00Z")
Can you share the (zipped) gcode file you use? ---
**Author:** ![Sineos](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/free1/user_avatar/klipper.discourse.group/sineos/32/18_2.png) [@Sineos](https://klipper.discourse.group/u/Sineos)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2023, 6:16pm UTC](https://klipper.discourse.group/t/resonance-compensation-failure-to-accelerate/5675/3 "2023-01-02T18:16:00Z")
I’m not sure what you are reporting. Judging from the `klippy.log` the print started off at an acceleration of 1000 and incremented up to 7000 ---
**Author:** ![tocguy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/5f9b8f/32.png) [@tocguy](https://klipper.discourse.group/u/tocguy)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2023, 8:02pm UTC](https://klipper.discourse.group/t/resonance-compensation-failure-to-accelerate/5675/4 "2023-01-02T20:02:44Z")
[Ring\_Tower\_short.zip](https://klipper.discourse.group/uploads/short-url/vND4CKK6E7DVtFwphL9S700uCtH.zip) (82.6 KB) Files attached: STL & gcode Yes, but the accelerations never increment as is evidenced by both the attached example pic and that I watched the whole thing three times. Thx ---
**Author:** ![EddyMI3D](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/free1/user_avatar/klipper.discourse.group/eddymi3d/32/1981_2.png) [@EddyMI3D](https://klipper.discourse.group/u/EddyMI3D)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2023, 8:49pm UTC](https://klipper.discourse.group/t/resonance-compensation-failure-to-accelerate/5675/5 "2023-01-02T20:49:59Z")
Are you going with this? [https://www.klipper3d.org/Resonance\_Compensation.html](https://www.klipper3d.org/Resonance_Compensation.html) ---
**Author:** ![tocguy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/5f9b8f/32.png) [@tocguy](https://klipper.discourse.group/u/tocguy)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2023, 9:12pm UTC](https://klipper.discourse.group/t/resonance-compensation-failure-to-accelerate/5675/6 "2023-01-02T21:12:44Z")
Yes, thus the title of this thread. Sorry, had to add text to meet the 20 char min reply length. ---
**Author:** ![Sineos](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/free1/user_avatar/klipper.discourse.group/sineos/32/18_2.png) [@Sineos](https://klipper.discourse.group/u/Sineos)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2023, 9:14pm UTC](https://klipper.discourse.group/t/resonance-compensation-failure-to-accelerate/5675/7 "2023-01-02T21:14:57Z")
> [@tocguy](#): > > Yes, but the accelerations never increment as is evidenced by both the attached example pic and that I watched the whole thing three times. Just because you see nothing on the print does not necessarily mean that the acceleration was not incremented. According to the klippy.log it was. Edit: At which speed did you print? ---
**Author:** ![tocguy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/5f9b8f/32.png) [@tocguy](https://klipper.discourse.group/u/tocguy)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2023, 9:31pm UTC](https://klipper.discourse.group/t/resonance-compensation-failure-to-accelerate/5675/8 "2023-01-02T21:31:54Z")
Instructions called for 80~100mm/s so it was sliced at 100 with Exterior Wall speed set to 80%. The XY lengths are long enuf for an audible pitch difference to be heard. No pitch changes were heard. I’ve been trying to locate some info about the gcode acceleration change. ```auto Send: N7685 G1 F1171*116 Recv: ok ``` Is this kosher? How should the printer acceleration respond to **F1171\*116**? ---
**Author:** ![EddyMI3D](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/free1/user_avatar/klipper.discourse.group/eddymi3d/32/1981_2.png) [@EddyMI3D](https://klipper.discourse.group/u/EddyMI3D)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2023, 9:54pm UTC](https://klipper.discourse.group/t/resonance-compensation-failure-to-accelerate/5675/9 "2023-01-02T21:54:23Z")
`F` s not for acceleration, it’s the feed rate: [https://reprap.org/wiki/G-code#G0\_.26\_G1:\_Move](https://reprap.org/wiki/G-code#G0_.26_G1:_Move) ---
**Author:** ![tocguy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/5f9b8f/32.png) [@tocguy](https://klipper.discourse.group/u/tocguy)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2023, 10:24pm UTC](https://klipper.discourse.group/t/resonance-compensation-failure-to-accelerate/5675/10 "2023-01-02T22:24:16Z")
Hmm, ok so the G1 F commands were not changing acceleration. My mistake, I confused Feedrate with Acceleration and lost a _per second_. 🫤 Before we put that one completely aside I’m still curious about the command’s format. It is unfamiliar. ```auto G1 F1171*116 ``` From the link you provided I see that Klipper either doesn’t support the acceleration M201~M204 commands and/or they are all not present in the gcode file anyway. Edit: M204 is supported according to the [Klipper G-Code](https://www.klipper3d.org/G-Codes.html) page. So, the **G1 F** was my mistaken rabbit hole and it leaves me no closer to solving this issue. Hmm… ---
**Author:** ![tocguy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/5f9b8f/32.png) [@tocguy](https://klipper.discourse.group/u/tocguy)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2023, 12:53am UTC](https://klipper.discourse.group/t/resonance-compensation-failure-to-accelerate/5675/11 "2023-01-03T00:53:16Z")
All else being equal I ran the same shortened version thru Cura 5 rather than SuperSlicer with command `TUNING_TOWER COMMAND=SET_VELOCITY_LIMIT PARAMETER=ACCEL START=1000 STEP_DELTA=1000 STEP_HEIGHT=5` and the acceleration increments did take effect. 🧐 The only difference of note is that Cura does not have a Klipper setting so RepRap was used as the gcode flavor. ![20230102_164809](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/free1/uploads/klipper/original/2X/b/bb8952d28eaac3c92ff7d3e930b42a46ccac65dd.jpeg) Any SWAGs as to what is going on here? ---
**Author:** ![EddyMI3D](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/free1/user_avatar/klipper.discourse.group/eddymi3d/32/1981_2.png) [@EddyMI3D](https://klipper.discourse.group/u/EddyMI3D)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2023, 6:49am UTC](https://klipper.discourse.group/t/resonance-compensation-failure-to-accelerate/5675/12 "2023-01-03T06:49:11Z")
> [@tocguy](#): > > From the link you provided I see that Klipper either doesn’t support the acceleration M201~M204 Hint: Klipper supports M204: [https://reprap.org/wiki/G-code#M204:\_Firmware\_dependent](https://reprap.org/wiki/G-code#M204:_Firmware_dependent) ---
**Author:** ![Sineos](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/free1/user_avatar/klipper.discourse.group/sineos/32/18_2.png) [@Sineos](https://klipper.discourse.group/u/Sineos)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2023, 7:44am UTC](https://klipper.discourse.group/t/resonance-compensation-failure-to-accelerate/5675/13 "2023-01-03T07:44:13Z")
For me it just looks like an mis-configured slicer. The first gcode file you posted seem to have been sliced at 15 mm/s. That’s likely the reason why you did not see any acceleration effects. Some unsorted notes: - Without good reason gcode files typically do not contain acceleration changes - Acceleration changes are called via `M204` (standard gcode) or `SET_VELOCITY_LIMIT` (Klipper) - The `TUNING_TOWER` does not modify gcode files. This is a Klipper internal change during print time - Gcode flavor in Super Slicer makes no big difference - You initial problem could have come from a minimum layer time setting ---
**Author:** ![Berggipfel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a3d4f5/32.png) [@Berggipfel](https://klipper.discourse.group/u/Berggipfel)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2023, 6:17pm UTC](https://klipper.discourse.group/t/resonance-compensation-failure-to-accelerate/5675/14 "2023-01-03T18:17:20Z")
The last picture reminds me on my fisrt attempts an my voron: the motors skipped some steps the whole print looked like yours (the step). The rest seems just to be not enough energy in the Hotend so the flow was too big for the heatblock. Sorry I did not go through the logs but I think you just went over your physical limits with this print. You use the standard hotend? EV5 Type? This should do 10-15mm³/s reliably and maybe 20-30mm³/2 peek performance. Maybe you are over this? Calculate: Layer width[mm] \* layer height[mm] \* speed [mm/s] this should be (in case my guessing was right) be above 15mm³/s…(for constant flow ofer some seconds). More or less: this looks ok, no problem just above physical limits. The Mega-“System” should do 60mm/s max (of course, this can be set to 120 but what happens then?)? I only got an Mega S from 2020 and the max speed was 60mm/s @0,4mm nozzle (no layer heigth given: honit soit qui mal y pense)… You use the original bowden printehead?