Laser Bed Tray(s) and Bed Depth

I’m not sure what I’m looking at in this photo. The corner of the tray is 1.5" think, but the honeycomb surface seems to be recessed lower than that in the top part of the photo. Shouldn’t we be measuring from the honeycomb surface to the bottom of the area where the tray goes to get a measure of how much space we gain by removing the tray?


Wow, @dan this is huge! I thought I was going to have to find a 1.5" jar in order for it to work!

So we have seen a lot of great engraving on 1/8" and 1/4" material. Would we be able to see engraving on 1/2" thick material set on the bed? I know it should look the same focus wise I would just love to see it if possible.

Thanks Dan, this is really great news!


If you are looking for a flask style jar I did find some that are under 1.5". However based on the new info the Bormioli’s will now fit which is even more exciting… well for me anyway…:slight_smile:


Those are great! That is extra exciting.

1 Like

My understanding of what I am looking at is the left surface is the top of the honeycomb, and the right is the bottom of the foot that would sit on the bottom. :wink:

1 Like

There appears to be a leg projecting on both the right and left sides of the object being measured. I don’t see how either one could be flush with the honeycomb surface.


Do we know for sure that the top of the honeycomb as pictured is the bottom of the focusing range? As I understand it for engraving, you could go all the way to the top of the focusing range, hence 2" (more or less)

AaahhhH!! I was gonna say that I was still confused from just the pic, cause I didn’t know how much space above the tray that left, until I saw this edit of yours:

And additional 1/2 inch?! 2 inches total?! THAT FRICKEN ROCKS!!!

And ok, not to be ungrateful or anything like that…but how did you guys miss explaining that clearly until now? Lol


I’m afraid I remain skeptical. I just don’t see how that claim agrees with what I’m seeing in the photo.


2" equals 5,08 cm which is great news! We may just be able to do some small acrylic bending :slight_smile:


But remember with acrylic bending and de focusing the laser you’re going to need to have even more room to drop it to defocus the laser so not the same as being able to put something in there that height and being able to engrave on it


I’m not following - what are you unsure about? Happy to try and clarify.


Which way are you defocused? You might be able to get away with something even a little higher (assuming there’s mechanical clearance) than the 2" limit, with the laser light still converging. Of course then you couldn’t engrave it once it was bent.

This is great news

I dont believe there is enough clearance upwards…

Yeah you’re right, didn’t think about that :slight_smile:

As I interpret your photo, it appears that the honeycomb support surface is not aligned with either of the caliper arms, something like this:

Which implies to me that the space between the bottom of the tray and the honeycomb surface must be less than 1.5". What am I missing?


I can’t imagine why @dan hesitates on giving updates. It seems to always be taken in stride and never over analyzed at all. Seems to me everyone just listens and responds with a kind thank you, not as if everyone asks the same question in a different way trying to catch him up in something. (slight sarcasm)


Understand where you are coming from. Dan’s word would be just fine. If he says it’s 2 inches then it’s 2 inches but we want to give him the opportunity to see what we saw. We thought he might want to double check because the caliper picture, as @fan-of-glowforge said, does not look like dan was measuring the actual bed height but was including the slightly higher lip on the tray. Changing the specs is a big deal and you don’t want to be wrong. If the specs get changed then we know that he has double checked or sure of his original measurement. A quarter inch is a huge deal for some applications.

Edit: Actually just checked and the specs were already changed by the time I typed this. So if they change back there was an error. If not. It’s 2". (BTW: @bailey The FAQs on material thickness should also be changed from 1.5 to 2.0". I believe there are 2 FAQs that mention the original number.)


Yes, I agree that those who try to trip someone up for self glory are tiresome. Believe me, I truly hope that it turns out we can engrave on 2" thick material. As an engineer, I have to reconcile what I’m told with what I can plainly see. Please Dan, correct my perception of this!

The logic seems simple to me. The surface of the honeycomb must be within the 1/2" focusing range, or we would not be able to cut paper sitting on the honeycomb. I’m supposing that the honeycomb surface is at one extreme of the 1/2" focusing range, otherwise some of that focusing range would be wasted. So any measurement of what size object fits below the focusing range must have the honeycomb surface at one end of that measurement. The photo seems to contradict that notion.

Do you agree, or am I missing something obvious?