evansd2
December 11, 2020, 4:02am
6
Great result. If you want to fool with wider lines you could try defocusing a bit for a wider beam, but slow it down some to get enough power to hit the surface.
I played with beam width modulation in a couple of posts:
Wait, don’t close the door, I’m sure I could interest you in a set of *SLAM!*
[IMG_2710]
Apologies, but this post is going to be complex, text-heavy and kinda nerdy. You have been warned.
So I finally got to the traveling salesman problem. This is a topic that has been covered a few times before , but I had some ideas about how to do it a little differently, and now with clean corners, it seemed like it was about time.
The traveling salesman problem is a broad topic, if you have no idea wha…
and:
So, under no circumstances should you do this.
OK now that we got that out of the way, @ovm.steve had an interesting idea to try scoring with the lens in upside down, to try to get a wider line. So I decided to try it at the extreme. I did three tests on white cardstock:
No tray, focus height set to 0.5", lens in correctly.
No tray, Focus height set to 0.5", lens in upside down.
No tray, Focus height set to 0.5", NO LENS.
Result? They were all about the same, roughly 0.08" wide. Width and…
3 Likes