Tests using low power settings

[Xabbess]

This is tied in with the discussion here; Problem using low power settings

Not really sure where to post this, but here goes. Anyone who was holding their breath, you may breathe, now …ha ha…I needed to post this now and move on to other things.

I wanted to test on transparent film (to help my brother) and also on card stock. This is the film that I used;

Below, on the left is an engraving test. It peters out on the top right part of the circle because I didn’t have it secured to the bed well enough and the GF fan was blowing air up underneath it while engraving. Test on the right (A) is the first test for scoring. It looks good, but was too deep. It pretty much cut all the way through. With slight effort, I could push that design completely out.

Below; in sequential order, tests E & F came out very well. Scored on the surface, but not all the way through. The back of the film feels smooth to the touch.

I used my desktop computer screen set to white and turned the brightness up to take these photos. The photos do not show the whole potential for this use case. When lasering the film, I placed it on a piece of black card stock which also got ‘lased’. You can see the results of the changes in power. I labeled them to correspond.

The rest are miscellaneous on card stock;

cutting (obviously also a lesson on which fonts NOT to use! )

Scoring;

And last but not least, engraving;

I also engraved using LPI 225 and couldn’t tell any appreciable difference.

I think they are still tweaking the focus settings, as myself and other PRU users have experienced some very different things, but for now these worked. If someone knows a more suitable category for this post, please…feel free.

[Jules]

Looks good! Haven’t thought to test it on films yet, so that’s pretty darned handy!

[Drea]

Wow, thank you for the detailed write up!

[Xabbess]

Edited my post, as I left out an important photo…the one of scoring tests on the actual film.

[3d_g33k]

Thanks for documenting and sharing your experiments @Xabbess !

[cynzu]

bookmarked!

[hansena]

Thank you so much for doing these trials! That is so great, I can add more stuff to my future projects list with this in mind!

[nathan_burley]

…what about on actual film i.e. camera roll… Ooooo so many ideas.

[cynd11]

Thanks for running all these tests! I’ve got some 4 mil (.004") Dura-lar which is the same weight as your sheets, so those numbers will be helpful. I think it would make some nice lighter-weight stencils for fine detail, vs the 10 mil stuff I posted about elsewhere.

[Xabbess]

Ran some more score/cut tests on the kind of transparency film that my brother uses…which is made for laser printers (the toner kind) as opposed to ink jet printers. Same thickness, pretty much the same results.

[tnycr2o]

Xabbess - Thank you for the information. I realize that the learning curve is daunting as my delivery time approaches and your insights are invaluable. I feel less intimidated by all the members generosity and sage wisdom.

[Xabbess]

@tnycr2o

learning curve is daunting

First of all, thank you…but second of all, don’t feel intimidated and don’t get worried about the learning curve…you will get on with it right away. The Glowforge is so user friendly, you will be amazed at what you can do…and you will continue learning new things every time you use it, which is part of the fun.

I never knew a thing about lasers or designing to make things before and I’m finding it absolutely so much fun. Stick around this forum…there is such an enormous pool of knowledge here that you will never be wanting.

[paulw]

FWIW, things with small features will require extra testing (or things with large features will) unless/until GF gets the acceleration-related power changes under control. The head simply isn’t getting up to the requested speed in the time between stops and curves. In some cases it might make sense to do through-engraves rather than scores, because at least then the speed is consistent. (Yeah, you lose time, but usually not that much.