The left side performs consistently worse than all other areas - even after an earlier clean out of the bed and manually adjusting the z-axis. Credit where it's due though, it was cutting fine for a while after cleaning it out.
Somewhat delaying the project by a few hours but I thought it'd be very interesting to see what I can achieve by playing around with offsetting thicknesses all together and make the most out of the given situation.
For the cuts, I will not be playing with the Thickness settings - it either cuts or it doesn't (eg: creating large black charred line as observed in assignment 2).
This will mean I'll need to do some additional cutting regardless.
For the raster's however, I'll be inverting the black and white so more black is shown and hence rastered (to show more of the result).
The Experiment:
- Question posed: What would happen if the thickness set is more or less than the actual material thickness for a raster?
- Method: (for a 2.4mm boxboard)
- Raster at 2mm TH
- Raster at 2.4mm TH
- Raster at 2.8mm TH
- Compare results
- Settings:
- Power: 100%
- Speed: 100%
- PPi: 1000 (to cram as many pulses in - in an attempt to make the raster as dark as possible)
- Results:
- Raster at 2mm TH produced a darker raster
- Raster at 2.4mm TH produced a more feint raster
- Raster at 2.8mm TH produced a darker raster
- Rasters 2mm and 2.8mm produced lower definition rasters
- Analysis
- In hindsight, should've known this would happen actually (eg: 2mm TH and 2.8mm TH producing the same shade of raster
- However, it is interesting in that to achieve a DARKER raster, offsetting the material thickness in the console works!
- Lower definition of rasters can be attributed to the fact that the laser is no longer focused on the material correctly. - NOTE! No harm done to the machine as all it's doing is heating up the material. If the mirrors were to be out of focus, THIS would be a problem.
- Conclusion
- To achieve a darker raster, offset material thickness
No comments:
Post a Comment