Recently bought a 60w jpt mopa em7. It came with 4 lenses and USB drive. I added the 4 lenses as separate machines and used the markcfg7 files to set things up. When looking at the F3 settings screen I noticed different Jump Setting Defaults and Delay Defaults for each lens. Now, my question is; should there be different values? Can I trust what was in the markcfg7 files?
I understand your issue. I have always found that the markcfg7 had all the information for a specific lens. This also includes the basic machine, such as the source type. This would include the jump/delay timings.
I purchased one lens when I got mine, so when I got a new lens, I imported the markcfg7 file for my only lens, then created a cor file for lens correction.
I would think the galvo would operate the same regardless of the lens length. That’s how mine appears to work.
Maybe @Rick can clue us in.
Did you do any of the timing tests to see the difference?
I would imagine that, in case of a bigger lens, the mirrors would need to make smaller movements to get the same mm/s. With this logic in mind, timings could be different. Didn’t do timing tests yet, mainly because all other info that came with the markcgf7 file seems spot on. Machine is from Haotian. Find it hard to believe they send out a untested/uncalibrated unit.
I agree with Jack, the same timing and delay settings should be fine for multiple lenses but what I’ve found, running timing and delay exercises, that different parameters need different timing settings. Speed and bi direction have a big effect on timing.
Bi directional scanning timings
Interesting phenomena, Have my timings dialed in pretty good, but when I run 0 degrees bidirectional running some tests, I was getting a strange start/ stop jog pattern (scanning origin from bottom left). When calibrating timing the goal is to hit the boundary with the start and stop point of the line, but when running bi-directional seems to call that strategy into question. :
This is my typical timing Makes nice test boxes but fails bi-directional.
Increasing the start and stop TC’s gave me longer jogs, bigger fail, need to go the other way:
Reducing my start/ increasing my stop in override:
Nice start stops both directions.
Thanks for your elaborate answer. Just curious; why did you put values in override and not in the F3 settings? Or is this only adjusted in override in case you’re doing bi-directional stuff?
Have to dive into this obviously and will put it on top of my when-I-have-time,-I-have-to-do list.
I think the factory default for my fiber laser on delay was -400 … will have to look.
I’m sure they interact with each other, since they are all relative to something.
Yes, partially. I dial in my timing per the LMA video, then run some additional tests to get it as nice as possible. Then use the overrides case by case.
Really shows on small objects.
Could you please post link to this LMA vid?
Yes, you bet.
Watch it through at least once before you put in practice.
2 things that will make your experience improved, make 2 sub layers, one sub layer fill, one sub layer line. (Video was made pre LB galvo, ezcad 2 has a border + fill, LB border or fill).
Make your start point bottom left CCW.
Uhm… okay… but… where is the link? 
1 Like
1 Like
What do the letters LMA refer to? The pic you posted in #7 looked like another test was used. Thats why I asked.
Didn’t realize it was this vid. Watched it before when I just got my laser few months ago. At that time it felt quite overwhelming. Used terminology makes more sense now. Have to watch again obviously haha. Having 4 lenses, F100, F210, F290 and F430, what would be the best choice for this test? Would one show defects more accurate over the other?
Laser Masters Academy AKA Laser Everything
The smaller lens would show more I would think, but until you asked I would probably have used what ever I had mounted. Thing is, these settings do not carry over IIRC. Need to copy over to each lens or run the same test w/ ea lens. .
I’d have to contest this as a longer lens has a longer line of travel, so an abnormality in the galvo should be seen much easier with a longer lens.
This is about surface scan speed, but the emissions of a longer beam would show more detail.
Just thought I’d throw this in, what do you think?
1 Like
You could be right. I was thinking TC settings when looking at the results under the USB microscope, thinner line would show the error more accurately. But like I said hadn’t even considered it before yesterday.
Bi takes some work to time.
This is exactly the reason why I assumed timings could very well be different for each lens. But as an old saying goes; assumption is the mother of all f#ck ups 
1 Like
So under the microscope you can see the difference between the start and stop timing , “Matchstick” (circled) indicates the beam waited just a bit too long, compared to the end pointed at with the arrow.
So IIRC the first line up goes from left to right, second line up is the return, so the Off TC needs to be reduced just a tiny amount. Start looks good.