Hi, I’m new to Lightburn. May I ask if there’s a setting to etch grids without it scanning across back and forth? This is great for all the horizontal lines but all the vertical lines take ages because it etches a tiny part of the line back and forth for ever.
Is there anyway to set Lightburn to etch along the lines so the laser follows the line. That would be so much quicker.
Here are some strategies:
Hmm, seems weird that it’ll cut in all directions but etching just sweeps back and forth like a printer. If it can cut horizontal, vertical, angles and circles then is there not a simple option to make it etch in the same way?
Did you review my strategies? I cover what I believe you’re asking.
If I’ve misinterpreted the ask, can you elaborate where it’s missing the mark?
Not at all. But 1 and 2 are out. There’s no way to rotate without offsetting the material on my laser. Everything will be out of alignment.
3 and 4 you don’t recommend.
And 5 would still sweep back and forth but on smaller sections.
Basically I’m etching panel lines in a model. What I’m hoping is that I can etch the full lengths of a line in all directions. Not sure if I’m explaining correctly. So if a line is top to bottom it’ll etch that way. If the line it left to right it’ll etch that way. In the same way it cuts.
I was answering with general strategies as your post seemed like a general ask. If you have a specific situation, then post a screenshot of what you’re trying to burn.
How does this rule out 2?
This was offered as a time savings. Under certain conditions this would offer that.
I guess the simplest way to explain is - if I cut a circle. It cuts a circle. Round. The laser head moves in a circle.
If I etch a circle - it doesn’t go in a circle. It sweeps side to side like a printer. Making the circle take ages to etch.
Is there a setting somewhere that just says “etch like it cuts”.
You seem to have dismissed my suggestions without understanding them or trying them. They all have tradeoffs. What you’re describing closest matches either 2 or 4.
There are reasons for not recommending 4 even if it does what you’re asking, mostly around quality or general usefulness. However, there are conditions where it’s a reasonable compromise. I suggest you review and experiment with these to understand the trade-offs and where they’re appropriate for the situations that you need.
Ok the reason 2 is out is because changing the angle makes the vertical lines work but then the horizontal ones won’t. Hope you see what I mean.
But 4 “offset fill” looks like it could be the way to go. Can you say why this is not recommended?
@berainlb is usually correct and suggest you follow his lead.
When learning how this stuff works, it’s isn’t entirely obvious, such as the difference between image and line modes…
So hang in there… you’ll get it.
The machine scans because you are operating that layer in image mode. Sometimes referred to as scan mode.
With a circle you are in line mode. In line mode you have no scan angle option.
You could put your vertical lines on a different layer and follow @berainlb advise about a 90 deg scan angle for that layer…
Thanks. I appreciate all advice. I’m coming at this from someone who has tried all options suggested and they either don’t work or require completely redoing the design.
Sadly I can’t put vertical lines on a separate layer as they’re all merged. It’s one solid vector. I did think about doing it but I’d have over 100 files to break apart and redo.
I guess I just can’t get my head around the fact that it’ll cut in all directions. But won’t etch in all directions. The entire process woul be 10 times quicker if it etched vertical lines vertically and horizontal lines horizontally and circles in a circle.
That’s why I thought offset fill might be a good way to go but if it’s not recommended then it’s seems weird.
Take a close look at the laser path that’s generated with offset fill in the Preview window. It will generally resemble a set of concentric rings based on the outline of the fill. The acceleration forces required to achieve this consistently are mechanically challenging for your laser. This can result in compromised quality both in terms of mechanical accuracy as well as in burn consistency.
Also, if you look even closer at the path, you’ll notice that while there’s an attempt at achieving consistent burn density that certain areas will have a different or reduced fill density. This may not be apparent on rectangular pieces but becomes more apparent with more complexity.
The mechanical stress with this fill type can actually make this entirely untenable on some lasers where steps are lost and material scrapped. This is not the same experience for everyone as this is very much machine and design dependent and also evaluated based on your personal tolerance level.
This is why I’ve tried to highlight where each strategy may have its challenges. There’s no magic bullet. You need to understand how each strategy plays as part of your repertoire of capabilities. Experimentation is key.
To be clear, it’s not generally recommended as the default fill type as it’s not appropriate for all circumstances. In contrast, the standard fill type is good for pretty much all cases.
I’d also caution that you’re trying to optimize for one condition in this quest with a mindset that all other variables will remain as they are. Be aware that’s not generally true here. Optimizing for one condition will likely compromise in another. Those compromises may be small or inconsequential for your particular needs so you need to build that intuition for what’s appropriate and for when.
Here’s what’s I’m making. This might help. Sorry, I couldn’t figure out how to upload.
So the panel lines are etched in. There’s nothing complex about them as they’re just thick vector lines. All merged into one shape (so not separate vertical and horizontal). Makes the design much easier to manage.
When I cut this the etching takes over an hour. The cut takes 9 minutes. If it could etch all the thicker panel lines along each line rather than scanning back and forth the etching would likely take about 8 minutes. But scanning back and forth for what amounts to tiny etches on a line seems inefficient when it could just do the line the same direction it cuts.
When you do line work, the vectors lines width is the kerf of the laser. A vector is simply a tool path that tells the laser where to travel. It knows knows nothing about how wide the line is.
So if your machine can produce a 0.20mm size dot, then that will be the thickness of the line.
You can’t make a saw blade cut a line wider area than it is size wise without multiple passes.
I think you are missing how these settings are actually working… or how the machine is directed to use them.
There are no such things a wide vector lines… you get a line the width of the kerf… to make it wider or thicker, you need to make multiple passes… this is where you engraving time is high.
My bad. The panel lines are filled shapes. Not lines. Gets complex when they’re called “panel
Lines” and ARE straight lines but not just thin lines.
Originally I just did them as lines. But the laser wasn’t etching them wide enough.it was literally just etching them the width of the laser. So I changed them into filled shapes. This worked great. All the “panel lines” etched wider.
But it’s scanning. Back and forth. Taking over an hour.
What I was hoping was that Lightburn had a setting hidden somewhere that would etch in an optimal direction. However, talking to you guys with great advice, I’m beginning to think what I was hoping isn’t actually possible.
Hence my confusion. It’ll cut up, down, left, right, circles. But etch back and forth like a dot matrix printer.
a saw blade is a great analogy. Love it.
However, if a move the saw blade sideways by its thickness I can make the an etch/score wider. Then I can rotate the saw 90 degrees and cut another line perpendicular then move the saw again and make that line wider.
As a laser can move in all directions then it’s more versatile than a saw.
My thinking now is, as per Berrains suggestion that offset fill will work in this case as it’s not a complex etch. It’s basically a filled shape made of straight lines. As I understand it offset fill will follow the contours of my filled shaped moving with the “lines (that aren’t lines but fills)”.
One can but try. If it doe’s work I’ll go back to waiting an hour.
I’d suggest experimenting with the offset fill. Based on what I’m seeing of your design this should work ideally. Slow down if you start seeing too much of a compromise.
Here’s my thought process as to why:
The “2” you may still want to fill traditionally but worth experimentation.
As an alternative, the lines seem thin enough where you could do those as a line operation. Defocusing a bit may get you the line thickness that you want.
These are all multiple passes. That’s what’s time consuming.
If you had created the vertical lines separately, then the application of them to another layer with a different scan angle would do what you want.
As @berainlb suggested, watch it in preview and see what it’s doing before you spend an hour for the machine…
Many people don’t really use preview enough… It saves time and material…
Brilliant!! You guys have been great!! Thank you for your patience with a newcomer. It has been very much appreciated.
