So I have a file that I spent several days aligning the lines of the objects to overlap each other so one single cut would make finger joints for both parts and in the lightburn software i went into optimization settings and selected to remove overlapping lines and the distance is set for .025mm.
When the laser is cutting it is going over the cut lines twice instead of once like i wanted.
What did I do wrong? i am new to lightburn and not experienced with it.
Are you able to post the .lbrn file for review? You can reduce it to a couple of shapes that show the problem if you’re precious about the content.
Here is the file. I am trying to make it so that when the laser cuts between say 1 & 2 it cuts once resulting in both parts cut, then it would cut between 2& 3, so essentially its less cutting as one cut, cuts two parts.
example to post to lb forum.lbrn2 (28.7 KB)
example to post to lb forum.lbrn (44.0 KB)
What’s happening is that because you have a kerf value applied, the 0.025 mm value for removing overlapping lines isn’t sufficient to detect the overlap.
Realistically, you wouldn’t be able to nest these pieces if you were trying to apply an overlap in any case.
If you still want to remove the overlap then either remove the kerf or increase the overlap tolerance. Doing the latter may get you slightly wonky pieces.
If you want kerf to work properly you won’t be able to nest the pieces like you’re trying to do as kerf necessarily will cut larger than the original shape.
I have a kerf applied because without the kerf the pieces are too loose and wont stay together. With the kerf they do however like this it cut twice and so theres too much of a gap and they fall apart.
My goal was to not waste material and maximize what i could get out of a piece of BB. Is there no way to still have a kerf but it only cuts once ? Is there a way to redesign so the overlapping lines become one so when it is cut it only cuts once, maintaining the kerf ?
How do people make puzzles that have a tight fit ? Isn’t this essentially nesting with a kerf ?
I don’t think I was sufficiently clear. There’s physically no way to simultaneously nest the parts, and yet cut each shape larger (which is what a kerf adjustment would do) than its current size. If kerf is applied, each part would intrude into the space of the other. If kerf is not applied, then both parts can share a single cut but as you say, each part will be too loose to hold together with a friction fit.
I’ve exaggerated the effect of the kerf here for a visual. You can see how the kerf would result in each shape intruding into the other.
By not nesting but with a kerf. So each piece is cut separately. This will necessarily result in some waste between pieces. You could try to redesign your sheet layout such that non-joining parts are directly next to each other but that mating sides have nothing next to it.
If you want to be very fussy with layout I’d suggest not using the kerf adjustment and directly offsetting each shape. This will allow you layout flexibility but at the cost of “hard-coded” kerf adjustment. I’d suggest taking a backup of your design at nominal sizes before modifying to apply the manual adjustment.
Your diagram makes sense to me now.
When you say manually offsetting each shape, i still would not be able to do one cut correct ? So what would the manual offset accomplish versus using the kerf and how would I do this ?
My end goal is to put as many of these shapes on one sheet of BB
How much space would I need between each one for it to cut properly ?
Right. No defying physics in this house.
This would mostly be beneficial if you still wanted to share some non-mating edges. It also makes it clearer how it will be cut. I assume this particular issue would have been more apparent to you if you could have seen the kerf adjustment.
You can use the Offset Shapes tool to do this.
This will depend on your particular machine and the material you’re dealing with. I’d suggest running some tests and adjusting as necessary. Keep in mind that areas of dense design work where the laser is spending more time could result in more space required.
This topic was automatically closed 30 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.
