Sculpfun IR-2 1064nm

Can Sculpfun IR-2 1064nm module cut thin copper 1.5mm? I am thinking in the direction of pcb prototyping.

Honestly, you would need a LOT more IR power to make that happen.
Best is Fiber and a powerful at that.

I would imagine it can do it with tons of passes, but is far from efficient


I think @gilaraujo is correct here. I have a 60W fiber and have tried to do pcb’s. They stink at best and are not quickly done … at least I haven’t found a way …

I have a bunch of 1 Oz pcbs that I use. I know it took a bunch of passes, I think it was 20 or more to get to the fiberglass base and I used 100mm/s@35%, which equates to > 20W (ten times your module)… so you probably could do it … a bit time consuming.

I’m sure there are many who’d like to try this, so you should give it a shot and see how it works… don’t forget to post your successes here :grimacing:

I did watch a youtube video that I’m going to try, but I don’t have a lot of hope here…

Good luck


1 Like

Thank you all for information.

I wouldn’t take that as a no, just unlikely… this is how you learn your machine…

If you test it, you might find it will do what you want… these are pretty low power devices…


1 Like


Not a chance.

Jus as @gilaraujo said, You need a lot more power.
Somewhere in the range of ~100W to pull something like that off even remotely feasibly.

Also, even though looks aren’t everything in these things either and can be wildly decieving in modern marketing, that Sculpfun module looks suspiciously similar to the xTool (near)IR 1064 module.
The usable focus range on that xTool module is so narrow that without highly intelligent and accurate focus control, one can’t even engrave anything visible on metals if the height varies 1.5mm.

1.5mm PCB foil isn’t exactly thin either, quite the opposite, most easily available varities in small quantities have ~ <0.05mm foils.
1oz PCB foil is ~0.035mm

The way I see it, You have only two options if the design You want requires -or can greatly benefit from- the use of a laser:

#1 Cut a separate mask with the laser, apply, and etch as usual.

#2 Paint or otherwise coat the surface of the PCB with an appropriate material that can withstand the long time that the etching of 1.5mm thick copper will take, laser the mask and etch.

Edit: If I should for some reason need a PCB with 1.5mm thick traces, I’d probably look at the router option.
Routing copper traces that thick so they won’t detach from the base material isn’t going to be easy or particularily cheap either, but still magnitudes cheaper than with a laser.



I hate to tell anyone they can’t… I’ve seen some incredible things… however 2W does fall into what I’d call very low power…



To each his/her own.

I personally hate it when anyone knowingly gives false hope and utterly uninformed advice when there’s actually zero chance of success.
Regardless of the question at hand.
Especially when someone is trying to find information -just as everyone should- before making the desicion to either purchase something or not.
The reason and motivation behind that kind of behaviour can only be guessed.

So again, to each his/her own.



This is a non-starter: I see no practical way to cut the copper but leave FR4 undamaged. FR4 resin even after moderate exposure to temperatures, I would say over 200C, will carbonize and conduct, ruin its very fundamental property.

Unless you cut copper foil first then laminate it back to FR4, but that would be even more strange,

Just mill it. It need very tiny mill to cut even through 2oz copper. You can manage to strap it on many existing laser frames.

Or use black spray paint, burn it away with laser then etch in ferric chloride, like old times.

I will use the process with black paint and a normal etch.

That is a popular opinion until someone does it. Then the opinion shifts to, “That can’t be ight!” Then then finally comes acceptance that someone discovered a new way of doing things.

Let us not suppress any enthusiasm here. There is no shame in having an Oh WOW!!! moment. A lot of what we take granted for today was done by experimenters. Encouragement is the rule.

Did you know you can etch glass using a Dry Erase marker? Anybody that did know this, raise your hand…

This I agree with. I have had foil separate with the heat of a soldering iron. I think the best application for circuit board work is using a UV resist coated board and a UV (diode) laser for exposing the trace patterns. Then follow that with an etch process. You would get some superb fine lines and accuracy.

Having been in electronics since the mid 60’s, this would be my choice.

1 Like


Nope, in most -if not all- cases that’s the informed opinion based on knowledge about the subject.
And about chemistry/physics/engineering/etc.

That’s extremely rare, remotely possible though.
In most cases it’s because of the lack of knowledge about the subject, not because the task itself would somehow be impossible.

But definitely not in this case.
You’re more than welcome to prove me wrong about 2W IR lasers ability to cut 1.5mm copper though :slight_smile: .

IMO It’s not at all about supressing enthusiasm if someone is told that they have thought about buying absolutely wrong tools for the task, and are told what are -or might be- the right tools to get the task done.

There is, if the “Oh WOW” (he/she actually fell for it) comes from the mouth of the encourager while the encouragee is having a “Oh CRAP” moment after dropping some serious cash and/or time onto something that fails to deliver miserably.

Yeah, the folks just loved the Nobel brothers in the early days :wink: .
And I won’t even start with how our eastern neighbours alledgedly came up with the critical mass without the use of computers.
Sure, there’s been successes -and a lots of them- as well, but one major thing about any experimenting is to not repeat the mistakes of the predecessors, but rather learn from those mistakes.

Increasing knowledge is IMO a far, far better rule.

Anyone who has left (budget) dry erase marker text or drawing exposed to sunlight for any longer period of time, would’ve probably guessed it.
But then again, reading the many threads about the variousTiO2 methods does reveal that the reactions behind that working -and especially when not working as expected- with glass aren’t exactly clear for most either.

While failure is an integral and in many times important part of any learning process, deliberately encouraging someone to fail and in the same time suggesting it might work, is just wrong in my book.

Fortunately OP decided to etch the PCB’s.
Masking and etching while maintaining the required Cu cross section won’t be a trivial task with 1.5mm foils either, but at least there’s a far better chance of success.



  1. Why did nobody point out to Vinko that 1.5mm foil should have probably been 1.5oz foil?
  2. Knowledge is useless if it cannot be applied. That is why we have experimentation, research, and development.
  3. We learn from our failures, not our successes. What if Edison, who said he learned 1000 ways to not make a lightbulb, had quit on Failure #998?
  4. Our eastern neighbors came up with Algebra, geometry, and critical mass without a computer. Our western neighbors came up with the power grid, integrated circuits, and the telephone without computers. What is your point?
  1. That was a YES/NO question. You answered with a deflection. So… did you know or not?
  1. I get the impression you had a less than stellar experience with your toys. Did you expect more from a 2w device?


You win, congrats.



Did not expect that! Did not know it was a contest either. I thought it was about trading opinions. To be honest, I was going to shut it down in this posting too.