I need to test speed/power as well as focus (and eventually # of passes) to determine best cut settings for a given material.
I made the attached test for power vs focus at a given speed. So, as-is, I run a standard material test to determine my approx limits, then pick a speed that seems slightly too fast. Run power/focus, so that gets me close on a fixed focus. Then I run another material test with the right focus to dial in the speed & power again. that gets me really good for single pass. Eventually I’ll need to add # of passes to the variables.
Is there a smarter/faster/more efficient way to accomplish this?
Can I make a test file that’s easier to edit, possibly incorporating more variables?
I tried the same thing with my “3018 Laser”. Your non-Ariel font keeps me from seeing the scales, so I cannot determine if you are getting LB to create the Z steps for you. I had to manually edit my GCode to include Zaxis motion between moves.
Right… Sorry, I didn’t think about those SHX fonts. You should be able to just substitute Arial or whatever. Or I can do it and upload if desired.
The variable text pulls the Z offset value & speed, the power is just a serial# variable and breaks easy. I’m not sure how to link variable to power scale.
The overall workflow is OK, but is a little slow and editing the different tests is a hassle.
Can’t even read the text. Would not know what to substitute.
If you are saying your variable is setting the Zstep and Speed in Lightburn, I am not sure you can do this. The same is for laser Power. It can be done by editing the parameters of each square manually.
Variable text is just that, text. If you are familiar with the MS Word mailmerge, you have the idea.
Similar to @MikeyH font of text issue, I don’t have the font you used and although the text will select, I can’t change the font in my case, thus I can’t evaluate or help with your test case.
Reminder that there are 3 laser tools built into LB that assist in material testing. See LaserTools->Focus Test, Material Test, and Interval Test.
OK, there is a version using Ariel font. I appreciate you looking.
I use the built-in test lots and enjoy having them, despite a few quirks (can’t save location with preset is the big one.) I just need some additional.
The cut/layer props drive the variable text, not the other way round. That’s part of the question eating at me…It’s cumbersome to edit all the layers and shape properties individually. I also can’t find a way to have the power scale value drive variable text, so that’s another edit step.
I haven’t messed with # of passes and Zstep yet. That’s an additional variable I’ll need to add later.
I do not think LB has the ability to drive the text content with the Cut/Layer properties. It is simply pick-n-place text into text identifiers from an external file. It also has no other way of loading burn parameters from an external file. Maybe LB staff can correct me, but I think you are operating in the Future Features area.
Set the variable text type to “cut setting” then enter the correct syntax in the text block…for example, entering “C01S” directs LB to lookup the speed value for layer C01 and set it as the text entry, including the units. A lower case “s” would do the same but omit the units.
C02z inserts the Z offset for layer C02, less units.
The geometric text formatting (size, font, spacing, etc.) can be irritating to get right since you need to either bake or preview to actually see what the format looks like with the variable populated.
The “dd” entries use the “serial number” variable text type. They’re are simple 2 digit numbers with a defined offset/advance value. I find these less intuitive as of now. I’m sure the nuances will become more clear as I use it. For instance, I currently have leading zeros in those blocks, but I don’t think they’re strictly necessary. I initially built that column as an array and I think I over complicated it.
I haven’t yet tried using the external spreadsheet approach. I’ve done something similar with parametric CAD models, and it’s always problematic when you have to share or restructure the files/folders, so I try to avoid it unless necessary.
It functions fine as-is, but the back-and-forth iterations and material waste is a nuisance. I know it’s overkill, but I tend to get mired in the details. Just my way.
