Flat floor on large areas??

[Morgan Jackson]

Fiber laser
20w

material is stainless, maybe a 316.. not totally sure


I am engraving some police badges into some firearm slides and the badge has a few large areas of cut depth. The problem I am having is that my floor is rough textured. The depth is good.. just a rough floor.

Settings are 1750mm/s
35hz
100% power

The fill is spaced at .01 with a 35 degree rotation.

In aluminum, I get a really good floor this way, but in the stainless I get vertical "striations".

[Kev Williams]

are you X-hatching or single?

Try running some X-hatch clean-up passes at say, .04mm hatch spacing 500mm/s, 70% power and 60khz. Maybe up the power if you think it'll help. The slower speed/higher freq may help flatten the bottom a bit...

This isn't SS but I got a nice lightly mottled bottom on this engraving-
416401

If need be, go with the 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em' method ;) --
416402
-this isn't very deep, but for this X-hatching wasn't looking good so I just ran a one-direction 0 degree .1mm hatch until it DID look good- came out looking like corduroy, customer was very happy :)

[Morgan Jackson]

Thanks Kev..

Please correct me.. I ASSUMED that by rotating the fill, that would generate a crosshatch..

Also.. why are you suggesting a larger spacing (of .04) on the crosshatch. Honestly, this is a thing I've had issues with understanding fully. It seems to me that a thinner spacing means you remove more lines of material per pass. So.. IN THEORY a narrower path = better surface quality at the sacrifice of more time spent to cut.

Equally.. again, please correct me.. I ASSUMED that a faster scan rate would (in theory) reduce effectivene power thereby getting the same effect. Though, obviously, reducing the power does this too...

[Nick Cicala]

You need to assume heat as well, the slower you go the more heat exposure you have. Filling is a odd variable, a smaller fill can be better for engraving depending on material. Your current fill is very small, i usuaully start at .002inches with a Crossline fill. Multiple passes at a faster speed along with an accompanying cleaning (fast, lower power) pass each time can be more effective. The rotation helps so not produce a grain.



Thanks Kev..

Please correct me.. I ASSUMED that by rotating the fill, that would generate a crosshatch..

Also.. why are you suggesting a larger spacing (of .04) on the crosshatch. Honestly, this is a thing I've had issues with understanding fully. It seems to me that a thinner spacing means you remove more lines of material per pass. So.. IN THEORY a narrower path = better surface quality at the sacrifice of more time spent to cut.

Equally.. again, please correct me.. I ASSUMED that a faster scan rate would (in theory) reduce effectivene power thereby getting the same effect. Though, obviously, reducing the power does this too...