Glowforge release

[Dave Sheldrake]

Ok, as I'm sure you've been able to figure out, I'm not exactly a GF cheerleader.

But I'm a bit puzzled by that comment, as I have zero problems cutting 1/4" wood and acrylic with quite a bit less power than that. Am I missing something?

DC and RF are very different Lee, a DC tube (like the GF) will struggle to cut 1/4inch materials at any speed. The better beam profile and power distribution curve of an RF (like epilog etc) will cut well above what a DC tube of the same power rating will do.
As a rule of thumb, if you double an RF you will get the equivalent DC rating.
So a 120 watt DC will cut as well as a 60watt RF (give or take a bit)

caveat: there are exceptions such as DC tubes from GSI and Coherant but you are talking tubes from $5,000 to $40,000 in cost for a glass tube

[Lee DeRaud]

DC and RF are very different Lee, a DC tube (like the GF) will struggle to cut 1/4inch materials at any speed. The better beam profile and power distribution curve of an RF (like epilog etc) will cut well above what a DC tube of the same power rating will do.
As a rule of thumb, if you double an RF you will get the equivalent DC rating.
So a 120 watt DC will cut as well as a 60watt RF (give or take a bit)

Ah, did not know that. I guess my 25W ULS isn't quite as wimpy as it sounds.

(Latest tube is actually 28W or so, but still...)

[Bert Kemp]

I'm didn't say it wouldn't cut it just its going to be very slow,my 40 watt FSL took forever to cut 1/4 never did it cut the entire designs I always had to take a razor and cut the missed parts and I always had charred edges. Now I know It wasn't a real 40 watt more like 30 but is the GF going to have a real 40 tube in it. I really doubt it as the entire width of the case is shorter then a 40 watt tube

Ok, as I'm sure you've been able to figure out, I'm not exactly a GF cheerleader.

But I'm a bit puzzled by that comment, as I have zero problems cutting 1/4" wood and acrylic with quite a bit less power than that. Am I missing something?

[Dave Stevens-Vegas]

Some Chinese manufacturers supply machines that work well. They are a good value, though not the best quality. We have no evidence Glowforge is capable of anything more than producing a great (if deceptive) website. The evidence against their claims for availability and functionality are eroding with every delay.

Glowforge will ship, probably closer to a year from now. Whether they have any longevity is the question. They've got plenty of backing from big names and VCs that know how to guide someone to release a shipping product. If nothing else I'd reckon they'd be around for a couple of years before the machines are bricked. In terms of technology it's nothing new, it's the integration of the parts that is new. In terms of marketing calling it a 3D laser printer is at best misleading, at worst deceptive. What they are doing is getting the UI/UX to a point where untrained users can make it into a crafting hobby or small business. It's more of a software product than a hardware product. My interest (though I wouldn't buy one) is in how they scale the technology of the cameras and sensors and integrate that in a package and how the UX is improved to a point where consumers can more easily use it. Software across the network only is a deal breaker for me and should be for most consumers. It's going to take a few more cloud based consumer companies to go off line the way Revolv has to gain more traction in seeing that connected devices that only fully function connected is a bad idea right now.

Contrary to what the previous poster said about custom parts, the core components of the machine are readily available, most of them used in the cell phone/mobile technology. That is what makes the machine possible. What is custom is how those commodity parts are integrated into the machine and the software that controls them. They are using a high volume, high profile contract manufacturer so scale won't be an issue. Should they make it that far. In terms of scale the ecosphere in Shenzhen scales like no other manufacturing hub in the world. That's one reason Foxconn can build 5 million iPhones in several weeks. I see the issue right now is that the design isn't fully fleshed out. Most of the manufacturing design team wasn't in place when they announced a ship date, they're playing catch up now.

As for Tesla's ZEV credits, Nissan and GM have sold far more ZEV eligible units and as a result have gotten a larger share of the ZEV subsidises. While the ZEV credit is an important component of Tesla's model (and plug in electric in general) most of the money funding Tesla is investor money, not public money.

[Lee DeRaud]

What they are doing is getting the UI/UX to a point where untrained users can make it into a crafting hobby or small business. It's more of a software product than a hardware product. My interest (though I wouldn't buy one) is in how they scale the technology of the cameras and sensors and integrate that in a package and how the UX is improved to a point where consumers can more easily use it.

I'm still a bit unclear on the 'value-added' of this, as it seems to fall into a category I usually refer to as "automating the easiest 10% of the job". While "pushbutton creativity" sells well, it has a rather short half-life.

[Dave Stevens-Vegas]

I'm still a bit unclear on the 'value-added' of this, as it seems to fall into a category I usually refer to as "automating the easiest 10% of the job". While "pushbutton creativity" sells well, it has a rather short half-life.

Point taken but you are looking at it from a woodworker/machinist perspective. The audience isn't people that are likely to come here, or CNC Zone or perhaps are members of a maker space. My wife and her Aunt are good examples. They are both crafters and are good at it. in an analog world. Pens, paper, paint.Remember Tandy kits? McCall's drawers at the fabric store? This is aiming to be the modern equivalent of that, though at a much higher price tag. These people can create the art, but not operate the tools to convey that art in other forms. She can use the ULS at Techshop (with some help) where we started the business but the FSL we bought to bring it in house not a chance. There are many artisans in that same boat. Take me, or my dad or our granddaughter and it's different. Likely more like you. We use CNC tools, in fact the kid was raised on Autocad and Solidworks, CNC, 3D printing, laser. As easy as we think even one of those K40 cheapies are to use, there are many, many that are into crafting and are great artist but are totally stumped by the technology. I see that as what Glowforge is trying to target. One of the main questions is that market big enough.

[Bill George]

Where I live the middle school , junior high kids are learning computer drafting and CNC in school classes. Granted its simple stuff but some of the kids take to it like a fish to water. They even get to build robots.

[Clark Pace]

I am not that patient. I actually put a donation down on a 3D printer a few years ago. It was only a 6 month wait. I finally withdrew(got my money back), got a another 3D printer and have been happy with how things turned out? So the company that I originally put some money down on even after a 1 1/2 seem to still be having problems. Several people are having issues, and of course some are not. I can't imagine what gf will do if there product is practically perfect out of the gate.

[Rich Harman]

DC and RF are very different Lee, a DC tube (like the GF) will struggle to cut 1/4inch materials at any speed.

I noticed no significant difference in cutting speed between my 80 Watt glass tube (DC) and a 100 Watt Universal laser (RF). I expected the 100W RF laser to to cut much faster but I was completely underwhelmed. So in my personal experience, combined with watching countless videos of various lasers cutting materials - I think that to say an RF laser can cut twice as fast as a DC is quite misleading.

I won't dispute that a several thousand dollar RF laser will have a better beam profile than my $400 80W Reci, and therefore be able to cut faster. But I challenge you to prove that it can cut twice as fast, or even 50% faster. A ten to twenty percent advantage, I could believe, but I'll need evidence to be able to accept more than that.

[Dave Sheldrake]

So a 120 watt DC will cut as well as a 60watt RF (give or take a bit)

I didn't say twice as fast , try cutting thin profiles on a DC tube, such as 3mm thick ply with a 0.5mm cross section. As a normal DC lasers power increases the beam profile usually suffers to a point where it become brutal with abberations causing all manner of unwanted effects. It's the nature of high voltage DC generated laser beams.

I have DC, RF , Diode Stack Pumped and Flowing Gas lasers here and they all have their place, my personal choice is large DC as they are the most cost effective but I'm not under any illusion that they can match the general quality of a decent RF.

It's like comparing Fords to Ferraris though, the RF should be better, it costs 25x as much

[Dave Stevens-Vegas]

I noticed no significant difference in cutting speed between my 80 Watt glass tube (DC) and a 100 Watt Universal laser (RF). I expected the 100W RF laser to to cut much faster but I was completely underwhelmed. So in my personal experience, combined with watching countless videos of various lasers cutting materials - I think that to say an RF laser can cut twice as fast as a DC is quite misleading.

I won't dispute that a several thousand dollar RF laser will have a better beam profile than my $400 80W Reci, and therefore be able to cut faster. But I challenge you to prove that it can cut twice as fast, or even 50% faster. A ten to twenty percent advantage, I could believe, but I'll need evidence to be able to accept more than that.

Depending on the part, our switch from primarily ULS (some Epilog and a bit of Trotec) to an in house GWieke by way of FSL was on a couple of parts was almost twice the time. A 7 min cut on ULS VLS460 is just over 12 min on LC6040N, 18 min part on ULS, 25 min on FSL. Most are in the 20-50% difference in the cutting times. Same files, same material. There were some differences in edge finish and kerf with the more expensive machines producing noticeably better quality (though for our app that wasn't a concern) We've been cutting these parts for about 4 years, almost two of which we've been doing in house. Thousands of parts at this point. I don't regret one bit buying what we did though a ULS would have been nice. The FSL has done what we've needed, when we needs and paid for itself in the process.

I think Dave's auto comparison is pretty apt in this case.

[Rich Harman]

I didn't say twice as fast , try cutting thin profiles on a DC tube, such as 3mm thick ply with a 0.5mm cross section.

You said;

...DC tube (like the GF) will struggle to cut 1/4inch materials at any speed. The better beam profile and power distribution curve of an RF (like epilog etc) will cut well above what a DC tube of the same power rating will do.

That sure sounds like you were talking about cutting speed to me. You were responding to Lee's comment about him not having trouble cutting with less power. Lee was responding to Bert, he brought up slow cutting speed. You seem now to be talking about the ability to cut very fine details - which is fine, but not on point.

As a normal DC lasers power increases the beam profile usually suffers to a point where it become brutal with abberations causing all manner of unwanted effects. It's the nature of high voltage DC generated laser beams.

That may well be true, but how is it relevant to cutting 1/4" plywood?

It's like comparing Fords to Ferraris though, the RF should be better, it costs 25x as much

The Ferrari may be faster and hold a better line, but the Ford will get you from A to B just as well, there is no difference in their ability to transport someone to a destination. You would need a special circumstance for the Ferrari to be able to outperform the Ford in that regard.

[Jacob John]

I keep seeing GlowForge refresh their sponsored Facebook ads, or maybe they're deleting comments, but every single time I see an ad on my news feed, which is around once a week, it's littered with 3D printer owners and others railing on the fact that it's not a 3D printer. If I were on the GlowForge marketing team, I'd seriously consider changing this. I've seen nothing but negativity from that part.

[Dave Sheldrake]

That may well be true, but how is it relevant to cutting 1/4" plywood?

Cross sectional power distribution and beam profile makes a big difference to penetration of a laser beam, the nature of an RF having PWM control also makes a difference to how well it will cut 1/4inch plywood, the ignition to lase time of a DC is magnitudes of order slower than an RF tube. The optical quality of DC tubes full reflectors and partial reflectors are well below those of a more expensive RF tube.
All these factors affect quality, speed and penetrative ability of a beam. Better speeds are a factor, but I didn't say the only factor.

[Kev Williams]

FWIW- I ran a cut test a week or so ago with my 80w Reci Triumph-

1/4" cast acrylic, masked on both sides, 2" lens, 26mV on the meter, it took 22 seconds to cover 15.2" (386mm), which works out to .69" (17.5mm) per second.
The laser just barely made it all the way thru.

My RF lasers are 35 and 40 watts, so not sure if cut time x2 is a fair comparison or not?