![]() ![]() I keep the machine running below that percentage, and I hope this will extend the tube lifetime too. So it does not make sense to use the machine above that 80-85%. This demo is really intended just to show what you can do with ECMLink and the very basic idea of making a simple change to the ECU. The amount of laser power I really can use out of my machine is around 15% less than what would be the theoretical maximum, and no surprise to me. A very basic tuning example showing how to use the datalogging and tuning integration in ECMLink to make a simple change to one of the ignition advance tables. ![]() Trace (the 4 farthest points) the AFR throughout the Fuel Map and you will see that it will appear to have the shape of a box, but not perfectly shapped. There you will find which areas the ECU used as reference and what worked the best. Maybe I find a way to mechanically optimize this so I can run vector engraving with higher speed. Look at the AFR log and use it to determine where the AFR are in the Fuel Maps. The small oscillation of the laser head is something I can reduce with slower speed settings. Every material is different, but at least I have now some good ‘rule of thumb’ values determined for my machine. Knowing the correct focus point distance is essential to use a laser cutter and engraver. Or using the machine above 80% does not make sense and probably only shortens the tube life time. Or as a rule of thumb: I can expect effectively 40 Watt out of a 50 Watt laser tube. I conclude that if the laser tube has a nominal maximum power of 50 Watt, I really get 85% out of it, or around 42.5 Watt. ![]() ![]() In essence, the cutting depth increases in a linear way with increasing the laser power, but only up to around 85%: above that I don’t get more cutting even with increasing the laser power percentage. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |