I created six 99mm squares using the basic shapes menu. I just want six 99mm square outlines cut. I do not want them filled in.
I selected all six squares, and selected these settings for the laser: On the Path; Work speed 240mm/min; Jog Speed 3000mm/min; 2 Passes; Z step 0; Laser Power 100%; Constant power mode On.
What I got was six 96mm square outlines cut.
Why the 3mm difference???
(All of the software and firmware updated)
It strongly depends on your imported model.
File format vector (svg) is the way to go for cutting in my opinion.
Try to convert and see if it helps.
You should be able to detect the difference by looking at the gcode in workspace.
If you have made them with the shapes menu, and set both W and H to 99mm, then that’s what you should get. It’s always been the correct sizes for me.
What material are you cutting?
Try making some other shapes on scrap wood or cardboard/paper, an measure to see if they are accurate. Circles, Rectangles, other size squares. I have never had a problem with that sort of sizing difference.
Sounds like there’s no imported model involved.
This is my first time looking at gcode, but I think it’s accurate. This is for cutting just a single 99mm square. And it cuts it 2.6mm short on the Y plane, and .6mm short on the X plane.
To answer other questions, I’m cutting 3mm thick birch plywood. And I’m not sure what you mean by no model imported. I import the model from Luban editor into Luban workspace, then send the gcode to the snapmaker.
G90
G21
M2000 W1 P100
M2000 W2 P100
M3 S0
M9
M2000 L23 P1
G0 F3000
G1 F240
G0 X-149.50 Y170.29
G1 X-50.50 S255
G1 Y71.29
G1 X-149.50
G1 Y170.29
G0 X-100.00 Y120.79
M5 S0
Yes, didn’t got this 
.
Do you have Quick swap kit and Bracing Kit appropriately selected in Luban and on the machine, dependant on whether you have them or not?
I generated this Gcode with a centred 99mm square on an A350 with a 10W laser, same cutting specs as you used. So your G code looks fine, I suspect its a machine or Luban setting that’s out.
G90
G21
M2000 W1 P100
M2000 W2 P100
M3 S0
M9
M2000 L23 P1
G0 F3000
G1 F240
G0 X-49.50 Y49.50
G1 X49.50 S255
G1 Y-49.50
G1 X-49.50
G1 Y49.50
G0 X0.00 Y0.00
M5 S0
Just had another thought.
Is your machine new?
Is it an A350 with the newer linear rails?
Are the rails in the correct positions if they are the newer ones? (Newer ones had different rails for different axis, old rails were all the same…)
Just throwing ideas out there…
This would make a bigger difference in movement and would be hear able by hitting the ends of the modules while Homing.
Was your work piece protected again slippery?
Chris meant from a third party software.
If it turned out 96x96 square then it’s not the rails.
I don’t know if I had the bracing kit properly selected before, but I do now. No change though - still off by a few mm
To me it sounds like the machine calibration (steps/mm) is not set correctly - did you in any way run calibrations on your own? As far as I understand M92 would give you your current values: https://snapmaker.github.io/Documentation/gcode/M092
When I do this on my - never modified - A350 Kickstarter version (old modules, all 8 mm pitch) I get:
M92 X400.00 Y400.00 Z400.00 B888.89 Current E667.22, BACKUP SINGLE E212.21, BACKUP DUAL E667.22
If you have the new 20 mm pitch modules I guess the value for X and Y should be less, by 8/20, so I’d expect M92 X160.00 Y160.00 Z400.00… as your output in that case.
All theoretical thinking, I may be totally wrong here…
1 Like
OK, I read all of the replies to date. Here are some answers to questions:
I have an original A350 from the Kickstarter campaign. Original bracing kit, no quick swap here. I’m using the 10W laser that came a year or two after that campaign. The workpiece was firmly attached to the bed.
I ended up restoring factory setup, recalibrating everything…and now it’s doing just fine.
Not sure how it got to the point where 99mm == 96mm, but I’ve rerun the routine twice and it’s perfect both times.
Thanks to everyone for being supportive!
2 Likes