We’re in agreement here. I also started with laser and some of the issues with Luban have pushed me toward other software. For example, the text sizes get corrupt and text elements have to be completely deleted and recreated, processing options aren’t saved in a .snaplzr file, etc. These issues emerged when I was developing a simple test file of a series of 12 mm holes. I engraved the number of passes, speed, and incremental depth on each hole to determine which settings were working best. When I reopened the saved .snaplzr file, none of my processing settings had been saved. Having to go back and reset the engraving settings on each text block and all the hole cut settings was a real pain.
Octoprint might work for transferring files already - I haven’t tried it yet. The things that aren’t working are the head-specific settings and recognition of different files. Out of the box, Octoprint recognizeds head and bed temperature, and expects those readings from your printer. It would be cool if there was a plugin to recognize laser power, CNC RPM, etc. in place of the printer values. In addition, it would need to understand that .nc files are fundamentally gcode.
Easels by inventables is great for doing sign carving type cnc stuff.
It’s what the CNC part of Luban should look like.
It’s by the makers of x-carve but you don’t have to have an x-carve to use it.
Great control of depths and simulated preview of what it’s actually going to look like. It’s a web app which some people don’t like.
Pro version adds some extra features and is monthly subscription but you can do a lot with the free version. First month pro is free to try it out.
Yup, I like Easel a lot but I could not work out how to use it to talk to snapmaker. When bring in a drawing for CNC it would always appear in the upper right quadrant of Luban. I asked in the forum several times for how to centre the image. Inventables Easel assumes the bottom left as 0,0 so I was unsure how to adjust the GCode to get it to sit at the centre point of the table on SM1. I don’t mind it being a web app. I liked its very clear interface, visual display and depth information. I made several attempts to adjust the GCode and used Camotics to confirm the validity of the code, nevertheless, I just could not pull the start of the carving to the centre of Luban or the table.
I wonder with all of these examples of excellent software function that the Snapmaker team, after some 4 years of production, have not managed to produce any software that is not a piece of beta software (alpha for CNC). It is not easy to see why the hardware could not be supported by great software. I struggled with Luban and finally gave up, thinking it must be me. The forum comments illustrate that the software is causing many of the hardware issues that are reported. I am happy to have found Lightburn because it solves my laser issues. Additionally, Carbide Create has saved me tearing out any more hair. I am purchasing a Carbide CNC machine and even though it is their standard machine, the build area is a fantastic 16 x 16 inches. Luxury!
I just use it with origin as bottom left. I wish you could use center origin but for most things I’m working on I’m using run boundary to position. So it doesn’t really make a difference for me. If i really need to I do a little math and figure out my offset.
-S
I see. I guess I was not too happy to run anything very close to the edge when I had the original clamps. The CNC function of SM1 is limited to 90mm square. I changed the table and made a new far more useful table and my clamps only intrude into the cut area by 5mm.
Of course, I still don’t get more than 90mm square in Luban. I will try with Carbide Create which I am sure will drive the CNC to any size I enter. I will have a go at the Easel GCode again. I did not have Carbide Create before when I was testing Easel files. The Easel files work fine in Camotics so I don’t feel they will be difficult to get going in Carbide Create.
I don’t like that ‘run boundary’ runs a rectangle even if you’re printing something round (or some other shape). It will still show that it’s running into your clamps even though it won’t when it actually runs. So sometimes I try to guess and hope it doesn’t.
On things I’m really worried about it hitting the clamps I either use some that I printed in PETG or I just use some scrap wood where I just plan on the bit running into and cutting the clamps.
-S
I agree that the run boundary instruction is useless as it is configured at the moment. My solution was to create clamps that only intrude 5mm into the workpiece area for both horizontal and vertical dimensions. The newly created table with an additional 36 holes is a really valuable adjunct to workpiece holding, even where I am limited to 90mm square. I ensure that my software definitions are always drawn 6mm away from the edge of any workpiece shape and I transport the endmill bit at a jog height of 6mm.
That saves me the bother of trying to make a run boundary assessment. The 3D printing of anything is just something I have not tried yet; the result is printing what I might need has not occurred to me. I could usefully spend a couple of full time months working on 3D printing alone. I suppose if cut toolpaths are configurable for direction, it may be possible to create clamps that are sacrificial during any of the Snapmaker processes… a bit like tabs but on the workpiece surface. It may be worth investigating as a work modality but there is usually a rational explanation why people do not reinvent the wheel.
My jig for 40mm cubes was enormously functional for me because of the horizontal clamps that worked by cam action. If one had a large surface area to use them, they are a great solution. I will have a 406.4 x 406.4 mm area to carve within after my new CNC machine is delivered. The flat clamps will work well there and they are only 13mm in depth (but require 20mm depth for locating the parf dogs. A new waste board is very much on the cards and with the threaded screw pieces recommended to me by @Melanchrom, I should be able to make a fair attempt at providing a waste board with horizontal clamping abilities.
A couple of images from Lightburn laser cutting burned into 2mm thick plywood - starting with some text samples. This a good thing to try because it leaves so little room for creative adjustment if the font is to be recognised and the sample read as text.
Variable power settings are still a bit of a hit and miss issue but I am making a power ramp to look at the settings and speeds specifically. My guess is that every maker ought to do something like that for their own situation, if they are to have any accuracy that is reproducible.
Of these images I like the last one best. Sharp and distinct showing me that the laser is in focus. I will make a test focus ramp as a well so that I can know exactly when the beam is in focus. Some techniques call for slightly a defocussed laser beam. You may not know that vector images are mathematical constructs and so the lines drawn will always be as thin as the laser beam can manage. If you need to draw thicker lines, you should produce them in a format like ‘.jpg’, which will not force the laser beam to its thinnest dimension.
That’s all for now… I am rather busy at home with a house decorating project.
Unfortunately I accidentally erased the exact settings I used but it would be easy enough to recreate.
For the cutting I basically created a single vector line in luban and repeated it several times and selected power levels of 10% to 100% for each.
For the bars I created a bar pattern of 100% to 10% (or is it 0% to 90%?) black to gray and used grayscale and I think B&W.
Here’s the code and the source files if you want to play with: laser test.nc (99.6 KB)
I also created just a cutting one with speed and power:
Thanks S. Very useful tests. I was thinking about a focus ramp test and some grayscale image testing too but for now, I am caught up with a decoration project so cannot spare this much time… I need a week to complete my wife’s requests.
Meantime, I was looking at methods for engraving larger pieces than the table permits and I like this one very much. The video presentation is very instructive.
Thanks for this great info. I use Lightburn with a Darkly Labs Emblaser 2 and love it.
I am now trying to connect to a Snapmaker 1 via USB and was wondering:
What flavor of laser did you select in the Devices menu when you created the Snapmaker device? I’m assuming that you did a manual creation, correct?
From what I’ve read, it looks like GRBL-M3 (1.1e or earlier) is the correct selection
to use with the Snapmaker 1.
On my machine, I’m telling Lightburn to connect to cu.wchusbserial1422410,
What do you do to connect the USB serial port before starting Lightburn?
I’ve tried a number of things so far with no success, always using a baud rate of 115200.
No worries Michael. Happy to help. I created an entry manually. I selected the same 1.1e and the Snapmaker name from the list of devices appearing on the manually entered machines list. The serial connection from the Mac to the SM1 is just as you have described. I connect the computer to the SM1 and turn on the SM1.
Then I open Lightburn and Snapmaker appears in the bottom right hand drop down menu. The middle drop down menu is empty until you look and there is the serial connection (use the USB A ~ USB B connection via the supplied double ended USB cable. The serial port is shown as wchusbserial1422410. The correct baud rate is 115200 as far as I can tell… none of the other rates appear to work in Lightburn.
Here is a useful tip courtesy of @sdj544. When you have saved the GCode, it will have a .gc file extension. When you change the file extension from .gc to .nc, you can save the file to a USB stick drive and it will work in SM1 from the stick drive port, without needing to connect the computer to SM1.
You must have SM1 as your computer in the software so then it knows to produce the code. No computer or laser machine detailed in the software means that it will do nothing. It has to know that a laser machine exists before it will let you create the GCode or run the software. Once the laser machine is known about, even if it is not connected, then your good to go.
Hello Jepho - I was still having problems getting Lightburn to connect to the SM1 on my a Mac when I retried after your last reply, but had to switch gears and didn’t get back to it until today.
I saw the post by Voidoids on getting Lightburn to work with the Snapmaker 2 A350. I changed the Lightburn settings in the “Device Settings” window to match the settings in the post, in particular enabling DTR and changing the baud rate, which I’d forgotten that Lightburn sets internally rather than me setting it externally (using SerialTools app) before starting Lightburn.
After setting these values and restarting Lightburn it now connects with no problems and seems to be working.
I am pleased to learn that, Michael. It is a great piece of software and I am pleased to be able to use it.
I have, sadly, come to the end of my Snapmaker use. AFAICT Snapmaker is still a largely unfinished product and after 5 years, alpha software is really not acceptable. It was a tough decision to make because I really like the forum but it is only active in the sense that users talk among themselves. The development team are slow to respond (or they ignore the repeated questions) to repeated complaints about similar issues.
After I had purchased Lightburn, I was able to speak directly to the software developers immediately I had questions and this is on a forum of some 7,000 users. They only have just the two developers and they both respond straight away to questions about their software. I have just invested £2,000 in a Carbide Shapeoko CNC machine with a 1.25hp router and a JTech 4.2W laser.
It is a pleasant relief to be dealing with companies who realise that I could buy more than one item and be a long term customer and advocate of their hardware and software. Today, I spent a long time on the phone talking with the senior territory manager of an American company which imports both the laser and the CNC machine into the UK. He was super helpful and as a result, I spent a further £867 with his company.
Team Snapmaker kicked the ball higher and further (with their kickstarter campaigns) than almost any other project. I have told them that their poor customer service will see them fall by the wayside as they run out of momentum. I am only one customer and it should have been a natural fit for me to buy an A350. I could not stand another few months of excuses for poor software or hardware issues that were not being answered.
Best business practice is companies should listen to the customer and user base. That is why I have bought my next machines from several of Snapmaker’s competitors. Interesting to note that they are all American companies and it is these people who are driving their businesses hard as we all become aware that economically it is very tough in the current COVID-19 mediated environment.
I have had incredible support from Lightburn, JTech, Carbide and RoboSavvy. Is Team Snapmaker ever going to learn this lesson? I am really delighted that you have got your issue sorted. One less issue to worry about for you and one fewer unhappy customers for Team Snapmaker to deal with… for the time being.
