ULS Super Resolution Accessory

[Tim Stamplis]

Does anyone have the ULS super resolution accessory ($2,650)? I intend to do a lot of photos on marble, granite, glass and am wondering which is better, 40 w with the resolution accessory or 50 w without as the cost would be equivalent in a vers laser 300. Any advise would be greatly appreciated!!

Tim Stamplis

[Lee DeRaud]

I'm not sure what you're looking at. On the ULS website, the part with that name for the VL series looks like it's just a replacement lens assembly, which normally has a price about 1/10 of what you're quoting. (Note that the description for the shorter lens (1.5") also talks about improved resolution, presumably because of smaller dot size at the focus.)

In any case, the "stock" resolution is in the 200dpi range, so I'm not sure how much it would help on the materials you're interested in.

[Richard Rumancik]

I'm not sure if I can tell you which to buy but there is interesting info in the review linked on the site. The article is from Engravers Journal and written by Steve Spence. If you go to products, then there is a link "Download VersaLaser Product Review."

Seems the lens assy refines the beam to smaller than .003 allowing finer resolution. It is an interesting option for some applications but I can't say that you would "need" it for granite, marble etc. I understand that you can do pretty good photos using 150-200 dpi with conventional optics.

There is a brief mention of photo engraving in the Review.

[Mitchell Andrus]

I have a March 2005 price list from ULS. Under "Accessories" there is a listing for a "High Power Desity Focusing Optics (Professional Series Only)"... $2,650.00.

In the glossy brochure, the "HPDFO" is said to reduce spot size and produces higher resolution graphics, "even scribe/etch on uncoated metals... without marking compounds".

If the beam size is just fine on a standard unit, the extra $2,650.00 may be an un-necessarily expensive add-on.

My Spirit has a beam of approx .004 to .006 depending on the target. (I sent a few samples to a friend with some very expensive optical calibration equipment) Is ULS's standard beam so much larger?

Mitch

[Mike Mackenzie]

Tim,

That application would not need the HPDFO option and believe it or not you really do not need any more than 30 watts to do the photos on the materials listed. For those materials less power is better from the tests we have done.

The HPDFO is an application specific option its very nice if you want to spend the money on it but it does not do everything that a standard 2.0 or 1.5 inch lens will do.

if your application is going to be doing photos on granite, marble, and glass then I would not try to sell you on this option. Keep in mind you can add it onto the system later on if you need it. If you are needing a spot size of 0.001 for very detailed work or are interested in marking on some metals without cermark then this lens option is the best.

To give you an idea the attached pic is about 2.0" tall when extreme detail matters there is no better solution.

[Mike Null]

Mike:
Maybe this would be a good time to talk about the differences in the focal length of the lenses.

[Mike Mackenzie]

Mike,

Here they are:

1.5" spot size 0.003 focus distance 1.5 inches
2.0" spot size 0.005 focus distance 2.0 inches
2.5" spot size 0.007 focus distance 2.5 inches
4.0" spot size 0.013 focus distance 4.0 inches

HPDFO optics spot size 0.001 focus distance 2.0 inches.

When ever you have a smaller spot size you must focus closer to the material, this causes the lens to gather debris faster it also causes larger kerfs, cutting with smaller spot sizes is not recommended. It is also very important to note that with smaller focus distances your tolerances are less so your material must be consistent in thickness. This is necessary when using the hpdfo optic as well even though you have a farther focus distance you have less tolerance going in or out of focus with your material.

Hope this helps.

[Richard Rumancik]

Hmmm ... when I saw the jpg from Mike I realized why I was confused. Epilog has their own product which they call Radiance optics. Seems the implementation is different but the end result similar to ULS. (If you go to the Epilog site do a search on Radiance and you will find the technical info faster.)

I don't actually see Epilog put a number on the spot size. In Steve Spence's article he says ULS gets a .00125 spot size. Curious that ULS and Epilog are both using the same Aztec calendar graphic to market their systems. I have the Epilog sample in front of me. The resolution is very impressive on wood; I assume the ULS version is comparable.

I would like to see how dark the ULS can mark stainless. Steve says that on the VL-300 at 15% speed the mark is not as dark as Cermark. I do like the dark black mark that Cermark provides - I don't care for a greyish or "washed out" looking mark.

[Tim Stamplis]

My machine purchase is confused by the two main types of material I intend to use; Stone (marble, granite) and wood. From my research, the stone requires very little laser power, while wood cutting requires the higher power. I intend to do more engraving on wood than cutting, but don't want to sell my potential short That is why I am trying to get a higher wattage.

I read the article on the lens, and it was impressive. I have read a lot of articles on this forum where people weren't happy with the quality of the photos, granted the end result seemed that they were using too high a resolution.

What made me consider this lens was the thought that a higher resolution engraving may be used with this lens thus producing a better graphic. I am going to Trotec tomorrow morning (I live 30 minutes from them) and I have a sample of marble and granite to take so I can see for myself the quality on a standard 2.0 lens.

Thank you for the advise, especially Mike!

Tim

[Richard Rumancik]

Mike MacKenzie . . .

I think what is needed in the table is depth of field for each lens. You suggest that the depth of field of the HPDFO is lower (in your comment about consistent thickness requirement of the material) but how much lower? Are there any numbers available?

I was surprised that you said cutting with HPDFO was not recommended. That's what I would have wanted it for. For one customer I cut doll house kits and fine accuracy is important. I noticed that in Steve Spence's article he said that HPDFO worked great for cutting wood, acrylic, and plastics in general. Doesn't the air assist keep the lens clean?

[Tim Stamplis]

Uhmm, good question Richard! Mike?

I forgot to mention I also want to cut paper for quilting patterns. Whatever advise anyone has on that in relation to equipment would be helpful!

Tim

[Keith Outten]

I've seen the engraved Aztec calendar that Epilog is now including with their brosure, it is indeed impressive. I would love to see the Epilog and Universal samples side by side for a visual comparison of the detail quality.

A Super Resolution Lens sounds real interesting if it is practical but it sounds to me it has a very limited range of application.

.

[Mike Hood]

Does someone have that Mayan Calendar in a CDR file? Look like a fun one to cut.

[Tim Stamplis]

Actually I received the same Aztec calendar from Pinnacle, but just a circle cutout without the extra frame work. It was not as impressive as Epilogs. Partly because of a knot in the wood they used, and I don't think the cleaned it very well, it showed a lot of burning on the surface portions. They engraved the back of the circle with their logo. I wish I would have made the ULS rep burn one for me!

[Kim Vellore]

I use my laser for fine scale models way smaller than doll houses and detailed. One interesting point is if you get a lower wattage laser the cuts are finer maybe the beam size is smaller for the lower wattage for the same focal length lens. I might be wrong here but when I use a machine at 35W to do my cuts I get a finer cut than with a 45W machine. This is after fine tuning both for best results. I am talking about high precession cuts, I use 1/64" thick plywood and paper sometimes. There could be other reasons too , like for example the output is pulsed , so at any time when the laser is ON it outputs max power at that instance and we see the average effect by changing PPI or frequency, so a higher power beam will burn a bigger spot dia on wood for the same beam size since it is hotter. I know the average effect is what comes in play but there could be a point where the power effect could be seen on fine cuts. I use a 1.5" lens on a 45W machine to get very good results a little better than 2" on a 35W Machine. Hope this makes sense, because I spent my first 6 months trying to get the fine cuts that I could with a 35W machine and this has been my experience.
Kim