Full Version: Pricing Correctly / YAG vs CO2
From: laserman (MIKEMAC) [#27]
21 Mar 2005
To: Jim (JEARMAN) [#25] 21 Mar 2005
Jim,
Realistically with rough numbers on a flying optic 12x24 system. you could produce between 1100 and 1800 pens in a 4 hour period. I am basing this off of an 8 to 12 second print time. There are several factors that would come into play to determine the final numbers, (Depth, Graphic, material, etc).
Just playing with numbers this is what I came up with.
12x24 work area = 48 pens x 8 seconds = 384 seconds / 6.4 minutes per run.
60 divided by 6.4 = 9.375 runs per hr.
9.375 x 48=450 pens per hr.
450x4 hours=1800
I am not saying that the galvo head lasers are slower what I am saying is you can utilize an employee for several other tasks other than loading and unloading.
That said the flying optic system has its benefits.
We also use the laser to cut all of our fixtures and with a set of identical fixtures you can keep the system running non stop.
Without Breaks/Lunch/holidays/sickness. When ever Its turned on and loaded they go to work. I classify the flying optic systems as the robotic employee.
Yes it does take someone to tell it what to do but it never asks for a raise and you pretty much no what you can expect to get from it.
Please I am not saying one is better than the other They both have there advantages and dis advantages.
From: Stunt Engraver (DGL) [#28]
21 Mar 2005
To: laserman (MIKEMAC) [#27] 21 Mar 2005
Mike,
What would an "Entry Level" flying optic YAG system cost? Not necessarily ULS. Industry wide.
I don't know if people realize how much the cost of a CO2 system has come down over the years. When I first saw 25 watt systems hit the awards and engraving industry, I think they were upwards of $50K.
Does a YAG system (flying optic) run at roughly the same speed as the CO2 systems?
David "The Stunt Engraver" Lavaneri
DGL Engraving
Port Hueneme, CA
From: bobkat [#29]
21 Mar 2005
To: Harvey only (HARVEY-ONLY) [#19] 21 Mar 2005
From: Stunt Engraver (DGL) [#30]
21 Mar 2005
To: bobkat [#29] 21 Mar 2005
Bobkat,
Is that straight Co2, or a mixture of another gas?
David "The Stunt Engraver" Lavaneri
DGL Engraving
Port Hueneme, CA
From: laserman (MIKEMAC) [#31]
21 Mar 2005
To: Stunt Engraver (DGL) [#28] 21 Mar 2005
David,
First the price of an entry level Yag system is around 40K This depends on mfg and power and we are talking about galvo head Yag. The only price I can offer is for the ULS and it is a 18x32 Diode pumped system that lists for $69,000. What most people don't know is the cost of operation. Lamp Yag systems can cost 150 to 300 per month in just consumables, Diode pumped systems last much longer but can cost as much as $10,000.00 with the consumables however this would be approximately 5 to 7 years. If you break that down its about $2000 per year. the lamp systems could cost as much as 3,600.00 per year this is all depending on use.
There are no real entry level flying optics Yag systems. Until Trotec announced there dual co2/yag system in Las Vegas Universal was the only one of its size available (I am speaking within our industry) I am not sure how trotec is doing the dual mode system because with my understanding the two systems use different optics in order to operate.
At Las Vegas they did not do both processes at one time co2 first then Yag second and it was not very impressive. I Think they have a good Idea but really need to work out the Kinks.
As to the speed yes the ULS system uses the same platform as there co2's so the speed is the same. On the other hand we are talking about completely different materials so its not fair to compare they are not apples to apples.
From: Harvey only (HARVEY-ONLY) [#32]
21 Mar 2005
To: bobkat [#29] 21 Mar 2005
How many watts would be needed in a YAG to cut the same thickness stainless as the 150 watt CO2?
I have always been told that metals reflect IR light. I do know that at minimum speed and max power my 25 watt unit will not touch the foiled labels that some materials have on them. (Oops, that darned label left a scrap!)
Always eager to learn.
From: Stunt Engraver (DGL) [#33]
21 Mar 2005
To: laserman (MIKEMAC) [#31] 21 Mar 2005
Mike,
Thank you for that info. With that rate of initial and sustained operating costs, where do you see the "Profit Pockets" for YAG equipment?
David "The Stunt Engraver" Lavaneri
DGL Engraving
Port Hueneme, CA
EDITED: 21 Mar 2005 by DGL
From: laserman (MIKEMAC) [#34]
21 Mar 2005
To: Harvey only (HARVEY-ONLY) [#32] 21 Mar 2005
Harvey,
To do it efficiently 250 to 500 watts You can do it with less but it is a slow process and you need to have an oxygen assist in order to do it at all.
There are Plasma cutters that work much better for cutting metals than lasers do and they are one third the price.
There are even water jets that will cut metals better than laser. The guy's who do a lot of metal cutting with laser are usually using 1.5 kilo watts minimum.
These companies also own 40 percent of the electric companies because they use serious amounts of it in order to operate and they also use flowing oxygen to assist with metal
From: laserman (MIKEMAC) [#35]
21 Mar 2005
To: Stunt Engraver (DGL) [#33] 22 Mar 2005
David,
Typically AD specialty markets, There has been a large growth in the aerospace industry as well.
What used to be chemical etched is now getting laser etched.
From: bobkat [#36]
21 Mar 2005
To: Stunt Engraver (DGL) [#30] 22 Mar 2005
From: bobkat [#37]
21 Mar 2005
To: Harvey only (HARVEY-ONLY) [#32] 22 Mar 2005
From: Rodney Gold (RODNEY_GOLD) [#38]
21 Mar 2005
To: laserman (MIKEMAC) [#35] 22 Mar 2005
Throughput is dependant on a lot of things , for example a pen with cerdec in a jig on a C02 is way way slower than any galvo YAG can be , apart from engraving speed , there is coating and uncoating etc.
In terms of employees , you need 2 people for this with a co2 , a coater/uncoater and a loader/watcher. You might be lucky and get about 30-40 pens per hr using a co2 and a coating.
There are risks to doing multiples in jigs too , if something goes wrong and the process is unattended , then you potentially have an expense far greater than the engraving cost in that one might have to replace many ruined items. For a simple logo on a wood pen it might be a different story.
I have 3 Co2 lasers , 2 operator/designers ONLY for these , a further designer for these and other machines and never use any of them for packing , unpacking , coating etc - I could not se my way to getting any decent thruput with a single operator - we do run high production here , most of my lasers are busy or fully occupied 8 hrs a day.
As to pricing , I don't know the exact quality of the system , but we can get a ND yag , with a 50 w av power , 7000m/sec . 11cm x 11 cm marking field , with chillers , positioning tables etc - from china , at about $25 000. From the same co there is a diode pumped laser , nd3 yag , also 50 w complete with computer , chiller , positioning table for $40k.
These are FOB prices and I have NO idea of the quality of the system , backup etc. We have been qoted higher prices locally for lesser power. Around $100k for a zenith 25 w installed with positioning systems etc. Gcc , a chinese co whose CO2 lasers I use , have a galvo yag marker in their line up
http://www.laserproi.com/en/mark_prod_model_detail.php?ID=English_040920042129#spec
and the local guys have quoted us $53 000 installed.
I suspect in this field you get what you pay for as with most things.
For $50k , we could get 2 1/2 x 30 w explorers or for $100k a medium powered largish format cutting system.
As to power , well that too seems a sort of you cant compare apples to apples field, I have seen all sorts of measurements like peak powers , average powers , tem beam quality etc etc and am totally confused
I have also seen some variance in what power is required to cut stainless , beam dynamics offer a 500w and dont really intimate it would cut more than 1.5mm stainless steel?
The real reason we would get a yag is to be able to mark metals , pvcs and various plastic etc with very high speed and compete in the ad specialities branding market concentrating on high volumes.
This is a seasonal industry and is pretty much cut throat in that there are cheaper ways of branding with far lesser captial costs (pad printing etc)
As david says , at least this is a very interesting discussion and I have not seen any definitive discussion on any forum with the specifics of YAG vs CO2 in these terms.
Regards
Rodney
From: laserman (MIKEMAC) [#39]
22 Mar 2005
To: Rodney Gold (RODNEY_GOLD) [#38] 22 Mar 2005
Rodney,
My times were done on Wood pens not applying Cerdec. There is no comparison to doing it that way Versus the Yag simply because you don't have to apply any secondary material.
I would not personally do any pens that way using the Co2's
From: Jim (JEARMAN) [#40]
22 Mar 2005
To: Rodney Gold (RODNEY_GOLD) [#38] 22 Mar 2005
Rodney,
Power in YAG lasers for marking and engraving applications isn't as confusing as it seems. A problem with YAG salesmen and literature is that it seems as though everyone is trying to "outspec" their competion by making their system seem so much superior because they are usually presenting their information to an audience that doesn't understand (and really should not be overly concerned with) things like peak power vs average power vs pulsewidth and so on and so on.
The same thing is true with things like top galvo speed. You are not going to engrave anything at 7000 m second because at that speed the laser doesn't have enough time to work on the material.
YAG laser markers aren't necessarily intuitive but nor are they that mysterious. The information just has to be presented in layman's terms.
Jim
From: Jim (JEARMAN) [#41]
22 Mar 2005
To: laserman (MIKEMAC) [#27] 23 Mar 2005
Hi Mike,
Nice to meet you.
I was waiting before I responded hoping that I would get some thru-put feedback from others but I guess not.
I suppose that the comparisons could go on and on regarding efficiencies of steered beam vs flying optics systems. A lot of it just comes down to what you're used to or what you already have and what tricks you've come up with to make the jobs faster. My laser career has been almost exclusively with steered beam systems so that's what I've built my bag of tricks around.
An application that is cumbersome for me is one that you mentioned...large panels. We process many of them and in order to do them we have to break the information up into segments that fit inside the marking field. On one particaular panel, for example, we break it into 4 segments therefore requiring 4 setups. I would be really curious to know if the time for the multiple setups outweighs the speed advantage of a steered beam system when compared to a slower flying optics system but with only one setup.
Any idea about how we could determine that? This is an ongoing job for us and we mark 500 to 700 panels a month.
From: Stunt Engraver (DGL) [#42]
22 Mar 2005
To: Cindy (CINDYM) [#20] 23 Mar 2005
Cindy,
Are you talking about the 3-D images inside optic crystal?
If so, I'm not sure what type of laser is used, but it's more a (probably not the proper term) a "Timed-Pulse" which makes the laser fire at a pre-specified depth within the glass.
David "The Stunt Engraver" Lavaneri
DGL Engraving
Port Hueneme, CA
From: Rodney Gold (RODNEY_GOLD) [#43]
22 Mar 2005
To: Stunt Engraver (DGL) [#42] 23 Mar 2005
You can sort of work out how long a flying optic laser would take to do a panel.
It scans left to right at a set speed and the dpi you use determines the top to bottom speed.
There are accellerations and decellerations and various optimising strategies that some drivers have , but lets say you run on average 45 inches per second left to right. (that would probably be the average speed of a 60-80 ips machine with accel and stopping and the overrun and thats a fast machine)
Lets say you have a 15" x 15" graphic
Being real optimisitc lets assume the laser can scan l-r in .3 secs
You would use 300 dpi or so (more likely 500) , so the laser can do a 15" x 1" swathe in 0.3x300 seconds or about 100 seconds.
15" - 1500 seconds or about 25 mins
Depending on whether the laser can skip white space etc , it might be quicker and if one has to run at less than 100% speed , it might be slower.
Some laser drivers will estimate time beforehand , our doesn't (Or I havent seen it) but it does report time taken afterwards
We often use this feature for costing and production , do one and then extrapolate for the whole job.
What REALLY takes time is packing and unpacking , espcially if the customer is fussy and wants the product to look like it was shipped with the branding from the factory as you have to re wrap very carefully.
From: Jim (JEARMAN) [#44]
23 Mar 2005
To: Rodney Gold (RODNEY_GOLD) [#43] 23 Mar 2005
I assume that your posting was in response to my panel engraving time question because it referenced a 3 d engraving post.
Do flying optics systems normally engrave in a raster file mode as opposed to a vector file mode? Unless you are doing something like a photograph or an image that has grey scaling, why is raster mode preferable to vector mode on flying optics systems?
From: Rodney Gold (RODNEY_GOLD) [#45]
23 Mar 2005
To: Jim (JEARMAN) [#44] 23 Mar 2005
From: Harvey only (HARVEY-ONLY) [#46]
23 Mar 2005
To: Jim (JEARMAN) [#44] 23 Mar 2005
Raster is the only way to get a filled area. If you do enough vector lines to simulate a fill, you are basically doing a raster anyway.
It all depends on the size of the filled area compared to the total size as to if it pays to do the additional setup to vector fill an area. Usually it does not pay at all.
Lettering is raster or it looks like a drag engraving.
Show messages: 1-6 7-26 27-46 47-66 67-78