[ I got an email notification of a reply, but it appeared to be missing here. I gave it a few days to see if it would resolve, but it didn’t. Hence, here’s the message (Ike on 2018-03-05): ]
Hi there,
I’m sorry this has been taking so long! A while ago, I managed to print clear test parts in a few geometries: the flat slab, semicircle, and quarter-circle with a protrusion, as well as some equilateral triangle prisms.
I tried clear-coating them with a Krylon clear coat, but that didn’t work terribly well, so I think I’m going to try manually polishing them or curing a thin liquid layer of resin on them next to try and achieve smoothness and clarity.
I don’t know how soon I’ll be able to do those things.
Another option is I could just print a bunch more parts and send them to you, if you wanted to experiment with the clear-coat and abrasive polishing methods.
I’m curious how good the surfaces really need to be; with lasers, maybe you’ll be able to distinguish the proper direction of the beam from the light scattered from surface imperfections?
Regards,
Ike
I recommend curing a thin liquid layer on the surface. As long as any air bubbles can be removed, that should be best. The trouble with a coat of something else is that the refractive index of the coating will probably be different.
Re: precision, the way the test works is you see whether the laser is totally-internally-reflected or if it escapes. If the surface is roughened, then the beam is “blurry” and some portion of the beam does both. As I mentioned, I don’t have the tooling to try finishing any test objects myself.
I ordered a test print of a prism-like object a while back. I was not blown away by the quality, and indeed the surface appears to have been finished using some kind of sanding technique. Nevertheless, I believe it would be possible to use an equivalent-quality part to get a reasonable estimate. As a reasonable heuristic, if you can see objects fairly clearly through it, then the imaging quality is acceptable: