Week 3: Computer-controlled cutting

Computer-controlled cutting week. For my individual assignment I built a parametric hex snowflake construction kit in Onshape, exported DXF, laser-cut the pieces, and assembled them into a 3D snowflake. The group section covers Chaihuo laser characterization (kerf, clearance, safety). My earlier violin bracket laser work stays on Week 2.

Individual assignment: parametric hex snowflake kit

Task and why a snowflake kit

The individual brief asks for a parametric construction kit that accounts for laser kerf and can be assembled in more than one way without glue. I wanted something small enough to iterate on one sheet of plywood but still teach me the same lesson as a big press-fit project: if board thickness or kerf changes, I should change one variable, not redraw every slot by hand.

I chose a six-fold snowflake: an inscribed hexagon hub with six rectangular spokes that slot into matching partners. Chamfers on the tabs make the first push-fit less brutal. After the cut I could stack the pieces flat, fan them into a star, or build the full 3D snowflake shown in the hero photo—it is the same kit, different assemblies.

How this page meets the assignment

Mapped to the Fab Academy computer-controlled cutting checklist:

Requirement Evidence on this page
Linked group assignment / kerf learning Group section; kerf variable in Onshape
Parametric 2D design documented Onshape workflow (variables and constraints)
Laser-cut construction kit Laser cut video; assembly
Original design files + hero shots DXF download; finished snowflake
Vinyl cutter Not documented yet on this page — I will add it when that cut is done.

Parametric design in Onshape

I modeled entirely in Onshape as a single sketch driven by variables. The screenshots follow the order I actually built it: hex hub first, then spokes sized with kerf, then chamfers, then export.

Variables I used (names match my feature tree):

  • diameter — controls the inscribed hexagon (hub); I started at 40 mm for the inner geometry.
  • kerf — width of each rectangular spoke tab, tied to laser kerf compensation from the group tests.
  • length — overall length of each rectangular spoke arm.
  • chamfer_distance1, chamfer_distance2 — drive the chamfers on joint edges so press-fit assembly is easier than square corners.

Step 1 — inscribed hexagon hub

I sketched a regular hexagon from an inscribed circle and bound its size to diameter so the whole hub scales together.

Onshape sketch: inscribed hexagon with diameter variable set to 40 mm
Figure 1: Inscribed hexagon; diameter drives the hub (40 mm in this capture).

Step 2 — six spokes with kerf and length

I added six rectangles for the snowflake arms, set width = kerf and length = length, then constrained each rectangle to the hex hub with coincident and center constraints so the pattern stays symmetric when I nudge parameters.

Onshape: six rectangles constrained to hexagon with kerf and length variables
Figure 2: Spoke rectangles tied to kerf and length, constrained to the hub.

Step 3 — chamfer variables and geometry

Square slot corners fought me on the first dry fit, so I introduced chamfer_distance1 and chamfer_distance2 and applied chamfers to the joint edges instead of redrawing the slots.

Onshape: chamfer_distance1 and chamfer_distance2 variables applied to edges
Figure 3: Chamfer variables added before cutting the part.
Onshape: chamfers complete with constraints so parametric edits stay valid
Figure 4: Chamfers finished; extra constraints so later parameter edits do not break the sketch.
Onshape: adjusting chamfer_distance2 parameter
Figure 5: Tweaking chamfer_distance2 to balance fit vs. ease of assembly.

Step 4 — DXF export for the laser

From the finished sketch I exported a flat DXF for the lab laser workflow (same file linked under Design files). I checked scale and units in the export dialog before walking the file to the cutter PC.

Onshape export dialog for DXF file
Figure 6: DXF export from Onshape — hex-snowflake-kit.dxf on disk.

Laser cutting

I transferred the DXF to the laser workstation, picked cut settings for our approved plywood (power/speed from lab notes and the group characterization table), and ran the job. The clip below is the cut on the machine. Useful when I need to remember engrave-vs-cut order and how long six duplicate spokes take on one sheet.

Video: week03-laser-cutting.mov: transferring the file and cutting the snowflake kit.

Assembly and finished snowflake

Off the bed I deburred tabs with a knife, then pressed pairs together starting from the hub. Chamfers helped more than I expected. The square-edged trial in CAD felt fine until real kerf tightened the slots. The assembled star and the final 3D snowflake are different views of the same kit.

Laser-cut snowflake pieces assembled flat into a star pattern
Figure 7: Flat star assembly — one way to put the same parts together.

Finished 3D snowflake

Finished 3D laser-cut snowflake construction kit standing assembled
Figure 8: Finished 3D snowflake — final individual assignment result.

Design files (download)

Flat layout exported from Onshape. If the browser opens the DXF instead of downloading, use “Save as”.

Reflection

Building the kit in Onshape forced me to treat kerf as a real dimension, not a note on the group page. Linking slot width to kerf meant when the group comb test nudged my value, I could regenerate the DXF instead of hand-editing six slots. Chamfers were the other lesson: parametric sketches only stay pleasant to assemble if you plan for entry angles, not just nominal width.

What I still owe this week is the vinyl cutter part of the assignment and tighter numeric rows in the group table (power/speed/kerf numbers next to this exact plywood lot). For the final project I may reuse the same hub-and-spoke pattern for decorative panels once I know the machine settings by heart.

Group assignment

Guangzhou (Chaihuo) — group documentation: laser-cutter characterization, joint tolerance tests, and GitLab-based collaboration.

Abstract

At Chaihuo we documented how our local laser cutter behaves in practice: focus versus cut quality, usable power levels, speed for cut versus mark, pulse frequency or effective scan rate (as the machine exposes it), measured kerf, joint clearance for press-fit or slot joints, and material types the site approves. We also ran a laser tolerance study (comb test and spacing sweep) to find reliable gaps for finger joints and inlays. Photos and short clips from the runs are in the repo via our usual GitLab workflow (fork → branch → merge request).

1. Safety training and approved use

We completed the lab’s laser safety training before cutting. This section will list who signed off and the Chaihuo-specific rules (ventilation, banned materials, fire watch, supervision).

2. Machine characterization

We recorded focus, power, speed, frequency/rate, kerf, joint clearance, and materials in a table, with notes on how each value was measured (calipers, test coupons, close-up photos, and so on).

Parameter Notes / method
Focus Relate focus setting to edge quality; record nominal vs. best visual cut.
Power / speed / rate Ranges used for cut vs. mark; align with control UI labels for your machine.
Kerf Measured from test cuts or comb coupons (calipers / photo overlay).
Joint clearance Press-fit or slot joints: gap that fits reliably on this cutter.
Approved materials List materials allowed at Chaihuo for laser processing.

Lab photos (cutting workflow)

Plywood stock placed and aligned on the laser work area
Figure 1: Stock placed and aligned on the work area.
Laser machine powered on at the bench
Figure 2: Power-on and bench state.
Laser cutter control software or panel showing job parameters
Figure 3: Operator UI — verify power, speed, and job parameters for your machine.

3. Tolerance testing (e.g. comb test)

We cut comb coupons and swept slot spacing to see which gaps press-fit cleanly on this machine. The photos below show kerf, joint clearance, and the coupons we kept for the group table.

Laser cutting job in progress
Figure 4: Cut in progress.
Finished laser-cut part on the bed
Figure 5: Finished part — add caliper readings or close-ups of tolerance coupons.

4. Collaboration: GitLab and the Chaihuo site

We used the usual fork and merge request flow so photos and tables could be reviewed before they landed on the Chaihuo group site.