I bought the F 2 a few months ago the resolution of 0.025 on the surface of the pieces and almost imperceptible work with jewelry the thinner the better the support because the parts are small more with this resolution the brackets do not complete there I have to use in some models The support of F2 that spend a lot of resin and the work to finish, before I bought an F2 already had a WDS 028 that we use 0.001 that we see the difference in the support and quality of printing and how long the printing for being small parts worth Only
These STL files with support at the beginning of 0.7mm and at the end with 0.3mm the WDS028 makes this impression without problems in F2 is no longer possible.This other file with F2 support already is much coarser and spends much more resin and the work in the withdrawal of the support.
Sorry for my English, which is not very good, but I have been correct.
Antonio, I looked at the DWS 028. If you want fewer supports for the print, I suggest changing the “support density” in preform to .8 or .75 and changing the “support point size” to .30 - .40. That should assist you in removing parts. For tighter clarity in the z-axis, formlabs would need to look at the peel process and see if the forces are affecting the layers, as well as look at an improved linear transport system. For resolution in the x-y plane, the spot size of the laser would have to be reduced (please!)
Antonio, vieron el DWS 028. Si quieres menos estructuras de soporte para el modelo, sugiero para cambiar el “support density” en preformas a 0,8 o 0.75 y cambio el tamaño a 0.30 - 0.40. Debe ayudar a quitar piezas. Para una mayor claridad sobre el eje z, formlabs debe ver el proceso de shell y si las fuerzas están afectando a las capas, así como investigar un sistema de transporte lineal mejorado. Para la resolución en el plano xy - láser de tamaño de punto tendría que reducirse (por favor!)
I would also not have printed the very last part in that orientation. You likely get print errors unless you place heavy supports.
Try rotating it by 20+ degree in multiple directions.
1 Like
I would hope they will include a fume extractor on the next printer. The fumes are likely a composition of micro particles from the resin. We built a box and hooked our extractor up to keep fumes from propagating through the room. It’d be nice if there were an integrated one though!
1 Like
I’m confused, why not simply bore a hole in the top of the orange cover and put your extraction tube there? what value does this massive box add? Seems kind of silly. I guess if it’s the warrantee you were worried about, but a new cover likely would cost a lot less that this massive plex box you have here…
Maybe because having a hole would allow for dirt to get into your expensive resin. And maybe ambient light will turn your liquid resin into a blob given enough time of idle time.
Who would want to drill a hole on that beautifully made acrylic cover anyways?
@ChristopherBarr - @aad345 has a point with the dust getting in under the box. Also, the fill tray protrudes from the enclosure, allowing fumes to escape the orange cover. Some more fumes come from around the cartridge tray as well. Consequently this massive box actually captures ALL of the fumes, not just some of them. Massive box wasn’t incredibly expensive, about the cost of two cartridges.
I’ll tell you, I don’t want to drill that orange cover either. Too pretty 
1 Like
Finally! Truth revealed! 
1 Like