There is no way to define the material cost for non formlabs material, at least for SLS.
This is a useful tool and limiting it to formlabs materials only does not leave a good taste in my mouth.
Are there drawbacks to taking the material cost/gram and multiplying it by the weight of the models? Another method could be taking the cost estimate on Formlabs materials and multiplying by the percentage cost of the other material. For example, for PA12, if the other material is $80/kg you could multiply the preform estimate by .8
the drawback is that i paid $13k to use this machine with other materials and Formlabs has crippled pieces of the software for third party materials.
I am capable of doing the math, that isnt the problem.
1 Like
Ahh I see, I get it. I did not know the open material mode cost $13K.
Just realized that the Sift hopper ultrasonic sensors (not the scales) disabled in open material mode too. This means the sift isnt tracking if i have enough material to fill a cartridge. If it runs short, the mix ratios are going to be fun.
Plus, the dosing offset function is disabled, though CS assures me this is a bug and not a “feature”.
Sure feels like i am being punished.
You didn’t already feel that way when you had to pay $13k for a “feature” clearly designed to be anti-consumer?
I understand that manufacturers reduce machine costs with the profit from material sales factored in, This is how XYZ has operated for as long as i have been in AM.
The $13k OMM fee for the fuse 1+ is a few years worth of material profit being paid up front. Assuming that the machine would be a flat $13k more expensive for everyone if it was open source out of the box.
But yes, paying extra to use materials that Formlabs doesnt offer yet hurts my soul.
I hope Formlabs is paying attention to Flame Retardant materials. There are too many small aviation companies that need retrofits and adaptions to old aircraft with new products. Unfortunately, the flame retardant materials that are already certified for the fuse 1+ are abroad and not locally available for 6 more months.
1 Like
@CARobertM I’m sorry to hear you’re having a poor experience.
I’m the Product Manager for PreForm. I’ll be looking into how we can support the cost calculator for OMM prints.
1 Like
This is just one of the undisclosed shortcomings of OMM.
Its honestly easier to just lie to the machine than it is do things correctly. I solved my own problem last week.
Can I ask how you solved it?
1 Like
You can ask but i wont answer.
2 Likes
I’ll try anyways - @CARobertM how were you able to solve this problem?
We want every single user to have an amazing experience with our products. I’m sorry yours has been below expectations. Please DM me if you’d like to schedule a 1:1 call. I’d be happy to take your feedback and try to improve your experience.
2 Likes
Adding a tool to create a OMM profile in the cost calculator page seems like a good start. Users shouldn’t have to do what i do to have a good experience.
@hasank I think the fear here is that whatever workaround was used will either void the warranty or worse be blocked in a future firmware update like the reusable resin cartridges were.
I understand that a business needs to make a profit, but if you truly want your customers to have an amazing experience the first step would be to stop doing stuff like this an be more open.
2 Likes
Best Answer!
I assume you already are using some third party material, that is unable to run with stock settings already there. It truly sucks to have limited options when running a third party material, good to know about the sift.
I need to edit that post.
The scale for the cartridge is not disabled. The ultrasonic sensors in the hopper that estimate how much powder is available are disabled.
I’m told there are formlabs materials where these sensors are disabled to reduce false alarms of hoppers being full (which is a trivial issue that just pauses your sift and can be overridden). My 3rd party material works just as well as the n12 gf on the emitters. Disabling them without giving the user any option is lazy and demeaning.
They claim OMM is only for experts yet continue to treat us like idiots.
Simply to reduce costs, I think some users are willing to experiment with different solutions, which are not always in line with the manufacturer. So it’s understandable that not everything is shared openly.
We ourselves are also experimenting with different solutions to either increase efficiency or reduce costs. Some ideas may or may not be within Formlabs’ desired boundaries.
But this applies to all machines and devices in the industry. Everything is a price war somewhere…
I would agree with you if OMM did cost as much as it does.
OMM is poorly implemented and feels like I’m beta testing the program unknowingly
2 Likes
I definitely have to admit that I didn’t expect what you describe in terms of the availability of settings.
With an open printer, I would definitely expect all the functions and settings that the device otherwise has to be available to me. It’s just that these functions can all be freely adjusted.
I would expect the license to open up all possible parameters and setting options at once. An additional control panel or a new settings tab, so to speak, where slider options, click options and precise parameter fields open up, which can then be freely configured in order to be able to use all the technical possibilities that the devices have through sensors and mechanics.
The fact that functions are apparently now missing, which are otherwise available, is not in fact what I understand by an “open license”.
I can also understand Formlabs side here, probably out of the intention to still make certain decisions themselves to prevent certain application errors from occurring.
However, I would agree that it would be better to grant complete freedom regarding the devices and software when a said license is purchased, and to include a clause that any application errors are then attributable to the user.
@br4n_d0n that’s a fair point. We’ve had missteps in the past and are always trying to do better. I’m more than happy to jump on a call with anyone to get feedback and address concerns (feel free to DM me).
@CARobertM OMM is a new product - we’re still ironing out the kinks. You’re the type of expert users we do want to cater to so your feedback is extremely valuable. Feel free to reach out for a 1:1 call - I’d love to hear your feedback and feature requests.
@CARLAYERS additional control panel or a new settings tab the Print Settings Editor offers many settings & configuration options. What do you feel like is missing?
2 Likes