I decide to start a new thread in the hope that a bunch more Form4 users can join and see how we can get the Form4 to print reliable, functional parts that are dimensionally accurate. At this stage I am just burning through resin which I am footing the bill for, with very little success or mixed results. With a little luck Formlabs can chime in and give some advice.
Below are some photo’s of my latest attempt in getting a simple enclosure printed. As printing at 30-45 degree angles one two axis left me with model showing more obvious layer lines than my UM printers, I decided to hit the “MAGIC” button. Now if this is anything like AutoRoute in just about any ECAD software, then I know it would be useless but I was running out of ideas.
This is how the “Magic” button orientated and supported to model.
At first glance, not to bad at all. No real visible layer lines (compared tot my previous prints). Some extra 'wet" resin spots but I will chuck that up to me not know what I am doing.
Some artifacts visible on the last few layers, but I can live with this. Suppose they will be less pronounced if I drop to 25µ, but that will print drastically slower??
And finally the “it was too good to be true” part.
There should be a mountain post where the red arrow is pointing into which the second part of there enclosure attaches to. I’ll admit, it only has a wall thickness of 1mm but that is a physical contrait I need to deal with as it needs to protrude through the mounting holes of other components. It was there for a while, and then it wasn’t. It was so “thin” it almost looked like it was transparent and simply touching it broke it in pieces. So printing this model at a nearly vertical position was good for the layer lines, but disastrous for pretty much everything else. It had severe case of that “wavy pattern” where all supports were attached (and I am not talking about nibs left by the supports) which I had to spend a good 20mins post processing with a Dremel and well, and the mounting posts broke off. So I consider this a failed print.
Sorry for tagging couple of people, just really hoping to get this thread going and hopefully catch the attention of Formlabs. Maybe they will see there are some people really interested in making this printer what they claim it to be, a printer for printing functional parts, reliably (unless I misunderstood)
It’s a pleasure to meet you! My name is Shiden, and I work at Formlabs as an Innovation and Community Manager. I’m happy to assist you in achieving a result that ensures you are fully satisfied with both the machines and the materials.
I’m confident we can address the current issue and significantly improve both the accuracy and reliability of your prints.
To achieve the best possible results, I generally recommend avoiding the “One Click Print” feature in PreForm. Personally, I do a lot of complex printing on our technologies and have never used this feature, particularly because many of my prints involve intricate models where it’s important to avoid support structures on certain surfaces. The automated orientation doesn’t always account for that level of detail.
So, my first suggestion would be to spend more time manually generating support structures. Be mindful that support touch points are not placed directly on sharp edges, and orienting large / flat surfaces at an incline of 10–30º drastically increases success rates. Reducing surface area minimizes the forces exerted on the print as the build platform raises with each layer.
My second recommendation is to decrease the layer thickness if this is not a time-sensitive project. Which material are you using, and what layer thickness? Generally, 50 microns should yield great results in your scenario.
For circular openings or cylindrical features with tight tolerances, I suggest orienting them as vertically as possible relative to the build platform.
To support you further, I’d be happy to print your file on my machine and share the results with you. I can also offer to hop on a meeting where we can discuss your part and its orientation together.
Thank you for the response, it is much appreciated. So far my experience in using the Form4 has been good, it is just the results that are lacking at this point.
To confirm, I do not use this feature… EVER. I did one now out of desperation to see whether the Auto function might do a better job at orientating and supporting than I would do. I will confess, I do use the “Auto Generate Support” function as I am new to SLA printing, but I have added some supports (or remove in some cases) with the edit function.
Ah ok, I did not know this. I actually did place them on edges as my finding was that if I place them on flat areas I get this “wavy” texture on the flat area that is really hard to sand out.
I tried having the larger flat are at a 30-40% tilt (with reference to the build platform) but this yielded severed layer lines, see below:
These were done at 50 microns and the orientation for both was more to less the same. The material used is Standard V5 resin. I have tried Grey, Black and Clear but the results are very much the same.
I can appreciate that yes, the problem is they will usually be perpendicular the the large flat areas. so orientating them to an almost vertical position to the build platform will mean I will have large flat areas almost parallel to the build platform
Let’s do it! I’ve accepted your LinkedIn request, so I finally have your contact details. I’ll reprint it as soon as you send me the file and will make sure to document how I oriented it and why for our meeting.
Looking forward to it!! I have another meeging this week with a potential client and would be great if I can be comfortable with the fact that I am indeed able to provide them with decent prints.
I had to upload the lid ad a STEP file as the STL is too large, the forum will not let me upload it. The gap on the one side is intentional… I am designing a sort of a light pipe to expose the LED on the PCB on the side of the enclosure.
@eaglechen suggested trying out Precision model resin, but I am afraid it will increase the pricing of these parts by too much. Aside from the cost, the color will also be a problem.
Just a heads up…Formlabs support does not actively monitor and respond to support requests on the forum here in the same way that they do through their support emails. So it’s always better to email their support rather than post here (based on my experience).
That being said, I have a couple of thoughts on these issues though I do not own a Form 4 yet.
I bet those stepped layer lines are a result of aliasing. Either along the XY (which I assume Formlabs would have implemented anti aliasing for) or the Z (which perhaps they haven’t implemented). Something that I’m sure can be improved upon with software updates. Those parts printed on a Form 3 would likely not show the same kind of stepping.
The layer lines on your top enclosure look like the part is moving during peeling and not returning to the exact same spot. You may need to add additional supports or step by the layers one by one to see what is happening.
I’ll admit… I used “auto generate supports” for this. As I am new to SLA I figured it would do a better job at it than I would
I left Density at 1.00 but did adjust the Touch Point size to 0.85. The model was still firmly attached to all supports even after curing. I know this as it took a reasonable amount of effort to get it off.
Ah ok thanks for letting me know, I was not aware. I would think at least there were some mediators or MVPs that would be actively involved
Probably not the answer you are looking for but it might be worth considering a cheap backup printer. While i can’t speak specifically to issues you are experiencing with Form, if you have clients that depend on your services, it’s something to think about. We had a very expensive resin printer that has now been down for 2 months. When it did “work” it was barely functional with part failure after failure for a variety of reasons, some not even explainable. We got tired of pulling our hair out and bought an Anycubic Photon M7 Pro for ~$500. It is by no means an industrial printer but I can tell you after a few days of dialing it in, we’ve printed a lot more successful parts on this printer than we ever did in almost a year of owning the other one. Quite honestly, it’s put us in a position where we’re going to wait and see what happens in the DLP market. Ideally, we’d love to have something that can print in volumes of the 3L but we also want a reliable machine that doesn’t require constant tweaking. At the end of the day, a 5L jug of loctite 3443 costs more than the AnyCubic printer so as long as this continues to be reliable for us and allow us to print 90% of the parts we need, we’re probably going to stay with this for now.
So far my Form4 has had no prints fail if we are talking about prints not printing at all or not printing completely. I have just been struggling to get parts printed in what I would expect from a high end SLA printer. If successful prints mean prints I would send to the client, then sadly my numbers are around 50%
My reasons for buying SLA as apposed to more UM printers, is that I needed faster print times and aesthetically more pleasing prints. This is easy enough to achieve with prints that do not have large flat surfaces and square corners. The issue is that most of what I need to print is exactly that, enclosures for PCBs. Try as you may, they will have larger flat surfaces somewhere and they will have sides perpendicular to the others. More challenging even, they might on occasion have parts needing to line up and slot into other parts.
That is where I have been struggling. For backup I can fall back in my UM’s for now even though they seems to be a dying breed. Question would be, when they fail, do I invest in more FL machines on then another brand eg. Phrozen or Uniformation
Once you get more experience, you’ll learn to never trust “auto generate” or “one-click print”
I very often manually tweak and edit supports - not so much for print success but more for making my life easier during post processing. On simple parts I may use auto generate.
That being said, I always step through layer by layer and view how the part is built. This helps you really understand where failures may occur and help you catch problems before you actually print and waste resin.
You could always use one of the other software that generates better supports and see if you can export that as a model or at least take note of where it place them so you can manually do it.
I figured as much for the one-click option, but honestly thought autogenerate support should be decent, very much like never hard to fiddle with supports in CURA aside from the obvious settings.
For this I guess I will have to know what to look for to begin with I have not had failures (In FDM terms prints coming off the build plate, delimitation etc.) but I have had prints I would not dare to deliver to clients. So I guess those should be considered as failures
Could you recommend one which is considered to be “better” ??
Thank you for forwarding the files! I took some time after lunch today to start the print job using Grey V5 with a layer thickness of 100 microns. The orientation worked well, and the results came out great! You can still see some layer lines, but this can be optimized through orientation and support adjustments.
My key suggestion is to take extra care when setting up supports for client-facing parts. I’d be more than happy to set up a meeting this week to go over how I oriented the parts, send you the Form.file, and arrange another meeting with our Premium Service team if needed to ensure everything is set for high success. Formlabs is here to support you at any time!
We’re now connected on LinkedIn. Let’s set up a time a meeting for us.
Please remember to reach out to our service team first with any 3D printing questions, but don’t hesitate to contact me directly if you have any special projects going on.
Thank you for the effort, it is greatly appreciated!
If you could send me the Form.file I can maybe print one before our meeting to make sure it comes out the same? This way we can eliminated an any hardware issues on the machine?
I have some resin left I can use, will have more as soon as the local agents have stock again. I have wasted quite a bit, but I would rather “waste” a bit more and get this right
@Shiden
I think this actually illustrates the difficulty in showing that the problems the Form 4 presents and convincing anyone at Formlabs that they are real… Form 4 will always finish the print, however, the finished result will not be accurate. The visual result is impressive, I am not doubting the Form 4 being capable of that. However, the real test is:
Does the 2 parts fit together without large defects and gaps?
Very importantly, are the edges of the part straight, resulting in the holes of models lining up?
Is there any significant warping within the first inch of the model (expanding areas where first attached to supports) of that bend away from the part?
Obviously, this is not testable without taking the part off supports, putting a straight edge along it, and trying to fit the parts together. My gut feeling is that it will not actually fit.
I attached some red circles to the image above, showing that the edges do not appear parallel and more importantly the bottom edge appears to curve. I understand this is speculation since I dont have the part, but it is like this uphill battle to convince anyone at Formlabs that print settings and material changes are overdue and drive these inaccuracies. If this is Grey v5, I can almost guarantee this part will be warped across the long axis if printed this way… I have absolutely beat my head against this problem with many orientations I have tried and even created my own thread about it. I have had many cases of support agents convincing me there is no problem and I just need to reorient and retry despite warping occuring with every orientation; I even had prints done for me at Formlabs with repeated inaccuracies with support claiming a good print is produced simply because it looks ok from the surface despite the same inaccuracies existing.
At some point we need to stop beating our heads against the concrete and realize the print process and settings are deficient and we need some serious fixes. This printer currently cannot print any of its general purpose material with reliable accuracy I can count on and cannot print most of its engineering material library into a deliverable part.
Would be nice to see whether the edges are straight indeed. I have a meegin with @Shiden coming up to discuss the results, will be sure to ask about this
Just worth noting, the two holes on the top side are not in line, one is offset a little due the another internal component’s placement. At least in this print the layer lines are less obvious than mine. I will try to reprint this on my side in the same orientation.
Image below is a comparison between Chitubox auto support and Preform Auto support. The orientation was determined by Chitubox Auto orient. Chitubox is the one on the left.
The two parts fit together well, with no major defects. I only needed to sand down a few support touch points. There’s no significant warping on the flat surfaces, and you can place the parts flat on a table without wobbling, which indicates no visible warping and straight edges.
When printing housings, I aim to keep both parts aligned at similar angles to ensure even tension between the layers. I also avoid long straight lines and try to reduce the cross-sectional area between layers as much as possible.
(showing an example of how it could be oriented and supported afterward)
There is still room for improvement but I’m happy with the first print for Friedl, and he is as well. If you’re interested, I’d be glad to schedule a meeting to review your models in detail and discuss how to best support you.
I have not had failures (In FDM terms prints coming off the build plate, delimitation etc.) but I have had prints I would not dare to deliver to clients. So I guess those should be considered as failures 
