So I am looking for a better castable resin and want to make use of my awesome Form 2.
Open Mode disables tank heating and also disables the wiper. Which is like, a problem for me potentially. Because then I see the prints failing more often if that is the case.
If I were to get a resin from someone else, and put it in a Formlabs cartridge (of a resin of most similar color and consistency), and I set the printer to run with the resin that matched the resin cartridge, would that technically fool the printer into working normally with the 3rd part resin?
This is extremely important for me. I am looking into CP203+ resin from Rapidshape and the Tiger Burgundy resin from Romanoff. They are the 2 resins that cast the absolue best with my casters in the diamond district.
You can–however, you could potentially cause some problems
First off–the resin level sensor detects level based on some chemical properties of the resin, so it’s possible that a different resin could cause the tank to overfill and cause a spill. Any problems like that that happen while using third-party resins are not covered under the warranty, since Formlabs can’t guarantee that the third-party resin will work properly and the issue could be caused by the resin.
He is somewhat correct. There is a capacitive sensor behind the vat that reads the level. From what some of us have discovered, it is dependent on viscosity and conductivity of the resin formula. It appears to also open the valve for a set time, which would be problematic if the resin is thinner or thicker. It would either overflow or not fill enough. These are simply facts that have been learned via trial and error combined with the hardware of the machine.
Again, filling isn’t your only or main concern. Each setting has a specific cure time, speed and such. You would have to consult the manufacturer or find out through experimentation which settings work. In some cases certain resins can’t be used at all in the Form 2. The only way to run automatic mode to test each resin setting, is to have an empty cartridge of each type.
It’s too saggy/floppy/soft. Larger pieces end up distorting, and even small rings that have flat under-bezels have the first few layers of the under bezel peel as a result of the lack of stability. it’s not fun. Then the curing is a bit of a nightmare to say the least. With all those silly nail polish curing sets. Casters in my area refuse to cast with it due to the poor burnout. and refusal to change their burnout schedule. It makes the machine impractical.
I think a major improvement would be to make the resin harder. Maybe the Formlabs curing machine they made will fix those problems but I’ll be damned if I have to spend a $750 to do that. The machine already has not delivered on expectations and now I have to pay more money. Ridiculous.
I am thinking of purchasing a F2 primarily to use for castabel resin, so I have been looking around on the net to see how its working for people.
It very interesting and some what perplexing to see how some apparently serious jewelers seem to be using the machine successfully and then there are many trials and tribulations with the castable resin.
I have heard about the burn out issues and the need for a maximum cure, and then the issue with out side casters not wanting to bother with a tricky burnout.
But still there seem to be some people successfully casting rings, and some that are having problems, I am trying to understand exactly why that is? Any ideas?
I went on the Bluecast resin company’s Facebook page and they have may pics of intricate larger rings coming out of the form 2, and then pics of the castings, and apparently their resin does not need curing.
I love to hear comments on what really is the route to success using a castabel resin with the form 2.
It seems rather that your casters refusal to change for you is what is impractical here. Many people in the industry have no issue at all with the resin. Calling a product unusable or poor quality because you are trying to mix it with an improper burnout schedule isn’t really fair.
As for the cure chamber, that isn’t going to help to be honest, just make it easier. Their goal is a seamless system, but a $45 cure chamber done right gives the same result.
People having great success have a dedicated setup with proper setups and perfected processes. Maybe take a look at the big picture and adjust accordingly.
You said you outsource the casting process. Most people that use it as you are trying to have all the equipment in-house and set how they need for their process and materials. This seems to be the only breakdown in your process.
I was not the original poster, but I think there are service bureaus that have been successful with FL castabel resin. But I would venture to say that many are focused on more volume that what most FL users might need.
I would love to hear more from some casters and jewelers on this subject.
The thing is, I work in the heart of the jewelry industry on 47th street in Manhattan. If the majority of the casters refuse to do it, that is the industry refusing the product. If the heart of the industry doesn’t accept it, the product fails whether it works for some rando in the midwest or not.
Think about it this way; you have all different methods of getting to a destination. You can either take the train, or hike there through woods and over a mountain. You take the train, right? Same concept with switching to the resin. It requires longer burnout, and more expensive investment (plaster for the casting negative). Which means it’s a pain in the ass for a business trying to meet the demands of a demanding industry, and also it’s not cost efficient for people who want to make jewelry in sterling silver (they pass the cost of the investment on to the consumer). So it’s pointless for a majority of the people in the industry to use nomatter what you or anyone else’s opinion is lol.
I can’t use it for those reasons. It’s unfortunate but it’s true. Now I have the printer and I can’t even really use it for anything unless I find another resin that does work. Thems the facts.
Also, it is definitely poor quality. I have worked with other castable resins on different SLA printers and many of them do not have the same saggy/floppy issue the FL resin has. It’s just not good enough yet. Not trying to say FL is a bad company or anything, but the fact is, if you buy a product to use it for something, and it doesn’t work, that’s what most would consider a bad product.
Idk if anyone from Form Labs reads this but if they do, I hear Rapidshape Resin works very very well. It’s the only resin one of my casters likes. They refuse Envisiontec resins. They refuse FL resin. The only problem is they won’t sell me that resin unless I own one of their $30,000 machines. They should get that shit and reverse engineer it lol.
This might be a beggars cant be choosers kind of thing, but their printers seem to be very low res compared to the Form 2. Do you think that is a limitation of the printer? Or is it also maybe because of the resin? My pieces require lots of detail. I would also be curious as to the post print process.
We keep a close eye on feedback like this and we’re working to improve our Castable Resin for better outcomes. The most common cause of issue we see with the Castable Resin is inadequate curing and for some parts, 4 hours on each side for a total of 8 hours can be necessary for a full-cure. We’re releasing an updated list of casting houses that work with Formlabs Resins shortly so stay tuned!
Re-filling cartridges with 3rd party resins can cause damage to the machine. Differences in viscosity and capacitance will throw off the level sense and can lead to print failures or spills. Heating 3rd party resins can potentially off-gas harmful compounds. For 3rd party resins, using Open Mode tends to be the safest option.
Good to hear a response on the castable resin. Also excited about new resins to go with the new vats!
In regards to the 3rd party resins, we as a community, have done a lot of research and work with one another and the suppliers to sort out our best options. We understand the desire to not fully disclose or open machines due to risks,. At the same time, if we have done testing and research; shouldn’t we be able to choose what we do with a product we paid for? Whether or not it is simply to keep us paying a premium for resins or not, the option would be nice and allow for more advances in printing.
Just a community view. You guys have a great machine and support so I’m happy either way.
When I read up on the MDS for the castable material, I read that even with properly cured pieces, the burnout schedule would be longer than traditionally casted materials ( I think the difference was from 8 hours to 12). Also upon speaking to many casters, I read that there is a specific, much more expensive investment that was recommended.
Do you think if the parts were cured extra extra long, that there would be better results? I can only speak for myself but using one of those salon thingies, I would cure for 2-3 hours and those pieces casted, but there would be other issues like the investment would crack and leave a lot of extra metal around it.
I am also curious as to the process of working with casters. Do you guys reach out and speak to specific casters and work with them? I use PAFCO in nyc. They work with many resins and even have a specific machine for it now. They like experimenting. Might be a good caster to reach out to. I would ask for Paul (the owner)