Reify3D Forum

so is anyone else having this problem , this is the 3rd file I grow ( diff. file ea. time ) that Iv had to redesign , having to space the prongs out more quite a bit and scales just the prongs thicker in order to get the right sz , I'm starting to see a pattern with all my SW models ?? is this normal ? is there a way to fix this , I don't want to just scale it in contour because the other stuff seems ok , just the heads are what I want to change , or should I say , keep the same size as I designed it

look at the upper left hand corner to see the actual design measurement , it's highlighted

its messing up my castings , I noticed it after the stones don't fit anymore and had to redesign and recast

Yes I have noticed it also. But I think it's also casting shrinkage. Before I would increase my ring size. My print was right on the size but after casting, it was 1/2 sz smaller. I just did a 6 diamond band. Had to redesign it to make stones a good .4mm larger to get a cast that fit correct. My B9 Emerald green did the same. Just about the same as if I was milling them.

I think the shrinkage is too much , I am use to doing a 1.5% scale , this is .86 mm off , the last ring I did was designed for 2mm channel set band and came out to needing 1.5 mm ea. , in one stone no big deal but in a 3/4 tcw band , well it changed dramatically , dont know whats happening , I notice it most in prongs , they seen to come out very thin , I have to design extremely thick to grow normal size , just wondering if Im the only one having this problem

rsaldivar wrote:I think the shrinkage is too much , I am use to doing a 1.5% scale , this is .86 mm off , the last ring I did was designed for 2mm channel set band and came out to needing 1.5 mm ea.

Have you printed a calibration block, measured it, and then in SC entered Scale Adjustment in X and Y?

How and how long are you post curing the prints?

9.90 min. in the b9 machine

I'm noticing this as well. I did a side by side comparison with the same ring in emerald. In Contour these were set at the same scale, the only thing I changed was the resin in the vat. Printed the soluswax first, then printed with the emerald, then printed again with the soluswax with a longer exposure (4s on each layer at 20z) Prong tips in the CAD are 1.0mm. Prong tips in emerald printed out at .98-1.0mm. Prong tips in the SolusWax printed out at 0.68-0.73mm. (Longer exposure prongs were 0.73)

Also, I did not cure the SolusWax at all, just cleaned in Iso alcohol for 15 sec, dried with compressed air, then measured the prongs.

Projector is an InFocus with the bulb having less than 100 hours on it. I'm not sure what variable (could be something on my end) is causing this, but for me there is a definite difference in scale between the two.

You may need to review you settings and set up. The quality print on both rings is awful. You can do way better prints on a nicely zeroed solus. Marc.

but wouldn't that only clean up the detail , What about the shrinkage aspect of it ,
what I'm doing now is designing at exact measurements using zero nug on all stones , going to the thicker prong diameter that I think still looks good , and when I'm ready to print , I scale it in contour to 105% , seems to be the best compromise for me , but still is not a 1 to 1 ratio

In any case,The soluwax did print much better, the filigree on the green is all clogged.
Regarding your question "What about the shrinkage aspect of it". I would leave it to the moderator of the site. He is the highest authority to troubleshooting process.