Also placing the thickest supports do the trick. Do not use thin supports with this material. - A lot of the work I do has pretty fine detail and the thick supports left lots of cleanup on the piece. Also, because of the delicacy of the material, I found it was prone to breaking as I removed the thicker supports, especially with smaller pieces.

Well the all idea is not to use additional phases like rubber molding. In that case why do I need printer for? I can get the form in wax from designer and just do regular casting than. No point. - The idea is to provide the highest quality product to my customer with the materials and tools I have at my disposal. That's the point. The end result is most important. I also run a wax mill, a Roland JWX-30 4-axis Wax Milling Machine, and milling machines are limited by where the cutter can reach. 3D printers don't have these limitations, allowing for more complex and detailed designs while cutting down on build time and assembly after casting. In the case of mass manufacturing, you will need a master mold anyway for repeated castings. I still use both the 3D printer and the wax mill depending on the job requirements. Same way I have multiple hammers in my bench. One does not replace the other, they both have their uses depending on what the job requires.

The posphate based investment seems to do the trick but it is very difficult to divest. I do it with screwdriver and hammer but.... comeon! should I pay for divesting machine because their recommended investment do not work? - If you don't like working with it, then don't. Platinum casters do it everyday, and I agree it is difficult to remove, which is why I use molds. I didn't want to buy a divesting machine either, so I figured out a workaround using the materials and tools at my disposal to achieve the desired result. Molding allows me to achieve a high quality product, utilizing the complexity 3D printing offers, with the tools already available at the shop.

I tried the recommended schedule for Plasticat - faled with the surface quality. I tried to extend the time twice - no results. I am getting rough surface. - Extended burnouts didn't help for me either. I was limited to a 6-8 hour burnout due to the limitations of the shop I work in. FTX Cast does require extended curing. Thicker pieces usually contained uncured resin inside, which was causing porosity and investment breakdown during burnout. I would extend the curing time of your prints considerably before casting, until the light-green shade of your print is completely gone. It should turn to a pinkish-white color when it's properly cured.

Any ideas on the chemical composition of the materials? this may help getting the correct temperature ladder which may help avoiding that explosive burnout which supposidly ruins the inner surface. - With FTX Green, expansion starts at around 800F (426C). Since FTX Cast is still a thermoplastic, I would imagine expansion will start around the same temperature. As far as the chemical composition, you would have to talk to a chemist on that one.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not singing the praises of the Projet and its materials, but this is what I had to work with. If money is no object, by all means buy the phosphate-bonded investment, the vacuum mixer, and the divesting machine. It cuts down a potentially 10-14hr burnout down to 2 hours and provides a consistent high quality product. But if you're working within a strict budget, like I was, molding was a happy middle-ground allowing me to utilize the complexity and shortened build times the 3D printer offers, using the tools already available in the shop. You just have to decide what's the best use of your time, effort, and expense.