IC-142 Preliminary results


Bellow are some raw photos of my first test of IC-142.
Models were sliced with Print Studio because I don’t like the supersampling of Netfab very much.
I used the default IC profile with only modification the tray rotation speed, I reduced retract to 6 RPM and approach to 8 RPM.

I need to point out that a measurement of wall thickness modeled at .65mm measured .7mm with IC-142.

I should also add that working with IC-142 was very pleasant, the viscosity is quite low which (should) help more with printing, but it also makes it rinse easily. Grinding the supports was fantastic, the material is crisp so it does not clog the abrasives, and can even be polished. Although the black color helps with surface inspection, I don’t appreciate it very much. It kind of makes the model look cheap… If it was something maybe a deep purple instead it would be way more flattering and give added “value” to the model, not to mention it would make it distinct from other not castable materials. I realize it’s vain to discuss colors of a sacrificial material, but I find even these details are important in my line of work.

After the unsuccessful print, I repeated the job with B9E, using the same tray, re-shuffling the pieces and adding a couple more. The walls I measured came at the modeled thickness of .65mm.

I m looking forward to read CPS’s comments, as well as other users feedback.



Thank you so much for posting the printed result for IC-142. Do you think you can cast those rings you printed with IC-142 and let us know the outcome? When I tested IC-131, it printed great, but it did not cast well at all. Too much residue ruined everything.

Thank you again!



Thanks, Patrick,
I m going to send for casting after getting feedback from CPS on improving print success rate. I m suspecting it is the tray rotation speed, but I can’t afford to do endless tests. Since they are affiliated with Autodesk I think it is up to them to provide optimal print settings.


You can use different/much cheaper test method that we use. Post Cure the model completely and just blow torch the fully cured model slowly. B9Y will melt down completely without any residue. IC-131 (least when I tested) will leave burned residue. Please see the picture of IC-131 (tested version) and B9Y. On 2nd picture, B9Y shows almost completely liquified very similar to wax, but IC-131 (tested version) shows black ash from what is left from the burned model.


Hmm I can’t agree with this test method, naked flame in open space yields different results than investment burnout. Most importantly, liquification of B9Y does not guarantee ass free, the liquid just gets absorbed in your substrate, I do see where you are coming from though, its a 5 min test and it does give some results.

I don’t expect CPS to conduct field tests with casting, I expect them to conduct and share printing and curing tests, that exhibit: repeatability, definition, accuracy, post curing stress handling, etc


Liquified B9Y gets burned out during burn out cycle. We cast using B9Y with 100% success rate. Resins that leave a lot of ashes in open flame in open environment will have even harder time investment burnout. So I was just trying to see if you can burn one of the model that was made with IC-142 and check whether it leaves same kind of ashes as IC-131. Thank you,



OK, will do :slight_smile:


Thank you so much for your help!



On the right, B9Y liquified and evaporated almost completely.
On the left, the black went to black carbon residue and If I kept firing it would turn to white ash and fly away. I have no knowledge if white ash can be burned off. Somebody with knowledge on the subject can chime in.


Thanks for doing these tests! Tagging @CPS.



Thank you so much for doing to burning test. In our casting experience with IC-131, which it turns to black ashes and then white ashes, white ashes does not burn up at all, so casting did not go well. Maybe CPS can give us some insight how to use these casting resins “successfully”, and show us some casted samples if they have any.


I’m also pinging another user who has reported excellent results with IC131 to see if he can share his process.


Thanks Owen !

Before we reach casting performance, let’s get printing with IC resins sorted out first, shall we?
B9E is not a crisp resin, it requires a lot of supports and steeper angles to build successfully.
Working on anything that requires more supports than B9E is not a good option.


I have been printing and casting using IC-131 for about 8 months and have just open my second bottle. After I figured a system I have had great success with my ember printer and IC-131 resin. I am not sure what you are trying to accomplish with burning on the pad. If you have been taught to cast with wax, resin is a different ball game. Wax will melt and burn up at low temperature while resin started to burn out at about 700 F. the ash does not disappear, so I plan ways for the ash to escape when I am spurring up the piece. The kiln should have a air circulation of some sort it helps in the burn out. After my kiln has run its programmed run, I will blow the the pore hole with a low pressure air, about 20 psi, and the I vacuum it also. I usually put back in oven for a hour before I cast to get back up temperature.

Casting resin

Hey psengraver,
I notice this is your first post, where were you 8 months now when we needed you? :wink:
It sounds you have been using an unreleased product, were you part of the testing crew? If so, do you care to share your setup and burnout cycle?

I believe what patrickleephoto is trying to accomplish is to determinate if burnout residue of various resins is complete.
Granted, the test is not “of lab standards”, but it provides some indications.
I understand you blow and suck your flasks (not pun intended whatsoever), and this has been done (to my knowledge) since the late 90s by the instructions of a Japanese Stereolithography machine manufacturer by the name of Meiko.

Nowadays, there are materials in the market that offer little to no burnout residue. It’s not irrational for an Ember user to expect that property from his material supplier. If however, their formulation is more advanced in other aspects, at the very least they are expected to offer print settings and casting instructions during release. Not to mention case studies…

Like I mentioned above, let’s begin with repeatability, definition, accuracy, post curing stress handling, etc, and we can discuss casting later.
Bare in mind that the models I printed were as basic as they could ever be.
I am eager to try more demanding geometries once I receive product guidelines.
Those trays don’t come cheap…


I forgot to add:
Casting facilities in my area deal with the sum of resin models out there and need to have a setup and workflow that caters to all. In other words, the resin must match the established casting workflow for other resins.


hello psengraver
I have been working with IC-131 about a few months also and I have great success using the same thing as you do I blow out the flask with some air and vacuum it prey or to casting ,right now I get even better result with the pre cure using glycerin under the uv light for a few hours ,


psengraver & johan_309,

Can you let us know how many pieces (IC-131 models) do you normally cast? Thanks,



I would like to thank everyone for the warm welcome, as for prep before investing I spray the pieces with isopropyl alcohol. This gets in into the nooks and crannies, rinse with water and dry with compressed air, no more than 60 psi. then I put under a uv light for an hour or longer depending on the size, I just did a 2" piece which I left under the light for 4 hours and it casted great. I cast 3 or 4 pieces to a flask but I have done up to 24 small pieces at once. The key I have found is treeing it up so the ash has a way to escape.


There has been a lot of interest in our new casting resins so we wanted to give a bit more information on them.

We will be getting the TDS for all the resins on the website in the next few weeks. They’ll included standard model exposures to help with printing. Until then the IC131 prints at 2s a layer and the IC 142 prints well at 1.6s a layer.

Both resins were formulated for the Ember so the window life time will be greatly improved compared to other resins like DWS and similar to the PR57 series. The resins are also lower in viscosity than the prototyping resins making them easy to clean. The IC131 is a bit thinner than the IC142.

The IC131 occasionally had some cracking issues in some geometries but otherwise casted well. The IC 142 prints harder and faster than the IC131 and hasn’t exhibited the cracking in some the geometries that we had issues with. We did some casting with a local jeweler and found that thoroughly post curing the prints before casting gave the best results. We used a Dymax light box with a UV bulb for an hour on each side at about 30mW/cm2, but any procedure that gives a hard, scratch free surface will give good casts.

I want to thank psengraver for the detailed information on casting. As we typically don’t do the casting in house it is was good to get the information from someone more experienced. We thank everyone for their comments on the resins and will keep them in mind for future generations.