You are welcome Michael. That particular discussion was at the end of July this year and still no word from Snapmaker. Remember, that support claimed that the OD was 1.19 in response to an enquiry from @gpt1plon, who had wanted to obtain official figures.
They were apparently testing at the wrong frequency and support had adopted the ridiculous stance that a laser pointing down was less powerful (presumably meaning that the radiant energy was less damaging… which is completely false) than a beam where it was shining at the eyes directly.
The support worker who answered the question from @gpt1plon did not understand where the danger lies with high radiant energy levels added to the coherent light. They also confused the term transmittance (6.5%) with transmission and that level of ignorance means I would not trust them to sweep the floor.
It is more than 10 weeks since this important safety issue was raised and nothing has changed. Class IV laser energy is the most damaging. The links below are make very sobering reading.
It is completely unacceptable that Snapmaker do not take the safety of their customers seriously. Just another reason that I have sold my Snapmaker and am moving to a platform where safety happens to be the primary consideration.
All factors relating to the use of a laser have to be considered with class IV laser energy where the user is to have appropriate protection. My new laser is 4.2W and is covered by an optical shroud that can block that energy but it does not mean that I must not use the appropriate eye protection. My work practices must be commensurate with ensuring that I am exposed for the least possible time to a laser beam’s radiant energy when it is only some 1.5 metres from me.