text:
Shapeways: Bring your creativity to life in 3D http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php Shapeways: Bring your creativity to life in 3D Preventing Rejections - Update on Project Caterpillar http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=62565&th=12976#msg_62565 <![CDATA[So a typical product cycle goes like this: I design and refine a new product, print it, occasionally refine it more, print it again, post-process the print including paint, take good photos, upload them, spend some time getting the word out on my new product on message boards, and then the customers start purchasing it and Shapeways REJECTS THE PRINTS!. So all my time is wasted, my name is mud, and I look like a fool. And this has happened more than once. I'm well aware of the design rules and follow them, (thus the I get the prints first time around) but it doesn't seem to matter. So what can I do to prevent this? Are there other services available that don't seem bent on making their designers look like idiots?]]> Roy_Stevens 2013-02-22T01:56:03-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=62591&th=12976#msg_62591 <![CDATA[Unfortunately, this happens to a lot of designers - including me  . Major nuisance.
 But Shapeways are working to reduce this problem by marking models as "Successfully printed" to make sure they ae not rejected later.

 This usually happens when items are designed close to the limits of the design rules. For each print, the item is checked by an operator and some are a bit stricter than others.

 Keep complaining about this! Hopefully, Shapeways will end up developing consistent processes.

 In the meantime, there's nothing left but repairing the problem item quickly, put up an apology note as comment for the model and explain things to the customer (if you know who she/he is).

 Greetings
 Dragoman

 ]]> Dragoman 2013-02-22T12:24:07-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=62953&th=12976#msg_62953 <![CDATA[

Dragoman wrote on Fri, 22 February 2013 12:24

...Shapeways are working to reduce this problem by marking models as "Successfully printed" to make sure they are not rejected later.

 I sincerely hope this is true. My process is similar to Roy Stevens and it gets very frustrating when, after several dozen successful prints you receive the "Could not be printed" notice.

 I've not been able to offer anything new because all my time is spent maintaining what has already been proven printable, yet keeps getting rejected.

 Come on Shapeways! Let's move forward, not backward!  ]]> CGNScale 2013-02-28T14:47:54-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=62954&th=12976#msg_62954 <![CDATA[I can tell you that we are progressing to a solution. I can't tell you when or what to expect. From what I have seen, it'll be up to your expectations and maybe even beyond. ]]> Youknowwho4eva 2013-02-28T14:52:57-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=62959&th=12976#msg_62959 <![CDATA[I hope that 'when' is soon. It would be nice to be able to request that a new or existing design be subjected to a validation process, and then not have to worry about it ever again.]]> Roy_Stevens 2013-02-28T15:24:22-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=63018&th=12976#msg_63018 <![CDATA[Currently, the prduction team willnot/cannot print my Twin Rail Mobius Pendant - small in silver, although before the Christams rush, many had been printed with no reported issues.
 Since then every one has been rejected for a variety of reasons, it was only last week that Joost conveyed to me the real reason as to why - the production team want me to add bars to the model to aid the silver flow... hang on isn't that what part of the handling fee is for? I have no knowledge about adding sprues or vents to aid the silver flow

 Anyhow since then another rejection has come through
 Reason: Can not be cleaned
 Additional information: to fragile, will bend

 What can't be cleaned? The wax print or the silver model?
 And if the silver wires bend, it's no big deal as they are 1.3mm diameter and will bend back easily.

 So, in addition to a 'printed before' or whatever flag, the communication about a reason for rejection needs to be clear and not change every time (the model hasn't changed since the day I uploaded the original),

 Cheers,
 Paul]]> stop4stuff 2013-03-01T12:19:20-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=63097&th=12976#msg_63097 <![CDATA[I have also had a similar problem to everyone else here. A customer who bought 2 prints of a model ordered a third, but received the message that it could not be printed, even though he received the first two no problem. I then received an email saying the model could not be printed because of thin walls. the diagram attached to the email showing the problem parts points to a section of the model, highlighting it as 0.8 mm. This is incorrect. It measures 1mm on all faces, so it is Shapeways who have made a mistake on a part which is perfectly printable.]]> Nathan2012 2013-03-02T14:11:52-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=63103&th=12976#msg_63103 <![CDATA[Nathan2012, do you the rejection image you can share?

 I have had a similar rejecion in the past, however the operator used the wrong tool for the measurement, they measured point to point rather than wall thickness. That was a simple mistake, which was rectified and the model printed.

 Paul

 ]]> stop4stuff 2013-03-02T16:37:17-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=63113&th=12976#msg_63113 <![CDATA[I am having problems uploading the image. Looking at a larger version of the image I can now see the highlighted figure is actually 1mm. What is wrong with this? This is the minimum thickness they go on to suggest in the email! ]]> Nathan2012 2013-03-02T19:43:11-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=63114&th=12976#msg_63114 <![CDATA[I had another model rejected yesterday. Again, a model that has printed successfully at least 30 times.

 The rejection is based on wire minimums. According to the design guidelines:
 How to design thin, unsupported wires:
 "0.3mm-0.6mm wire thickness: keep under 6mm wire length"
  http://www.shapeways.com/materials/frosted-detail-design-gui delines

 Here I have .44mm wires supported at multiple points. True, the supporting points are closer to 6.6mm apart, however this should still be well within the acceptable tolerance, ESPECIALLY for a model with a numerous printable history.
 (At least I would consider about 30 prints to be numerous  )

 Here are some photos of one of my successful prints. The same photos that accompany the model on the product page:
  http://www.shapeways.com/model/651286/n-scale-42-dry-bulk-tr ailer-2-pack-kit.html

 Careful observers will notice the railing for the ladder is broken. More careful observers will notice the thickness for the railing parts are thinner than the ladder. And further yet, clever observers will notice that in the rejection photo above I had thickened the railings to match the ladder. Finally, I'll admit that it was me that broke those railings during cleaning  But notice that the overall ladder assembly is printed PERFECTLY.

 I think the best test should be, does the product have accompanying photos of a successful print?
 Then why perform the manual check? Shouldn't that be sufficient proof?

 Additionally, this model was ordered and printed more than a dozen times! THAT, should be definitive proof.

 ]]> CGNScale 2013-03-02T19:50:51-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=63124&th=12976#msg_63124 <![CDATA[

Youknowwho4eva wrote on Thu, 28 February 2013 14:52

I can tell you that we are progressing to a solution. I can't tell you when or what to expect. From what I have seen, it'll be up to your expectations and maybe even beyond.

 Great to hear Youknowwho.

 This is a rough outline, but it closely models my suggestion for this process.

 The standing question would be what is considered "Tolerable". I would suggest to have the checkers error on the side of pass, and deliver the resulting model. As a serious designer, once I see and hold the model in hand and can physically observe the tolerance areas identified by the checker, I would be MUCH more motivated to refine appropriately and ultimately produce a quality design that would profit both me and Shapeways. (Win-Win)

 When the design is rejected based on virtual dimensions, I am given the ability to doubt, scoff, and never return. We usually call this a Lose-Lose situation. ]]> CGNScale 2013-03-02T22:00:25-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=63186&th=12976#msg_63186 <![CDATA[The problem with your chart is the mildly successful prints. A failure can cause a whole tray of production to be lost, can cost hours, and can damage the printer. Problem 2, which is part of our thinking on the solution to some issues, is what you might find acceptable, another customer may not. So if you have a piece with thin rails that ships to you ok, we also have to be able to ship it across the world to arrive ok. And you may accept a broken rail, but a customer may want a reprint. ]]> Youknowwho4eva 2013-03-04T14:37:43-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=63195&th=12976#msg_63195 <![CDATA[And today's rejection is...

 Twin Rail Mobius Pendant - small in Silver
 Reason: Can not be cleaned
 Additional information: has to be more connected

 Same model different reason... Additional information: has to be more connected ... The model is a single shell, it cannot be more connected!!!

 Paul]]> stop4stuff 2013-03-04T16:41:12-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=63216&th=12976#msg_63216 <![CDATA[I unfortunately have also had this same issue with customers having prints rejected after I successfully printed and took pictures. It is a bit embarrassing and hope that there is at least a message being sent to the customer relieving designers of responsibility if the print had been successfully completed before and suddenly becomes unprintable. I even went as far as to re-upload files....but now that seems like that was completely unnecessary and that this issue happens to many people and is unpredictable. ]]> CactusBones 2013-03-04T21:59:27-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=63250&th=12976#msg_63250 <![CDATA[OK, I'm going to have to call BS on the idea that a broken wire can cause an entire tray of prints to fail. Gravity, at least where I live, only works in the down direction. The problem that I have found is not a failure of the wire, but a failure of the support material. I have one model where I had a number of wires, which were designed to be printed in the X-Y axis, but the operator in his infinite wisdom oriented the model vertically, causing some wires attempting to be supported at the top of 6 cm of 0.6mm thick wax walls. I added 'plates' near the wires to cause the support material to be solid throughout the print and the next print came out perfect. But this wouldn't be an issue if orientation could be specified.]]> Roy_Stevens 2013-03-05T04:27:41-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=63251&th=12976#msg_63251 <![CDATA[The mobius pendant should try to connect with its inner self.

 The tray reference is probably to the box used in SLS, full of nylon dust. The box is filled a bit each time, with a blade moving over it, so if a block of material becomes lose, it could disturb the smoothness of the dust. Imagine a small rock falls while flattening a pile of very fine sand.

 In any case, the recurrent issue is that problems are reported with new orders, and rarely along the fullfilment of current order, and with cryptic descriptions, no photos (that's different than renders), or just contradicting past prints experience. Last one was a 0.02mm difference, and after fixing that, claims that final customers would prefer it even thicker (final customers depend on the flexibility and "invisibility") for a part that has printed hundreds of times (it repeats many times per item, just in case anybody wants to guess which one it is).

 To make it worse, as you have no way to contact customers of failed prints, you & SW lose face and sales, specially with impulse buys.]]> stannum 2013-03-05T05:08:21-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=63263&th=12976#msg_63263 <![CDATA[

stannum wrote on Tue, 05 March 2013 05:08

 To make it worse, as you have no way to contact customers of failed prints, you & SW lose face and sales, specially with impulse buys.

 I agree. At least 90% of my clients with a failed print never re-order it.]]> Innovo 2013-03-05T11:05:46-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=63268&th=12976#msg_63268 <![CDATA[

Roy_Stevens wrote on Tue, 05 March 2013 04:27

OK, I'm going to have to call BS on the idea that a broken wire can cause an entire tray of prints to fail.

 I take your call of BS and tell you that for WSF, the pieces are built by putting a layer of powder that is synthered with a laser. If the powder sinks or shifts, it can alter the entire layer, and once the powder isn't level, it won't be level the rest of the print. And I think if FUD sinks, and the printer tries to add another layer, that material has to go somewhere, and it's not going where it's supposed to. I don't know if FUD can be as catastrophic as WSF.
 ]]> Youknowwho4eva 2013-03-05T14:10:19-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=63271&th=12976#msg_63271 <![CDATA[It took me a long time to understand the "destroying a batch" comment.

 I finally came to understand: A small piece of material has significantly less mass than the printhead (or the wiper) does. As the printhead passes over it, it is possible that some friction is generated between the small peice and the printhead. That small piece of material could then be shifted laterally by the print head (or wiper).. causing that peice to "surf" for some distance, possibly even landing on somebody else's model. Then, as small as it is, that sliver can cause the print head to "bump" upwards, causing a gap or irregularity on other people's models... "destroying the batch"]]> stonysmith 2013-03-05T14:44:08-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=63319&th=12976#msg_63319 <![CDATA[If the mass of the wiper is big enough to push things, why would it bump next time instead of pushing them again? And the laser is above the box, plastic melts "itself" with nothing moving near it (invisible laser beam).

 Based in one print with a defect (broken and bent tube, like if slices had been pushed) the issue seems to be that it makes a mess of dust instead of perfectly flat surface, layers don't match with ones above and below, and soft parts deform. Given enough deformations, the items are useless.]]> stannum 2013-03-06T00:49:34-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=63400&th=12976#msg_63400 <![CDATA[If a wiper or printhead could really move small items, whenever an overhang on a model starts it would ruin the batch. For a time that portion of the model isn't connected to anything except itself.]]> Roy_Stevens 2013-03-07T01:47:57-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=63460&th=12976#msg_63460 <![CDATA[When a model is rejected after a customer has bought it from my shop i would really like to get one day for fixing the problem and to upload the fixed file, it would save me a really nasty feeling  and the customer wouldn't have to pay for the shipping cost again
 if they ever are considering to reorder  .

 At least give the customer the choice to 1 : wait one more day for the designer to fix the problem or 2 : Accept a refund.

 I think most problems can be resolved within a few minutes/hours, my problem did in 10min.

 Even if there are al lot of models that can't be fixed within that day for any reason a bunch of them would.
 Let's say we win 30% of the lost sales/customers back, i say give us the chance please.

 Everybody including shapeways is fairly new at this and except for a few guidelines i still can't find a course :
 designing X for 3Dprinting in X Material @ X company.
 (X = could be anything)]]> FabMeJewelry 2013-03-07T18:26:49-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=63471&th=12976#msg_63471 <![CDATA[I agree, in the majority of cases a fix is easy enough.

 But I'm maybe not so unique in that the Twin Rail pendant I mentioned earlier was printed many times before without any reported issues, but (to me) suddenly the model is not printable any more. The reasons vary, and it took 2 months for the real reason (poor silver flow) to be conveyed - I just designed the thing, it passed the checks and was printed many times, I don't have a clue about silver flow.

 So, yeah, some stuff is simple to fix, but other stuff is a tad more complicated, and its the complicated stuff that really needs to be looked into and how a successfully printed model can be made printable again.

 Paul

 ]]> stop4stuff 2013-03-07T19:47:41-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=63533&th=12976#msg_63533 <![CDATA[

FabMeJewelry wrote on Thu, 07 March 2013 18:26

When a model is rejected after a customer has bought it from my shop i would really like to get one day for fixing the problem and to upload the fixed file

 There is one huge problem with this request. If the repaired model is larger than the original, who pays the difference? There is nothing stopping you during your "fix" to doubling, tripling , the size of the model, thereby creating significant extra cost that the consumer didn't agree to in the first place, and may not be willing to pay. Shapeways can't afford to take on that risk themselves, the difference needs to be paid for. Shapeways can't "pull" extra money from the buyer's Paypal - it will require the customers specific interaction. That's why (currently) the orders are just outright cancelled - because a change in price requires interaction from the buyer.

 Yes, I know.. there could be some allowance made for "negligible" changes, but this is one of the reasons why this is more complicated than just simply "placing the order on hold". Note: I'm with you.. I have often goofed on a model, had a buyer's order rejected, and wanted to tell Customer Service.. "I'll pay the difference.. just let this new copy go thru".

 But putting that set of processes in place will take time and careful thought.]]> stonysmith 2013-03-08T07:34:07-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=63549&th=12976#msg_63549 <![CDATA[So I've been conversing with a customer about the pendant, he asked if he could give the premium silver a shot, expecting rejection.
 It was. And again, a slightly different reason than before (no mention of silver flow)

 Twin Rail Mobius Pendant - small in Premium Silver
 Reason: Other (do not use)
 Additional information: due to such design type high glossy finish is not possible. it will not give a same finished look in all over the design. it will vary. also wire will get deformed.

 So now comes another question, if the finish is not possible, why is there no mention of the model not being printable/castable?

 Time to try another service with this model, 2 1/2 months of faffing about trying to get an understanding of how to make the model printable without altering the design (i.e. adding bars to somehwere that aids silver flow that I haven't got a clue about) has done my head in.

 Paul]]> stop4stuff 2013-03-08T10:29:38-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=63590&th=12976#msg_63590 <![CDATA[Two meaningless emails about the same model.

 Hi Paul,

 I have asked my colleague from production if he has a different approach to get this model printed in silver glossy

 I will get back to you as soon as possible.

 Regards,
 Kind Regards,

 Joost Denissen
 Customer Service Agent
 www.Shapeways.com

 Hi Paul,

 I see that somehow the rejection reason is not ended up in your rejection mail. I will report this to our development team.
 This is the reason that your model can not be produced in Premium Silver:
 "due to such design type high glossy finish is not possible. it will not give a same finished look in all over the design. it will vary. also the wire will get deformed".
 See also the attachment: file.jpg

 Hope this was helpful.
 Kindly,
 Maartje

 Kind regards,

 Mrs. Maartje Vijn
 Customer Service Agent
 www.Shapeways.com

 ffs,.,,, does anybody read anything????

 Just print the thing in ordinary Silver like what was done last year before your producton partners flaked!!!!!!

 nuff sed
 ]]> stop4stuff 2013-03-08T19:10:29-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=63617&th=12976#msg_63617 <![CDATA[I see your point stonysmith, most of the time a fix will definetly increse the pricing (fill up holes , add wall thickness, increse strength, add sprues etc..) maybe it's not so bad being only a designer and not having to solve this complicated matter

 Maybe some 3D print* simulation software can be developed or already exist somewhere for checking if a model can be printed?

 *including every part of the process (somehow that seems impossible)]]> FabMeJewelry 2013-03-08T23:20:27-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=63647&th=12976#msg_63647 <![CDATA[If your looking to only get parts made in silver, then you might get better results with a casting company that service the jewellery industry .
 Shapeways provide a great service , but because of the volume and many different materials they use, they can't experts at every type of material .

 I've had pendants rejected from shapeways for having to fine text engraved, or extruded , I.e has fine has 0.18 mm.
 I then sent the exact same file to a local caster, no problems, looks great and only 3 days for delivery .

 It's not shapeways fault , it just that , when it comes to casting silver, a caster that's been doing it for 20+ years is just going to have a better idea on what will and will not work ( they know where to place sprues to get he best silver flow )and they know how to get the best out of their equipment .

 ]]> stevecim 2013-03-09T06:24:31-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=63650&th=12976#msg_63650 <![CDATA[Shapeways don't do the silver themselves, they use a production partner.

 The pendant was produced many times, then suddenly the production partner decided they couldn't produce it.

 Yes, I could go the route of having the pendant produced undependantly, but the big point is with Shapeways, items are made on demand, I carry no stock and I don't need to get anything hallmarked.

 Paul]]> stop4stuff 2013-03-09T07:53:11-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=63698&th=12976#msg_63698 <![CDATA[

Youknowwho4eva wrote on Mon, 04 March 2013 14:37

 Problem 2, which is part of our thinking on the solution to some issues, is what you might find acceptable, another customer may not. So if you have a piece with thin rails that ships to you ok, we also have to be able to ship it across the world to arrive ok. And you may accept a broken rail, but a customer may want a reprint.

 So if a model is ordered, successfully printed, and survives shipping dozens of times previously, the fear of one customer wanting a re-print because of a fluke breakage in shipping is enough reason to start rejecting models left and right?

 I apologize that my frustration is beginning to leak into anger, but that is ridiculous!

 Here is my shop: http://www.shapeways.com/shops/cgnscale

 Notice how every major model has multiple photographs of the successful print?
 As someone who works here, please look at the record of how many times these prints have been ordered, successfully printed, and shipped. Based on the mark-up payments I've received, I think you'll see indisputable evidence that these designs are successful.

 So why are we moving backwards and rejecting these??? Nearly EVERY SINGLE ORDER I receive in recent months is rejected. A year ago, a rejection was a rare occurrence and meant there really was a design flaw. Now, I can only believe a rejection means you have a disgruntled employee who's trying to sabotage your, and my, profits.

 Again, I apologize for venting my frustration, but THIS HAS BECOME RIDICULOUS!]]> CGNScale 2013-03-09T22:52:49-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=63819&th=12976#msg_63819 <![CDATA[Thanks, to the MOD who redirected me.
 I've had this problem too. I didn't realize there were others.
 It certainly looks pretty stupid when you've sold five copies but the sixth is rejected as unprintable.

 One case I had was "multiple shells". In CAD, the solids were actually separate shells (my mistake), but by less than 0.001" away from each other. So when they were printed it didn't matter -- the distance was so small that the machine bound them together anyway.

 Second problem was wall thickness on a very tiny gun barrel. Technically the "wall thickness" if that's what you can call it was too thin at 0.020", but the depth of the gun barrel hole was only 0.031". Does this still count as a "wall"? On a tiny little barrel? It supports nothing. More like just an indentation or depression, really. Would this same logic apply to a reversed panel line that sticks out from a surface?

 It seems like like the operators are using a set of rules instead of experience to make decisions on what to print. Companies like to set hard and fast rules to train new people easily, but silly things like this happen as a side-effect when people stop using their own judgement.

 To check my designs I print them out on my own 3D printer here in my own workshop ... so I know they work. The small Shapeways shop I have has photos of everything printed-out and painted as proof.
 I realize every machine is different and has it's own quirks, but with the examples above we are literally splitting human hairs.

 Other than this, my Shapeways experience has been quite good. However a consistent problem like this would definitely make me rethink these services. It's just not practical to have designs rejected so randomly. ]]> pezhetairoi 2013-03-11T17:53:33-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=63880&th=12976#msg_63880 <![CDATA[Hi,
 I got the same problem with one of my designs. I've posted this today on another thread... sorry for the double post.

 ----------------------------

 I was very pleased when a custumer ordered one of my designs in Silver Glossy. It was the "Amour Fou Pendant" which was printed in stainless steel a couple of times before. The next day I've got a message from shapeways service that the design is "not printable" ...

 Amour Fou Pendant in Silver Glossy
 Reason: Thin walls
 Additional information: too fragile too handle

 It is always frustrating if a model gets rejected but in this case I find no violation against the design rules. The wall thickness is above 0.8 mm and the depth is even 3 mm. It looks fragile but it is in fact pretty stable.
 I wrote to the always friendly service and got the answer that "the walls indeed are thicker than 0.8mm but it seems that this model is too fragile like this" and that this issue will be forwarded to the production facility. This was on thurstday and I got no further infos about that.

 I'm really upset especially cause this was a customer order.
 As far as I know 3d printing is not an automated process. Instead every design will be proved by the people in the production facility during the preparation of the printing process. OK, everyone makes mistakes sometimes. I think this means to admit that this can happen the guys in the production facility, too. Maybe I've missed something in the design rules. I'm looking forward to get some useful feeback from the service.
 If it was in fact a mistake by the production facility, I like to see a prompt and customer-friendly solution here.

 Does anyone else got an issue like that?

 Cheers!
 Michael

 ]]> MichaelMueller 2013-03-12T13:05:11-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=63881&th=12976#msg_63881 <![CDATA[I don't know if this will help anyone else,but I may as well post it anyway, considering I'm the one who started a rejections thread before Christmas I believe.

 I'd spent the last few months working on a model that I definitely wanted to put up for sale, and that I definitely knew would sell a few of. I ordered a prototype before Christmas, and to my surprise, it actually printed. I emailed support to ask if any part of it was a problem during printing, and found out that they had to reprint it once; and I still can't believe they printed it after discovering some parts under the minimum specifications. (Very much appreciated though.)

 I made up my second prototype, and test customer of mine and myself both ordered one, so I'd have two prints to ensure it could be printed again. After checking with support after receiving the model, both models were perfectly fine, and I was told it was be ok to have it for sale for multiple prints.

 I think in this case, I was incredibly lucky, and I am kind of waiting for the day where it all backfires. The support team has been absolutely amazing in the time I've been printing here, and I'm sure if that day comes again, they'll be helpful then.

 In the thread I made about this topic, we were told that a printing tag was being implemented; which may explain why more previously alright prints are now being rejected, especially those with thin rails. However, if those files have never caused a problem before, it shouldn't now, unless the shipping constantly breaks the model (which I know was the cause of one of my models refusal reasons). The printer may be fully capable, but transporting it halfway across the world can take it's toll. Maybe you could email support and ask how many customers complained of broken items they bought from your store? I know that without talking to support, my models would probably never have sold.]]> Calistotash 2013-03-12T13:06:51-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=63884&th=12976#msg_63884 <![CDATA[Hi,

 this is the feedback I got from the service a hour ago:
 ---------------
 I have received a feedback about your model from my colleague from the Production Facility.
 This model should be okay with a thickness of 1.5mm in those letters. The problem we are facing is that the wax material is so brittle after printing that a structure likes this needs to be more thick.

 Could you maybe make your model around 2.5mm thick so we can print the wax model and have
 this casted in Silver?

 Thanks!
 Kind Regards,
 ---------------

 Needless to say, I'm not happy with this.
 The design already has a wall thickness (depth) of 3 mm but the line strengh of the calligraphy is approximately 1.2 mm. This can't be increased to 2.5 mm without killing the design.
 I don't understand why this shouldn't be printable though it is conform to the design rules. Let's face it, it was even printed in Stainless Steel which has much stricter design rules about wall thickness.
 I would suppose someone at the production facility classified it as not printable without really checking the wall thickness. Instead of an apology there are suggestions way beyond the existing design rules. Maybe I'm wrong.
 What if I order it in silver and it gets printed this time... just to make my point?

 Cheers!
 Michael
 ]]> MichaelMueller 2013-03-12T13:11:10-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=63895&th=12976#msg_63895 <![CDATA[Michael

 They use different "wax material" for the other metal.

 Still I don`t understand why they use a different wax instead of one harder ? Even hard wax melts at the temperature needed to do the cast.

 To fix the pendant form the Designer perspective it is like making the pendant be "from 7cm" to "8-9 cm" that makes is look so big that I wonder who will wear it ? A second fix will be to put the letters on a plate of 1.5 mm cut around the letters but still this ruins a bit the Design.

 So why not use different wax dear Shapeways ?

 Or better make that the automation process when you upload the design to have it checked for this problems and instruct de designer that "material X" is not available for printing the design.

 Or buy a better wax!]]> numarul7 2013-03-12T16:22:09-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=63899&th=12976#msg_63899 <![CDATA[Regarding the wax and design rules, Michaels issue has brought this to light. So we are examining how to prevent these rejections in the future.]]> Youknowwho4eva 2013-03-12T17:04:32-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=63912&th=12976#msg_63912 <![CDATA[
 So here's a prime example of a rejection for a phantom issue. Someone took a screen shot of my model and pasted 0.25 mm onto it in several places with no indication of what or where it is being measured at. I shelled this model at 0.32 mm, I also have a print of this model done previously.]]> Roy_Stevens 2013-03-12T18:16:20-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=63918&th=12976#msg_63918 <![CDATA[Can you share the file with us, or email it to me?]]> Youknowwho4eva 2013-03-12T19:19:55-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=63919&th=12976#msg_63919 <![CDATA[Although I'm a fairly new designer of 1/200 scale aircraft models on Shapeways I thought I was getting the hand of checking my models for minimum wall thickness and avoiding over-thin aerofoil sections.

 Now I've facing a new reason for rejection, my WSF models can't be cleaned because the holes aren't big enough.
 Yes, I've watched the video of WSF models being fine cleaned with an air hose in a dust-proof booth but I can't believe that it's intended to recover every last grain of unfused material.

 4mm is larger than the fuselage diameter of several of my models and 2mm is larger than the internal diameter of the hollow in most of them, trying to place the required holes so that they are relatively unobtrusive on a model that may be viewed from any angle is not always possible (designers of land and sea models have an advantage here!).

 Are the cleaning holes for WSF required for a practical (not theoretical) production benefit or is this simply a case of over-literal interpretation of the rules please?]]> NickHawkins 2013-03-12T19:21:53-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=63945&th=12976#msg_63945 <![CDATA[While I rarely repeat Shapeways official rules, they will charge you full price for any captive material, ie material that can't be removed. I can't see why such a rule is necessary, but you have to figure out price somehow and volume is as good as any to keep everything simple. In your case I might recommend making your airplanes solid, based on the size the price won't change much and it would solve such issues.]]> Roy_Stevens 2013-03-13T00:48:29-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=63963&th=12976#msg_63963 <![CDATA[Before I discovered this thread I had posted on another and have since got some useful feedback on why models that can't be cleaned may be rejected:
  http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=msg&th=13299& amp;start=0&
 It would appear that the reason is primarily to avoid customer complaints due to retained powder rather than to try and re-use every last bit of material.

 The saving I can achieve by making a 1/200 scale model varies widely but I'm guessing that it is typically 25% to 33%, maybe not a lot in absolute terms compared to the costs of printing in other materials but significant in relative terms. The largest saving I have achieved is 80%, but that was exceptional. As well as reducing the cost making models hollow has the advantage of making them lighter which is of practical benefit when they are mounted on tall flight stands. EG (sorry, these models aren't 3D prints, they're OOP CLIX models for Crimson Skies):
 ]]> NickHawkins 2013-03-13T06:16:06-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=63997&th=12976#msg_63997 <![CDATA[

Roy_Stevens wrote on Wed, 13 March 2013 00:48

While I rarely repeat Shapeways official rules, they will charge you full price for any captive material, ie material that can't be removed. I can't see why such a rule is necessary, but you have to figure out price somehow and volume is as good as any to keep everything simple. In your case I might recommend making your airplanes solid, based on the size the price won't change much and it would solve such issues.

 Shapeways doesn't charge for trapped material. If you have an item that is hollow, but with no hole at all connecting it to the outside shell, the software automatically removes internal geometry. This was implemented years ago to prevent double charging for overlapping geometry. ]]> Youknowwho4eva 2013-03-13T15:40:11-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=64000&th=12976#msg_64000 <![CDATA[This is why I try not to do what I just did, because it just makes me look stupid. So maybe you can explain to us designers why it's so important to have such a large hole if Shapeways isn't concerned about trapped material. Wouldn't a 1mm hole effectively be sealed in WSF, without the need for fusing the internal material, and solve the whole overlapping geometry issue?]]> Roy_Stevens 2013-03-13T16:11:54-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=64003&th=12976#msg_64003 <![CDATA[My take on this is;
 1. You are charged for the printed material by volume.
 2, The support powder for WSF is the same powder that is used to make the model
 3. Unused powder is recovered.
 4. Shapeways are a business, their whole point of existance is to make money.
 5, It is not good business practice to give away money.

 Why not arguee that is takes less man hours to empty a solid object so that we all get a cheaper printed build?

 Paul]]> stop4stuff 2013-03-13T16:38:38-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=64005&th=12976#msg_64005 <![CDATA[My guess is that one rule is simpler.

 WSF is its own support material and so anything reclaimed from a hollow model can be reused. This means that Shapeways has an interest in cleaning our models when the unfused volume is significant, for small models the key concerns appears to be avoiding loose powder.

 It might be a difficult call for an inspector to make:
 - This model is small, the escape/topology hole must be small enough to ensure it is sealed.
 - This model is large, it must have adequate cleaning vents.

 An additional complication might be caused by the weight of unfused powder causing structural failure in some cases.

 Personally I would like a 'self sealing' small model option for hollow strong flexible materials, just not sure how Shapeways could specify it.]]> NickHawkins 2013-03-13T16:45:13-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=64012&th=12976#msg_64012 <![CDATA[

Roy_Stevens wrote on Wed, 13 March 2013 16:11

This is why I try not to do what I just did, because it just makes me look stupid. So maybe you can explain to us designers why it's so important to have such a large hole if Shapeways isn't concerned about trapped material. Wouldn't a 1mm hole effectively be sealed in WSF, without the need for fusing the internal material, and solve the whole overlapping geometry issue?

 No need to feel stupid. There is a lot to learn, and many confusing rules. Shapeways is learning as we are. Not only the demands of the community, and the market, but also the limitations of the machines and processes. I've been here for years, and I still had a model rejected in my last order.

 Currently trapped material is allowed in FD, FUD, and at least transparent detail, as these materials can visually benefit from having trapped build material in their translucent print. I used to offer a cube with messages inside that could be viewed when you held the cube up to a light.

 The only reasons I'm seeing for allowing trapped WSF is to make the print less expensive. To try to counter this, there is a density discount for WSF prints. For models that are greater than 10% dense (material volume divided by bounding box volume), after the first 20cm3, the remaining volume is calculated with a 50% discount. We try to offer a finished product to customers, and having trapped material (that has no purpose to the product) or products that leak powder, is not a finished product. There is also the point that the left over powder can be reused, but that is not as much of a driving point as the powder isn't 100% reusable. The unused material is still effected by the processes of printing.

 So what you can do to save some $ on your prints, is put multiple pieces in one file. For smaller items it is recommended to either join them with sprues or to build a cage to hold them together so they aren't loose in the build. ]]> Youknowwho4eva 2013-03-13T17:18:20-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=64015&th=12976#msg_64015 <![CDATA[As a by-the-by and sort of on topic

 Shapeways have now said that my previously-unprintable-due-to-flow-issues small mobius pendant may be printable in premium silver as long as the production team are careful when they polish it

 paul]]> stop4stuff 2013-03-13T17:43:49-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=64850&th=12976#msg_64850 <![CDATA[Hi,

 another customer order was canceled today.
 -------
 Crown Ring (US Size 12) in Silver Glossy
 Reason: Thin walls
 Additional information: 0,2 mm
 0,2 mm will be gone after polishing
 -------
 The design rule says: "Min Embossed Detail: 0.3mm (Regular & Glossy)"
 In the screenshot the support provided you can see that it is 2.83 mm. I would round this to 3 mm not to 2 mm.
 This ordere was canceled cause an embossed detail was 0.017 mm too thin?

 Most of all I dislike that customer orders get cancelled without the chance to fix the issue. This customers are mostly lost and they don't buy again.
 Guess this was suggested before, but it should really be a feature that allows the designer to send a new model within 24 hours, otherwise it might be cancelled.
 With the "personalize" technique, there is already a similar message and upload feature implemented which I suppose could be enhanced.

 Michael
 ]]> MichaelMueller 2013-03-25T16:33:52-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=64857&th=12976#msg_64857 <![CDATA[

Roy_Stevens wrote on Tue, 12 March 2013 18:16

(...)
 So here's a prime example of a rejection for a phantom issue. Someone took a screen shot of my model and pasted 0.25 mm onto it in several places with no indication of what or where it is being measured at. I shelled this model at 0.32 mm, I also have a print of this model done previously.

 Funny, but not true.

 That's netfabb Studio, wall thickness measuring.
 The indicators are the blue dots right behind the values.

 ]]> pfeiffer stylez 2013-03-25T18:24:37-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=64858&th=12976#msg_64858 <![CDATA[

Michael Mueller wrote on Mon, 25 March 2013 16:33

 The design rule says: "Min Embossed Detail: 0.3mm (Regular & Glossy)"
 In the screenshot the support provided you can see that it is 2.83 mm. I would round this to 3 mm not to 2 mm.
 This ordere was canceled cause an embossed detail was 0.017 mm too thin?

 Most of all I dislike that customer orders get cancelled without the chance to fix the issue. This customers are mostly lost and they don't buy again.
 Guess this was suggested before, but it should really be a feature that allows the designer to send a new model within 24 hours, otherwise it might be cancelled.
 With the "personalize" technique, there is already a similar message and upload feature implemented which I suppose could be enhanced.

 Michael

 To your first part, the line is .3mm. Even .299 would fail.
 To your second part, I'll make sure it's brought up in discussion again.]]> Youknowwho4eva 2013-03-25T18:45:05-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=64920&th=12976#msg_64920 <![CDATA[I'm glad I am not alone. I have a part which I have successfully printed over 40 copies in FUD over the last year or so which has now been rejected in my last batch file which contained several copies to minimise costs. To be fair it also contained a test design which did have valid rejection issues.

 The item concerned has a 1/16" square shaft about 20mm long which has a fine hole down the centre. The item is not sold directly as I clean out the hole to take a steel pin for both strength and provide a point - it is a height gauge which I sell on my own website (see here). The rejection image showed the wall between the shaft edge and the hole was too thin. I suppose it technically it is but I've printed 40+ without it ever being a problem.

 My big dilemma is I can't change the shaft dimensions and there is no way I could drill the hole out if it were solid. As it stands I will probably have to redesign the whole thing to include a separately manufactured metal square rod which will substantially change my cost basis and prices.

 As noted by others why can't the fact that a model has successfully printed before allow it to proceed. Unfortunately this time it was a seemingly new model containing several copies of previously successful parts. Otherwise at least allow the designer to add an appropriate comment to that effect.

 This has really dented my confidence in Shapeways.

 John]]> JohnC 2013-03-26T16:25:37-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=64951&th=12976#msg_64951 <![CDATA[I'm not familiar with the output of Netfab. But there were small areas under there that I would classify as detail as they were about 0.3mm square and 0.23mm thick. Easily fixed but not obvious, and this particular model had been successfully printed before the rejection.]]> Roy_Stevens 2013-03-27T00:12:40-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=65094&th=12976#msg_65094 <![CDATA[So it happened again. Someone discovered my store, got all excited about my designs, ordered a whole bunch of stuff, several of which have been there since the dawn of time (Shapeways Beta) and received a whole bunch of rejection messages. All of the items had been previously printed several dozen times, but that doesn't seem to matter. Shapeways seems to be relying exclusively on NetFab instead of their own brains. Oh look! There's a 4mm long encased feature that isn't a full 1mm in diameter! Reject! Reject!]]> Roy_Stevens 2013-03-29T04:30:53-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=65102&th=12976#msg_65102 <![CDATA[Hi Roy,

 this really sucks. Even if you've made a testprint, you can not make sure that it will be printed for customers again. This rejections are killing all the fun.
 I can't imagine that it is cost-efficient for shapeways to check a design every time it gets printed. A model that was printed hundred times will be checked same as a model that was never printed before!? Whay not flag it as "printed before" and skip all tests on it. Of course it should loose the "printed before" state, the first time it causes trouble during the print process. I would pay gladly more for printing generally to prevent that customer orders get canceled.

 Michael
 ]]> MichaelMueller 2013-03-29T09:05:12-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=65120&th=12976#msg_65120 <![CDATA[I would pay good money, say $20-$40 to put a model through a full validation and NEVER have to worry about it again. As it stands I don't dare take out magazine ads, send models to bloggers or other professional reviewers, or anything else that takes time and money for fear that Shapeways will take all my work and throw it out the window as soon as somebody orders it, regardless of how many times I test print it. I have no idea how some people are making their living doing this.]]> Roy_Stevens 2013-03-29T16:08:27-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=65130&th=12976#msg_65130 <![CDATA[Is there a standard time frame for alerting us of rejections? I have had everywhere between next day to up to five days before my order is cancelled and I am notified that my files are not in production. I think it would be really helpful if we were able to expect notification within a shorter time period so we can attempt to rectify the situation and still be able to meet our own deadlines.
 ]]> CactusBones 2013-03-29T19:11:46-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=65325&th=12976#msg_65325 <![CDATA[Hi, I have the same problem, was directed to repost here to underline the seriousness of this issue.

Quote:

About an hour ago, I logged in to check the status of my pending sales, only to find that eight of them had simply disappeared from my sales page. On a whim, I decided to download my sales summary document from the shop overview page, and found that seven of them - for two different models, both of which have been printed successfully previously - have been marked as rejected.

 The fact that this occurred, and that I did not receive any notification of it happening greatly concerns me. What's worse, I don't know if Shapeways sent the usual "your model could not be printed" email to whoever ordered them. The idea that Shapeways would communicate this to an artist's customers without informing said artist so that he or she could fix whatever is wrong does not sit well with me at all.

 Has anyone experienced a similar issue?

]]> uncommented 2013-04-01T21:31:27-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=65345&th=12976#msg_65345 <![CDATA[

CactusBones wrote on Fri, 29 March 2013 19:11

Is there a standard time frame for alerting us of rejections? I have had everywhere between next day to up to five days before my order is cancelled and I am notified that my files are not in production. I think it would be really helpful if we were able to expect notification within a shorter time period so we can attempt to rectify the situation and still be able to meet our own deadlines.

 It all depends at what step the item fails. The file is manually checked in the first few days. When it's sent to production, it can fail while printing, or, depending on the material, when being removed from the print tray. After that, the prints have to be cleaned, and in some cases finished. Some items are printed at Shapeways, but some still have to be shipped to Shapeways, where they are checked, packaged with your other pieces, and sent to you. So a rejection could happen a day before it's supposed to ship if it arrives at the factory broken. ]]> Youknowwho4eva 2013-04-02T13:04:40-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=65469&th=12976#msg_65469 <![CDATA[Again a customer order was rejected cause of an issue which is (as far as I know) not part of the design rules!
 And again I had no chance to "fix" it before the order was canceled.
 ------------
 Snake Ring (Size US 9) in Silver Glossy
 Reason: Can not be cleaned
 Additional information: will bend
 will bend. Has to be more connected.
 -----------
 ]]> MichaelMueller 2013-04-04T07:45:02-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=65560&th=12976#msg_65560 <![CDATA[This is so profound that it appears to be sabotage to me.  Compared to the masses there are only a handful of designers in the world highly familiar with the use of 3D design software as it pertains to 3D printing. Consequently, it would be very easy to perturb this small group so much that they simply move on. If I were Shapeways I would have everyone drop what they are doing and work to come up with a solution to this ongoing problem.

 Also, I hate to say it, but in connection with these rejections is making people ask for their money back. NOT GOOD! I don't know how it is in Holland, but I know I myself was highly perturbed by this! It causes people to think things along with the being upset about the rejection. I haven't looked lately, but I have well over $100 that has been sitting in Shapeways' bank account and not mine for well over a month. And yes I know why Shapeways does it that way. And no, I don't need my money back, if I did I would have asked for it back, I'm simply telling you people don't like that when it is in connection with a rejection. It will cause them to think all kinds of negative things in conjunction with the rejection.

 Why can't Shapeways simply tell everyone that a new item is in research and development and what is involved with the development? And then once the item has been printed successfully 25 times it would then attain a full production status with no restrictions.

 Another thing Shapeways should be doing is sponsoring designers. Wherein, Shapeways would help with R&D of new products, photography and marketing. One idea might be to print a number of items of select products using unused space in the printers to have on hand an inventory. This would allow for more optimized shipping times!

 Also, price wise, Shapeways needs to decide whether they are a retailer working for itself or a wholesaler working for the designers who are the retailers. And shouldn't there at least be more robust marketing research available?

 Have there been any attempts to develop a relationship with any of major retailers? Wouldn't it be awesome if Shapeways shops could directly connect to Amazon or eBay?

 I've been reading the forum since the very beginning. I know everyone here. It's only recently that I have started participating. I'm on Shapeways' side and I'm rooting for Shapeways to succeed! So lets make a better future!  ]]> UniverseBecoming 2013-04-05T19:44:59-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=65579&th=12976#msg_65579 <![CDATA[Hi James,

 great posting. I really agree that customer-orders shouldn't be canceled this way. Also a cooperation with companys like ebay, amazon, etsy or dawanda would be a great benefit. I'm always astonished that shapeways is not doing much conventional advertisement like similar companys. Shapeways relies to the community and their personal marketing power in the social network. Beeing part of such a strong community makes you feel that you can actual change things. It's easy to forget that shapeways is a company with a management so it's up to them how to run the business.
 I like to think that there is always a way to communicate and that feedback might help to improve weak procedures.

 Cheers!
 Michael]]> MichaelMueller 2013-04-05T23:15:46-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=65582&th=12976#msg_65582 <![CDATA[Do you think that Shapeways as an entity actually cares about its 3d modelers and their ability to reliably produce works? I'm starting to have serious doubts.]]> uncommented 2013-04-05T23:20:45-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=65587&th=12976#msg_65587 <![CDATA[I wouldn't be rich, but I could turn this into a nice side income stream IF I dared spend the money to advertise my products in related magazines, send items to bloggers and product reviewers, and other things that cost money but bring in customers. But I don't dare because it could be the first, it could be the fiftieth customer and then wham - my product is shut down due to someone not liking what they see in Netfab. And then all my advert money is wasted at best, and noone will ever look at my products again at worst.]]> Roy_Stevens 2013-04-05T23:31:05-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=65628&th=12976#msg_65628 <![CDATA[Hi Michael,

 Thanks for the compliment.

 Yeah, we'll just have sit back see what management does this year. I hope they keep in mind that when it comes to online related businesses they can go from thriving community to ghost town overnight. Case in point, Myspace! Hopefully they stop and take a good look at the core foundations stones (the designers) and make sure everything is sound in this area. Are the designers being fairly compensated for their innovation? Yes or no? Is the competition doing a better job at providing this compensation? Are the designers happy; yes or no?

 Maybe Shapeways should replace the word beta next to their logo. At least until the New York facility is completed.

 ]]> UniverseBecoming 2013-04-06T17:48:37-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=65636&th=12976#msg_65636 <![CDATA[

Quote:

Maybe Shapeways should replace the word beta next to their logo. At least until the New York facility is completed.

 Sure seems hard to hire new engineers with 5+ years in the 3d printing industry. I wonder why that is ?  ]]> mkroeker 2013-04-06T20:57:34-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=65985&th=12976#msg_65985 <![CDATA[I've just got a rejection:

Quote:

The following models have been rejected by our production team:

 1/300 Westland P12 Wendover in White Strong & Flexible
 Reason: Bad file
 Additional information: There are some empty triangles

 I can accept dimensioning issues not being caught until an attempt is made to print a model but how come a file can be OK on upload but 'bad' by the time it is submitted for printing?

 I have 'freshened up' the model (with cleaner topology) and hopefully it won't have 'gone bad' on Shapeways servers by the time someone next tries to buy a print ]]> NickHawkins 2013-04-11T13:29:36-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=66402&th=12976#msg_66402 <![CDATA[This is the one area where Shapeways really, soundly, and unfortunately falls flat, on its face, hard. The prices are good, the interface - while occasionally buggy - is easy enough to use, and the customer service is friendly and helpful. There's just so much internal confusion and turmoil that nothing seems to get done in a timely manner, if at all. We've been promised a 'successfully printed' flag, which I have yet to wrest a straight answer out of the forums on whether or not it's actually been implemented (internally) or if its even still 'in the works'. And if it IS 'in the works', it has been for many months now. I simply don't see how it can take that much time to implement. Slap a sticky note on a USB drive if you have to, there are ways to make it happen, I'm sure. There is zero accountability or reasoning to rejections of models - one person will inspect a model and approve it, and the next day his co-worker will reject it. There seems to be very little or no communication within the different Shapeways teams and between Shapeways and the various printers it contracts to. One would think that if Jim comes in to work today and approves a model, tomorrow Josh could receive that same model, see that Jim approved it, and let it through. There needs to be communication and explanation, not just internally, but to us, the sellers, as well. If one of my models is approved once, but even though they made it work, it was troublesome to print and they make a mental note to reject it next time, you have no idea how happy I would be to have that information relayed to me so I can fix those problems before I make it public, people try to buy it, and I make an ass of both myself and Shapeways.

 In summary, Shapeways has a lot of issues to work out. Here at the storefront, things are generally fine. The website can be buggy and we all know my issues with the UPS situation, but generally it's all good. Internally though, I think Shapeways has a LOT of work to do, establishing a line of communication between the sellers, the customers, Shapeways service, and most importantly, the folks on the factory floor making these things happen. Consistency and communication need a very serious overhaul, very, very badly.]]> PeregrineStudios 2013-04-19T03:37:38-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=66407&th=12976#msg_66407 <![CDATA[

PeregrineStudios wrote on Fri, 19 April 2013 03:37

<snip>
 In summary, Shapeways has a lot of issues to work out. Here at the storefront, things are generally fine. The website can be buggy and we all know my issues with the UPS situation, but generally it's all good. Internally though, I think Shapeways has a LOT of work to do, establishing a line of communication between the sellers, the customers, Shapeways service, and most importantly, the folks on the factory floor making these things happen. Consistency and communication need a very serious overhaul, very, very badly.

 I don't completely agree with PeregrineStudios on this although I and (more importantly) purchasers of my models, have been burnt by inconsistent pre-preint QA.

 I've been involved with helping companies migrate from an 'evolved' process to a 'rigourously engineered' one and I know that it:
 - Is very expensive
 - Is time consuming
 - Negatively impacts on the core business whilst the change is happening
 - May transform staff from thinking people into 'wetware' robots' (who no longer bother to think)

 I don't want to pay for Shapeways to do this.
 It probably won't be as friendly a company at the end of it, maybe more like Canadian UPS

 A complicating issue you have to deal with is what happens in the Christmas rush?
 (Note, this is NOT specific to Shapeways, it's a more general issue.)
 - The website guarantees Christmas delivery if you order by X
 - Many orders are placed at the last minute
 - QA gets rushed (in Shapeways case this might result in borderline models being marked OK)
 - After the rush QA settles down again...

 Shapeways need to get better and a bit more joined up but I'm not expecting perfection, I'd far rather deal with people committed to doing their job well than an anonymous business process.

 Nick H.
 ]]> NickHawkins 2013-04-19T05:44:11-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=66690&th=12976#msg_66690 <![CDATA[If this hasn't the potential if losing sales, I would find this very funny.

Quote:

The following models have been rejected by our production team:

 K6 - 7mm (1:43.5) Scale in Frosted Ultra Detail
 Reason: Bad file
 Additional information: The file contains shells which aren't attached correctly, printing it will result in them not being attached and lost in the printer. For more information about the design specifications for this material please visit:  http://www.shapeways.com/materials/frosted-detail-design-gui delines

 Why should this be funny - it is a 7 part model, none of the parts are attached to each other, all of the parts meet the requirement for the minimum size - but it is not funny. IMO this rejection is as a result of an operator not understanding the basics of their job, so intead of a happy customer, there are now messages and emails flying about to get the situation resolved.

 Paul

 p.s. my pendant from earlier in this thread is now printable with no changes - nothing to do with silver flow, just a few issues buffing up the silver due to the thin wires.]]> stop4stuff 2013-04-23T07:51:57-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=66695&th=12976#msg_66695 <![CDATA[The "be lost in the printer" part makes me suspect that your parts are very small and the operator in question
 wants you to sprue them together ?]]> mkroeker 2013-04-23T09:08:10-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=66697&th=12976#msg_66697 <![CDATA[

stop4stuff wrote on Tue, 23 April 2013 07:51

 ... all of the parts meet the requirement for the minimum size ...

 The [smallest] part in question is 4.89 x 9.35 x 3.49 mm, these sides add upto 17.73mm = bigger than the minimum 12mm

 If they wanted me to sprue the parts up together, that would have been conveyed in one way or another.

 Paul]]> stop4stuff 2013-04-23T09:20:26-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=66716&th=12976#msg_66716 <![CDATA[Ok, now I've had it.

 A month ago, Shapeways cancelled multiple orders and told me my model could not be printed. I went through multiple slow, painful rounds of iteration - during which I specifically requested they tell me if there was something wrong with it - until they sent me a test print. Upon receiving my test print, I put my model back on sale. Now they have declared it unprintable again.

 Last night, I received the following email:

Quote:

Thank you for writing.
 I'm really sorry to hear that your model got rejected after several months of prototyping.

 I checked both rejected models and spotted this rejection reason:
 "Reason: We have tried printing this part several times, there is too much pressure on the protuding parts and it breaks everytime. It needs more support to be printable."
 "Reason: Within tolerance, however, we have tried printing this part and it breaks every time. There is just too much leverage on thin parts to successfully print it. Also, next to impossible to ship without breaking."

 In short this means that we have had several attempts of printing the model but according to our production team there is only a 1 out of 3 chance that it will survive the process.
 After this we are having difficulties making sure it will be shipped without breaking it.
 Right now the main difficulties are the protruding parts like the beard and the horns which break really easily.

 The 2 new orders have not been made by Shapeways and are in fact 2 new customers.

 Again our sincere apologies for the inconvenience and we hope you will be able to make these parts a bit thicker to ensure that the parts will be printable and able to be shipped without breaking them.
 I however do agree that we should have communicated this earlier to let you know that we were having issues printing this model without breaking it.

 So in short, they have apologetically fucked me over, and have provided very little information about how to "fix" the model. Meanwhile, its two months since I initially put the model up, I've wasted a lot ot time and money on test prints, and everyone who wanted the model (aside from the three who got theirs first) is SOL.

 I'm honestly not sure whether I should even keep trying at this point. Shapeways offers some nice prints, but if they are going to do this again, I'd rather get someone with a consumer-grade extrusion printer - who at least won't screw me - to produce an inferior quality product.]]> uncommented 2013-04-23T11:54:23-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=66729&th=12976#msg_66729 <![CDATA[How bout this. How about a research and development phase for products. Rather than trying to get the machines to perfectly match what the designers are instructing them to do with their CAD/CAM instructions, why not just make it clear to everyone what's to be expected until the ultimate design goal is finally achieved?

 For example. Lets say an item prints successfully 5 times and then a problem occurs. Well, why not just document the problem with a description and maybe even photographs and then put that information right on the pertinent shop page? Make it so customers are informed of what may happen and that returns are not allowed for the product in its research and development stage.

 Then, once a product has been printed numerous times successfully it can then be bumped up in status where it can have the benefit of allowing returns if not 100% satisfied. Yet, should it ever be found to have a problem, it would simply be demoted back down to research and development status.

 That's how to deal with the customer aspect, but what about the designers? How do we keep everyone happy, including Shapeways employees, throughout the entire process? Simple, we just let everyone know what the machines will do and not do. A design rule checker that spots an error would simply inform the designer that for reasons A, B and C the machine will not print correctly and consequently there will be no returns or money back guarantee. The design would be put into research and development status. So if a designer for example wanted to order a box of polyamide dust that is supposed to be their 3D printed design, then so be it, just give them whatever comes out of the machine.

 You could even have it set up where designers could pay a premium to have their model checked for errors. Or, if they felt confident with the design they could wave the check and pay for whatever came out of the machine regardless of what the machine turned out.

 Design rule checkers would still check designs coming in, so as to hopefully spot anything that could compromise other designs, but they would only contact the designer if the a design would be suspected of possibly contaminating other orders, in which case the design would be given a possible contamination status and not printable until revised.

 It would seem to me that a business model something like this would be a lot less stressful for everyone. The work load on the design rule checkers would be drastically reduced and therefore they could spend more time investigating each order that was specifically paid to have detailed checking. The designers would be happy because they would would be operating the machines almost as if they owned the machines and were operating the machines themselves. They would be free to push the envelope if they wanted and most importantly, they'd only rarely be confronted because they would only be shown their design flaws when they either paid for it or it could possibly corrupt other orders.

 Keep in mind too that under the current system design checkers can be spending time on checking designs that aren't even REAL! I know it's a stretch, but it is entirely possible that a competitor or even multiple competitors could be uploading fake purposely erroneous designs just to throw a monkey wrench into Shapeways' core operating system. However, under a business model like I am proposing competitors wouldn't be able to cause artificial disruptions.

 Finally, try to envision the future. Look at how things are developing. As the whole 3D printing movement exponentially gains more and more momentum we are going to see more people who know nothing about 3D modeling and design in how it intimately relates to 3D printing. Currently, I feel by taking in a sampling of the forums, that Shapeways is mostly getting highly talented designers who know quite a bit about what they are doing as it relates to 3D printing, however, what about when the masses start getting involved. Even though nerves are being tweaked between the design rule checkers and the designers we are all competent enough to keep under control enough to keep working it out as can be seen in this thread, though discussions have been a little heated we are still moving forward to a degree, yet the masses aren't going to be so understanding.

 Changes are most definitely going to be made, but what kind of changes? Lets see! ]]> UniverseBecoming 2013-04-23T18:24:08-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=66730&th=12976#msg_66730 <![CDATA[Messed up formatting of the forum messed my ability to read your lengthy reply.
 (and your reply does not show in the stuff below as I am trying to respond so I do hope it is good stuff that helps Shapeways and their partners understand that clear, open, language barrier free communitcation (as I've said all along) can help us all stop getting models rejected on the first order let alone to 20th.

 UB, I do take it that you have 1st hand experience of order rejections whether the rejecton be true or false?

 Paul

 ]]> stop4stuff 2013-04-23T18:32:52-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=66735&th=12976#msg_66735 <![CDATA[If I had to pay for my models to be checked I would stop using Shapeways.

 3D modelling is a hobby for me, my models are available to others so I can give something back to the community.
 I am prepared to put up with the occasional model rejection because an earlier QA had passed it in error.
 I donate my 'profits' to a local charity.

 Nick H.]]> NickHawkins 2013-04-23T19:37:49-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=66737&th=12976#msg_66737 <![CDATA[Remember that shapeways does not print everything in-house (yet ?), so at least for some materials they are at the mercy
 of their production partners themselves. (Who may even be reluctant to communicate that they needed several tries to print
 a particular order, lest they be considered too clumsy ?)
 And I assume they are already considering increased feedback between their own production and service teams - but
 creating a feedback mechanism that allows the machine operators to log how many "hidden" reprints were necessary
 (and for what reason) may be a non-trivial task when it must also not increase the workload, i.e. not reduce throughput.

 Collaborative tinkering between the designer, checkers and print operators - which is what your R&D phase boils down to -
 does not seem to fit in too well with the speed and efficiency requirements of shapeways' business model (as I understand it).
 So for truely marginal models you may still be better off with some traditional, local rapid prototyping business, unless your
 model is so spectacular or raises such fundamental questions that the shapeways crew can justify putting in extra hours to
 make it work.

 That said, i still assume and hope that most of the recent rash of rejections is just due to the inexperience of new hires and/or
 increased workload (less time per part for checking) - unfortunately it is quite easy in netfabb (and probably competing systems as well)
 to pick a wrong point while measuring.

 And finally, the grand disclaimer - as I do not have a shop, I hardly know what I am talking about. (And as English is not my
 first language, I may not even be putting it in the right words)]]> mkroeker 2013-04-23T19:53:51-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=66861&th=12976#msg_66861 <![CDATA[Yep! Plenty of rejections, Paul. I argued against every one of them too!  None that had already been printed though, that's got to be even more aggravating!

 I don't know how helpful my reply is to Shapeways, I'm just trying to brainstorm up some possible solutions. I'd like to see a solution developed for this ongoing problem since I'm interested in doing further development with some of the designs I have up such as photography and advertising and so forth.

 Good point Nick. Scratch that then, can't have a solution that causes more problems in another area. As a side, I think it's wonderful that you're donating to charity with your hobby.

 Mk, you're doing great with English. I would have never known. Then again, I taught myself how to read and write in English so I'm not that great at it myself and I don't really know for certain if you're doing great with English. Looks good to me though!  ]]> UniverseBecoming 2013-04-25T14:43:07-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=67317&th=12976#msg_67317 <![CDATA[As a designer it would be useful to be able to flag an order as a test print, this might have two effects:

 1) Pre-print QA might take more care to check the model and could send a response back showing where the model is only just within material specs.

 2) So long as the model is safe to print it should be printed even if the result might be imperfect, this would allow the designer to see if it looked right even if some parts were not quite thick enough for general sale.

 These changes could save time (money) for both Shapeways and the designers in the long term by avoiding rejections of previously printed models that had been passed in error.

 Nick H.]]> NickHawkins 2013-05-02T08:04:44-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=67350&th=12976#msg_67350 <![CDATA[Good day ladies and gents,

 I'm curious though: had the nuance rules for FD/FUD material gone out of favor?

 Cheers!

 RoeT]]> matt_atknsn 2013-05-02T19:59:05-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=67393&th=12976#msg_67393 <![CDATA[

NickHawkins wrote on Thu, 02 May 2013 08:04

As a designer it would be useful to be able to flag an order as a test print, this might have two effects:
 .

 Good suggestions!

 Greetings
 Dragoman]]> Dragoman 2013-05-03T13:46:48-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=67395&th=12976#msg_67395 <![CDATA[It is a good suggestion, and I believe may even have been suggested before in one of these myriad threads - what is missing from these discussions is any meaningful, official, response from Shapeways ... imo.]]> AmLachDesigns 2013-05-03T14:16:30-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=67397&th=12976#msg_67397 <![CDATA[

matt_atknsn wrote on Thu, 02 May 2013 19:59

Good day ladies and gents,
 I'm curious though: had the nuance rules for FD/FUD material gone out of favor?

 Apparently, yes. The text has been changed, there no longer is a detailed discussion about thin wires.

 They could have announced it more prominently, though.

 Greetings
 Dragoman
 ]]> Dragoman 2013-05-03T14:23:03-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=67400&th=12976#msg_67400 <![CDATA[Yes indeedy, wires or bars are no longer considered walls, and therefore do not have the same 'rules' as walls - or is someone made a blanket decision for FUD that should be applied to FD?

 Hey ho, once again what worked without any reported issues now does not work due to whatever issues weren't reported
 Had it myself with customers FUD models recently

 Paul]]> stop4stuff 2013-05-03T14:40:03-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=67402&th=12976#msg_67402 <![CDATA[

Dragoman wrote on Fri, 03 May 2013 14:23

 Apparently, yes. The text has been changed, there no longer is a detailed discussion about thin wires.

 They could have announced it more prominently, though.

 Greetings
 Dragoman

 Cheers mate!

 Wish they'd update the page http://www.shapeways.com/design-rules/frosted-detail  (like with some explicit ones ex. 1:3 wire thickness:length ratio; or where should they start measuring them structures... unless I missed it somewhere)

 Chalk more tiny ships unavailable :/

 Best regards,
 RoeT]]> matt_atknsn 2013-05-03T14:58:04-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=67405&th=12976#msg_67405 <![CDATA[..........

 1: All communications between shapeways and customers should be anonymously forwarded to the shop owner so that he or she is aware of everything, it is not only shapeways shop and reputation that's on the line !

 2: When there are problems with a model ordered by a customer shapeways will put the order on hold with consent of the customer to give the designer the chance to fix the problem (rapid prototyping)

 = Customer happy, Shop owner happy and Shapeways happy

 Just do it  ]]> FabMeJewelry 2013-05-03T15:19:07-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=69114&th=12976#msg_69114 <![CDATA[Hi,

 I'm really tired of getting mails saying "You've sold models which could not be 3D printed".
 Especially the silver material seems to be very complicated.

 It's fine for me that a design has to go along with the material rules...
 but today I've got a rejection which says "minimal 1,5 mm for this particular model", instead of the usual 0.6 / 0.8 mm.
 This way rules make no sence and you never know if your design will be printed or not. I think I'll no longer offer the silver material option in my shop.

 Michael
 ]]> MichaelMueller 2013-06-03T16:07:09-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=69124&th=12976#msg_69124 <![CDATA[Seeing your beautiful designed products this could happen to anyone

 With both shops I'm running i didn't have a lot rejections overall but still I'm scared every time someone places an order.
 Maybe it's a good suggestion to leave the "Yippee!" from the "you've sold models" notification ?

 Just some more ideas that would help to dissolve these issues a little bit :

 3: There should be an option to thoroughly check prototypes i order for sale in my shops to ensure they can be (mass) produced in the material i choose, i would even pay a fee for that !

 4: When the design rules change the material should be locked and the shop owner should be notified to check if the design rules are affecting the producability of the model.]]> FabMeJewelry 2013-06-03T17:34:20-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=69150&th=12976#msg_69150 <![CDATA[Hi all

 Have not read every post in this thread, but have had rejects with a few designs lately , first I want to make clear that my rejections were valid.
 I mainly sell models in silver, well when I do sell any , Not being a expert in design, looking at some of the rejects posted some are valid,
 You need to remember with silver , it,s a 3 step process, designs are first printed in wax , then loss wax cast in silver, then finished . And the fishing can be a mixture to mass finishing and hand finishing.

 Some points.
 1 . Mass finishing means a machine does the finishing , I.e the piece get placed in a machine, turned on , then removed ... No control over what gets material gets removed . Hand finishing is a little more selective .... The thing to keep in mind is .2mm or more can be removed from all surfaces at each stage If you have a surface detail that's only .283, you can end up with no detail left... You need to allow for finishing in your design .... The problem is you either have to design a different model for each version of silver or just accept that the each type of silver will look a little different and design in and extra .2 mm I.e if I want detail to end up .3mm I'll design it at .5mm , then I know the final piece will be some where between .51 and .28mm.  ..
 And it not so straight forward sometimes small details can be protected by other details, so you can get a way with detail .283
 I guess the main thing is to allow for polishing, it will remove material every where....

 2. Your design needs to allow for sprue placement, this is the biggest problem I've seen with some of the designs I've seen post here.
 If you have a design that has detail over every surface you don't leave any where for the sprue to be attached .

 Also The pressure of the investment will bend the wax if there is not enough support. .

 Having worked directly with casters, 90% casters will only place 1 sprue on a design, if your design needs " runners" to support the design that's upto the designer. This is where the process falls over because there is not a method of telling shapeways what is part of the final design and what is sprue / runner which can be removed.

 Just recently I had a caster make a bangle from 4.1 mm round wax, 60mm diameter , now I only had 1 x 4mm sprue and no runners and the final cast bent out of shape. No big issue nothing a hammer can't fix. For me. But for shapeways it would eat into profit for the 1 piece. And the wax I used is a lot stronger then wax used in 3d printers

 My guess, it it could be way off and not being able to see the back of the above ring, is there might not be enough area to attach a sprue, the more silver that needs to flow into the design the larger the sprue needs to be.the design has lots of changes from thick to thin which could have flow issue Just a guess

 ]]> stevecim 2013-06-04T02:05:08-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=69496&th=12976#msg_69496 <![CDATA[I GIVE UP. Seriously. I am taking every single model that I have in FUD and setting it as not for sale. I admit, this is probably what Shapeways wants. I don't think they want to support that material any more. They find new 'problems' in every single model that has been sold in the past four months and I'm tired of it. If there is a new material with 'better' detail later, I may come back. Hasta la Vista Shapeways.]]> Roy_Stevens 2013-06-08T19:53:25-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=69950&th=12976#msg_69950 <![CDATA[

matt_atknsn wrote on Fri, 03 May 2013 14:58

 Wish they'd update the page http://www.shapeways.com/design-rules/frosted-detail  (like with some explicit ones ex. 1:3 wire thickness:length ratio; or where should they start measuring them structures... unless I missed it somewhere)

 Hmmm... seems they've taken down that particular page... quite alarming as it'll mean rejection for all my FUD-exclusive models... (0.8mm FUD wires seriously?  )]]> matt_atknsn 2013-06-17T12:48:11-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=69973&th=12976#msg_69973 <![CDATA[Yep. If I want to put mullions into a window through a wall they need to be three times the thickness of the wall. Oh, and they have to be 0.8mm in all three dimensions. I had some L-braces that worked for a while by being 0.8mm on each leg with 0.3mm walls, then they started rejecting them by measuring them from arbitrary points inside the corner.]]> Roy_Stevens 2013-06-17T18:43:55-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=69975&th=12976#msg_69975 <![CDATA[with you there Roy, previously printed models with small walls now rejected due to someone's arbitary interpretaion of 'the rules' = sucks for us trying to explain to CS that the model has been printed already without any reported issues....

 Maybe I'll sign in again next month if there's been any changes to Shapeways policy of arrogance.

 Paul
 ]]> stop4stuff 2013-06-17T19:06:58-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=70393&th=12976#msg_70393 <![CDATA[For those who are interested, this thread complaints has been locked and re-directed here.]]> AmLachDesigns 2013-06-24T14:11:39-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=70422&th=12976#msg_70422 <![CDATA[I originally posted this on another thread. It was pointed out that it was more appropriate on this thread:

 It's become a wack-a-mole game. A model printed successfully, you make it available, a customer orders it, it won't print and you fix the error and re-upload it. Another customer orders it, and it won't print for another reason. You fix it, and there's another problem. It's the mole jumping up in another hole and you keep bashing. [I see this has been expressed previoulsy in this thread]

 I cannot say Shapeways is wrong. Unfortunately by printing these designs in the past they "lured" me into some sloppy habits and enabled me to push the design limits a little too hard. I am in the process of going through all my designs and reworking them.

 Lately I get a new rejection- shells that aren't attached. However they are (except one that was my oops). My understanding was that intersecting shells were OK (and they printed OK in the past). Now I am no longer sure, and the topic doesn't seem covered in the materials guidelines. I have just ordered some new models that have intersecting shells- we will see what happens.

 My thoughts at this point is to only order prints myself, and after I have the physical model in my hands sell it on ebay. It totally defeats the zero inventory, just in time production process that shapeways makes possible, but I just look like an idiot when a customer orders a model and gets an email that it can't be printed.

 I also pointed out to customer service that a "square" wire that measures .88 has an equal cross section to a 1 mm round "wire." No luck.

 And no one can tell me when a wall is too narrow and becomes a wire. With FUD that can make a huge difference. ]]> dcyale 2013-06-24T20:45:17-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=70425&th=12976#msg_70425 <![CDATA[And another thing- as long as we are complaining- breakage during shipping should be an non-issue. As part of my intent to sell my models on ebay I ordered cotton filled cardboard jewelry boxes. About .40 each by the case.

 This is an example of some rolltop desk and chair models I have produced in FUD (and have been trying to get to print again ever since) in a jewelry box. Yes, some are painted, others are half painted- these were tests.

 But I think the production model will get to the customer OK when they are sold on Ebay, and have this box put into a flat rate box.

 I suggested to Shapeways that they could offer packaging like this for $1, prevent breakage, and make a little bit extra on the mark up in response to the survey they sent around a while ago, but didn't hear anything back.

 I understand we want everything fixed today, and that is is not that easy when you are not only growing a buisness, you are growing a technology. But the Shapeways to designer communications could be better.]]> dcyale 2013-06-24T21:06:09-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=70427&th=12976#msg_70427 <![CDATA[The real problem is, that ShapeWays doesn't seem to care about communicating their intents until you have ordered something that they then decide to reject. I've had Mrs Hagens do a manual check of models. She said they checked fine. But once someone, other than myself ordered them. ShapeWays kicks it out. Locks the model for NO SALE, turns off the materials selection and markup section. Then has the nerve to come to me and say,

 "As at this moment we haven't got the possibility (yet) to put a model on private while doing the rejections, this hasn't been done automatically. This is something we are looking in to, that as soon as we are doing the rejections all the models which can't be printed will automatically get a restriction for the material we can't print it in. For now, the designer needs to put his model on private or a restriction on the materials and make the changes to the models and offer them for sale again. Of course I understand that this is something we have to provide and we are going to do this in the nearby future."

 As if they haven't done it, But I watched as they did it. ShapeWays doesn't communicate it's intentions, or it's motives to others very well. It's as if we don't matter to them. Then when something happens, they expect you to just KNOW what they did and why. They dance around a simple answer as well as a seasoned politician in congress. They are experts at giving answers, without actually answering the question. And frankly it's starting to wear a bit THIN-walled.

 This was the answer I got today about printable to now rejected models. Your going to love it, God knows I did.

 "The Production Facility who checked the model in 2012 and printed this model as well unfortunately didn't check this model as strict as our own Production Facility does check them. We saw the notification that this model was printed before and if the model does meet the design rules or almost meets them, we always discuss this rejection with our Production Facility, but because the walls are really too thin this rejection was a valid one and we continued."

 They've tightened up their guidelines so much, you couldn't breath thru a straw as they are now. You NOW have to design something for WSF for it to pass for FUD. And God help you if your designing for WSF material and want to use the dye feature. Used to be the same material as WSF. BUT, without telling a single soul in the universe. ShapeWays dumps that program to make dye now a POLISHED material. Again, CHANGING the guidelines without telling anyone.

 I wouldn't mind some of what they have done. But dammit, COMMUNICATE that fact to me first. Just don't do it and then expect everyone to know what ShapeWays is thinking, and way. I ain't a mind reader. I got PMS, not ESP! ShapeWays has lost it's way. They are trying to so hard to top everyone else. They are changing their guidelines around. But yet THEY DON'T TELL ANYONE!

 All of this, because I had a model that printed just fine last yr. Printed it several times. And WHAM! One day ShapeWays decides that my model no long works, shouldn't have been printed in the first place. I make corrections, upload the new model, it gets rejected, I make more corrections, it gets rejected, and I get so damm mad, I upload the last updated file, AS A NEW MODEL THAT NOW PRINTS! Turns out every rejection I got, was still using the original model to reject from. But the page showed that the updated file uploaded correctly and everything. And what is even more stupid. That first file of that model. I ordered 3 of them. They refunded all 3. But in the package was a set, IN WSF MATERIAL! The same material they kept rejecting it under. And not one person at ShapeWays has the guts to tell me "HOW A MODEL GETS PRINTED IN WSF, BUT REJECTED IN FUD, FD AND EVERYTHING ELSE!".

 ShapeWays, YOU FAIL!

 Or as Ann on "the Weakest Link" would say,

 "Who's one Froot Loop shy of a full bowl?",
 or
 "You would be out of your depth in a car park puddle."
 or
 "Whose brain will be donated to science and rejected?"

 Your's truely,

 Samantha
 aka Mechanoid]]> Mechanoid 2013-06-24T21:29:53-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=70438&th=12976#msg_70438 <![CDATA[I think the words of the day should be the ones we hear at work daily:

 ISO 9001
 Total Quality Management
 Six Sigma
 Process Control
 William Edwards Deming

 I get the feeling Shapeways my have "winged" things early on and is now trying to get things under control. It might have been better to start with tighter design rules and loosen them up over time based on experience. But that's bridge under the water. I now try to design everything with the polished alumide rules to cover all plastics yet still seem to run into problems...
  http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=msg&th=14874& amp;start=0&

 Last week I had some pens come back with flat tops even though they had rounded tops in the design file. I don't know if it was something in the design file (the shell issue I keep reading about?) or something bad that happened during manufacture. Instead of wading through customer service I just redesigned the pens to have a flat top and sent out for revised parts since I also had another change adjustment I needed to make.

 The nexus of thorough design rule checks needs to be at Shapeways for all processes, either in the form of online checking as part of the upload process or an open source rule check deck that can be utilized in various programs to do the checks before upload. .You shouldn't have to buy a part or have someone else buy a part to flag a design or manufacture issue. There should also be a good way to appeal flagged rule checks to improve the rule check deck when possible or a way to permanently sign off on an error to allow manufacture with the error if the designer feels it is a non-issue. However having a decent rule check process right from the get-go would pre-empt many of these problems!

 ]]> MrNib 2013-06-25T02:26:08-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=70507&th=12976#msg_70507 <![CDATA[Had a lovely couple of emails today that made very little sense. Rejections for new models (not old, already-printed ones, thankfully).

 It's high time Shapeways began differentiating between a 'wall' and a 'detail'. The Stainless Steel page tells us that 3.0 mm is the minimum wall thickness for stainless steel; details can be smaller than that. Most of my models have small details and have printed fine several time. Today, however, two rejections:

 If those are 'walls' as opposed to 'details', I'll eat my beret.

 What's more, the e-mail included this little gem:

 "Increase wall thickness to at least 0.03" / 0.762mm in all areas."

 So..... is it 3.0mm, or 0.762mm?

 In any case, I have had plenty of models print successfully with similar designs and 'wall' (detail) thicknesses; what makes today's rejections different? Hell, my Forever ring has even thinner 'text' on it, and it prints just fine, and has done so probably over 20 - 25 times now!

 In any event, it is absolutely impossible, given the design of the ring, to thicken any of these walls to the magnitude requested - more than tripling the thickness of each one, essentially ruining the design. There's no reason this shouldn't print. If the following can print:

 http://shpws.me/mVZV
 http://shpws.me/nwgx
 http://shpws.me/nFfC
 http://shpws.me/nBTX

 ALL of which have detail-walls MUCH thinner than both 3.0mm and 0.762mm, then there is NO reason the above model cannot print.]]> PeregrineStudios 2013-06-25T21:47:30-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=70512&th=12976#msg_70512 <![CDATA[I haven't tried stainless steel yet, but the data sheet says that embossed details require .1mm, or about .04". It looks like you fell in the same trap I did. Because you had models print previously, you designed based upon experience, not strict adherance to the material specifications.

 It would be nice if Shapeways had communiated that they were going to be applying the design guidelines more strictly, instead of simply rejecting models.

 The problem now is how do we have any confidence that models will print succesfully in the future. That is why I pay for a test print- I want to make sure it will print before offering a model for sale- to make sure I didn't mess it up, and I mess up a lot!

 And your particular problem is that all the past ring designs you listed might be rejected in the future at any time if they don't adhere to the materials guidelines. ]]> dcyale 2013-06-25T23:45:33-00:00 Re: Preventing Rejections http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=70514&th=12976#msg_70514 <![CDATA[The issue appears that your details are too tall. For it to be considered a detail, they must be no taller than they are thick. It appears yours are taller then than they are thick.]]> Youknowwho4eva 2013-06-26T00:40:10-00:00