Add new fields (min wall, wire, detail..) in order to auto disable materials

Hi,

I'm posting here because the feedback.shapeways.com site does not work for me.

My idea is to let the creator of an object to say what is its minimum wall height and/or minimum wire size and/or minimum embossed details.
Then the ShapeWays website can inform more directly the creator about the materials that don't fit the object.

That could also be a feature for the ShapeWays API : if someone is creating an object on a website that uses the API, the user could be informed which materials are adequate and thoses which aren't.

Theses fields can be private or even public so that people buying the item know more about the product's properties (this is not revealing the volume).
I have to precise SW does not have to compute anything - the fields are up to the creator and are optional.

Same to me - I disabled my shop, because I got these candy emails, like " Hurray - you sold a model through your shop ..."
Then, a day or two later, ..." ohhhhh, we are sooooo sorry to say, that the selected material / model did not went through ..."

As the refunding procedure of SW is quite demanding (you only get a sort of a voucher instead of a refund to your paypal account..) I did not wanted more customers to loose money on my models, due to inappropiate IT/Software which could easily auto disable wrong materials .....

It would also be useful if Shapeways announced rule changes that make previously printable models unprintable (related to 'wires' in FUD) :cry:

@Salorian - A credit voucher is issued, but a refund back to PayPal can be requested and will be issued (unless the rules on that changed too)

Paul

@stop4stuff
Yes, I know that, on request, they will refund your credit.
But this is a very awkward procedure in times of 24hrs shipments etc.
At Amazon and many other online shops as well you get refunds automatically credited.
To me, this seems a little bit like a rip off procedure - request a refund, send emails, no refund received, again send emails, etc.
This is a dishonest procedure, which the customers of a "young modern age" startup does not deserve .....

Heinz

This entirely depends on your intentions, i believe:
If you intend to try again with a fixed model, the credit voucher saves you the transaction fee, or the
2-3 days transaction time for a SEPA transfer. Only if your intention is to be disgusted and leave should
the inconvenience of sending an email be necessary. (@stop4stuff: i do not think refusing a refund would
be legally possible for shapeways, or at least their EU branch)

"If you intend to try again with a fixed model, the credit voucher saves you the transaction fee...."

and exactly here starts the problem - SW never tells you WHY your model was rejected (only these childisch messages like ... ohhh, we are soooo sorry that your sweet lovely model did not surpass our grim test procedures ...)
Thus you are stuck in the dark - can redo the model by just guess & gut feel, re-enter the model, just to see, that it is rejected one more time ...
This might work for hobby users, but not for business.

And, back to the credits, you also have to manually deduct them in your order procedure.
Bottom line: I think it is either unprofessional or by sin will, that credits and their refund are encumbered this way.
Most likely the users will utilize PAYPAL, not SEPA, thus the transaction time saving argument does not count - it´s just a mouse click...
There is no solid reason in doing it, like Amazon, Ebay and million other online businesses do it - in a professional way....

Again, the simplest solution to getting an answer is to ask.
If the rejection email isn't clear as to why the model failed (looking at attached images is sometimes not at all helpful) the easist solution is to ask for clarification as to why the model failed. Sometimes the rejection is operator error - classic for me was a chainmaille piece rejected for 'too many shells' - the operator was expecting a single shell, but as we all know chainmaille is made up of individual rings (i,e, shells)

Back on topic.

Auto checking for wires is (imo) not viable unless the programmer makes known what the definition for a 'wire' is under material guidelines. e.g. Frosted Ultra Detail has a minimum wall thickness of 0.3mm yet a 'wire' needs to be a minimum wall thickness of 0.6mm, this could cause contradictions in the model reporting and in all probability cause more hassle than it's worth.

Paul
[hr]

stop4stuff Modeller for hireShapeways Shop - Controller PendantTwitterYouTube​

[hr]