Choose your orientation

Hey All,

To preface this question I want to say that asking this question does not mean that we will be giving direct access to choosing orientation. This thread is not a guarantee that it will ever happen. That said, we've been asked about choosing orientation for a looooooong time and we're looking into the possibility and how it could potentially work.

I have 3 questions:

Do you want control over orientation?

What material (s) would you want it for?

Why specifically do you want it? ie, What are you making and why does having a particular orientation impact that product?

Thanks for your feedback, I know that this has been addressed elsewhere but we wanted to have this info in a centralized space.

~Andrew

Here is my issue. I have received FUD models where one side is rather smooth, and the opposing side is considerably rougher.
When I asked why, the answer I was always given was "orientation". The trouble is.. I don't know what orientation was actually used during the printing.

I could assume that a 90 degree rotation would smooth out both sides, but should that be +90 or -90 to achieve what I desire??

I was told that the rough surface is due to the support material, but that alone doesn't explain all of what I've seen. I can see nothing worse than rotating the model the "wrong" direction and ending up with an orientation that I requested, but produces an unusable model.

I also know that SW has a 'rule' about printing airplanes nose-down so as to maximize the smoothness on the wings. Unless designers understand such things, they may go about picking the "wrong" orientation.

I think we need more information here. It would help to see some models up close while they are in the print tray (to understand the orientation selected), and then examine the surface finishes with some up-close photography.

I've advocated in the past... we need to see a video of a model go thru the entire process from start to finish - checking the file, choosing the orientation for the tray, all the way thru printing and cleaning, and then closeups of the final product. I know that it's some labor, and it's problematic because of privacy concerns, but it should be possible to work out something.
====
To supply a relevant quote:

After a time, you may find that having is not so pleasing a thing after all as wanting. It is not logical, but it is often true. - Spock, ST:TOS

user-defined orientation in FUD/FXD and WSF would be lovely!

Why? To minimise the disastrous impact of layer lines and support-material roughness on the more delicate details.

I agree with Stony that we need more info - what is this unpublished "rule" about planes for example? We designers could certainly benefit from having all such "rules" published on the material design pages so we can make better, more successful models! Hiding these "rules" only serves to tie our hands, leading to more friction when things go wrong. (Not long ago, a thread revealed that "open" models like train-car shells get printed upside-down to minimise the amount of support material used - this has a major impact on any roof details, so the sensible design solution would be a separate roof that gets printed right-side up. Trouble is, if we don't get told about these "rules" we cannot adapt to them...)

Can't help but feel all of this has been said here ad-nauseum...

To respond to the "rules" I think that is a misnomer.... there may be some best practices that are followed by some people in the company but that doesn't make them rules.

As you can imagine, across several facilities and an ever changing teams (as people come on board, change roles, get promoted, leave the company etc) certain ideas come into play, they get shared and may live or die depending on who has them.

I don't know of any "airplane" rule and I'm not sure that it still exists. It might be a best practice in one facility but not another. In general the less rules there are the more concise and easier to follow they are. Therefore someone might have thought it was a good idea to plan airplanes a certain way but by no means is it a rule that everyone knows about for follows, making it very hard for us to share this best practice with you.

What's important to understand is the logic behind the process, and once you know that you can design accordingly. Its also important to remember that in most of our processes, the idea of "product" is fairly divorced from the model. No one really looks at things as a "plane" or "train" they see an object and try to make it as efficiently and best they can. If I can help you guys understand this I'd be more than happy to explain further.

I've never had big issues with orientation although if I could specify an orientation I might for stainless materials. So far my fishing lures seem to be consistently oriented which means the obvious step patterns have been consistent. The more they resemble fish scales the better, I suppose. I'm kind of worried that someone might get one that looks different than a photo, although they are always different than the stainless renders that don't show the stepping (and quite frankly don't render the stainless metal colors well either). I'm probably lucky that flat oval type objects are always printed the same way for stability in the printer, however that luck may run out for more uniquely shaped lures or spoons down the line.

I think you've hit the nail on the head. This "logic" is somewhat opaque at the moment. And the fact that the techs don't know what our models are meant to be only makes things worse. That's EXACTLY why we need a system where the designer can decide which faces of the model are less important (so can be "face-down" in the tray), and which direction is least damaging for the print lines. This is compounded when SW is acting as customer interface - I don't get to filter out the models for quality control before they go to the paying customer. This is a case of SW having to decide if it is only a bunch of fun-lovin' nerds playing with toys, or a grown-up business promising to deliver goods that meet an advertised standard.

(And I include myself among the "nerds", seeing as I like playing with designs...)

Andrew, thanks for posting this!

I would, very much, appreciate having control over the print orientation of my parts. I used various forms of 3D printing as it evolved over the last 25 years in my professional life, so I have a very good understanding of the impact orientation makes on print quality. With retirement, I'm stepping my use of the technology up considerably.

I design model railroad parts and equipment. Quite a bit of this stuff is older equipment partially built from wood. The printer grain can actually help with some of these things... see my recent FXD print of my HO scale CNR Hart Convertible Gondola. In this, with "bathtub" orientation, it gives a nice wood grain effect.

In other models, the boards run vertically, and bathtub print orientation works against me. Still other models are of all- steel prototypes. and it would be best to have these smooth surfaces facing up.

As long as a designer understands what factors are influenced by print orientation, this can give huge benefits in consistent good quality. I was used to specifying print direction at work, both for our own SLS printer and for outside agencies. It was a real shock to my system when I realized SW doesn't accommodate this!

I absolutely agree with Stony, that people will need some sort of guidance to understand how to choose print orientation. I learned on the job, as the technology developed, while just about everybody else was learning the same thing... but now we have artists and hobbyists becoming involved in printing, not just engineering types. These folks definitely need some sort of reference material to help them make good choices.

A "no preference" button could make the choice easy for novices- this would allow the SW people to use their judgement. Perhaps the choice might not be ideal, but neither is the scenario where a novice makes the wrong choice.

My designs are almost exclusively FUD or FXD. I only use WSF when making structural components that can either be easily cleaned up or that will be hidden, or when forced to use it due to model size. So far, I haven't seen the need to use any of the other materials.

Steve Hunter

Andrew, that "airplane rule" stems from a posting by your ex-colleague Natalia on page two of this thread (yes, June 2012 . 'nuff said...)

Just to be clear, my use of the word "rule" above was inarticulate. I did NOT mean to imply that it had been printed as a sign and tacked up on the wall in the factory right under the "Number of days since a Lost Work Accident" poster. <GRIN>

I was referring to Natalia's comment as mentioned by @mkroker.. I just couldn't find the thread at the time.

Some control over orientation is basically critical to my Shapeways products. I make fine scale parts for nutso WWI aircraft modelers in FUD and FXD -- my competition is resin AM guys; the support "fuzz" on the wrong side of a part basically makes the part useless. For instance I am offering replacement propeller spinners that SW chooses to print upside down, meaning the inside is perfectly smooth -- the side that is completely hidden on the finished model. Meanwhile the outside surface requires much sanding and high-build primer to get a nice finish.

I have resorted to adding all kinds of extra sprues and junk to try and trick SW into printing the part in an optimal orientation. For objects like the spinners however, I haven't figured out a way to "game you." It would just be so much easier if I could say "please print it this way."



print artifacts still visible after much much prep and sanding (FXD here

Knowing the print orientation is important to design better prints, which is of benefit to both the us and Shapeways. Better prints that are accurately reproduced more easily can take away some of the risk from the regular consumers(not Designers) and boost consumer confidence in Shapeways.

Personally I pretty much exclusively print in WSF and WSFP so those would be the materials I'd like to see selectable orientation, also given the nature of how WSF is printed I'd imagine it might even be the easiest to implement it for.

Here is a perfect example -- just got these in today -- wheel covers printed in FXD. The parts in the rear were obviously printed on their sides -- and they suck! The two covers in the foreground were printed the way I had hoped -- detail side up -- and they are perfect.

I`m not affected by the orientation too much , even if I find that on some designs is there a bit of "stair" effect but is not too evident.

My personal opinion is that people expect PHYSICAL DETAIL when that detail must be PAINTED not MODELED.

Arguing a 0.2 detail is something "bad" I find it not so , in real life , 0.2-0.5 are the engineering errors that are normal.

I never seen injected products with that deep detail , and what I have seen with that deep detail was either CNC or HAND CARVED and the DETAIL FADE after 5 months at last in wood plastic and some metals.

From my point of view there is no need to specify the orientation unless it lands errors more than 0.5 mm or 1 mm.

I suggest people to try to SCULPT BY HAND and then ask for HIGHER DETAIL.

That way they learn the limits of real life.

numarul7, are you suggesting we SHOULDN'T expect any detail on our prints? 0.5-1mm error tolerance is worse than I'd get carving things freehand! If I did not want detail, I could scratch-build from sheet plastic at a fraction of the cost of a 3D printed item. The issue is that SW says it can create fine detail, and we have all seen some good prints with fine detail, but the random choice of print orientation makes it all a crap-shoot.

[edit to correct spelling...]

Orientation is critical to accurately produced models with details shown correctly.

If you do not know the orientation, you do not know whether your models will be as you intend or vague approximations - a vital distinction if you are hoping to sell via Shapeways. If the orientation is correct, beautiful models can be produced, with crisp and clean printing and minimal stepping. If the orientation is bad you get the kind of prints that give 3d printing a bad name.

I have had this problem here over several years (with strong and flexible) - if I could be bothered I would look out the threads I started about it. Perhaps you guys at SW should search the forums...

AmLachDesigns thanks for your input! We're trying to get all this information centralized into this thread, if a particular conversation comes to mind feel free to drop a link.

I would love to have this option in FCS, WSF and steel. I think it's extremely important to keep product quality consistent. If I take a pic of a product and the customer receives something that looks different, it's not good.

It's also an aesthetic choice. In WSF sometimes the print lines create an effect that can either be bad, or be used in your favor.

I would like to have this option, but I would also like it to be an opt-in per model, so I don't have to manually select orientation for models in which it is not important at all. If you don't manually select an orientation, it does whatever it normally does.

I want control over orientation for WSF.

Two reasons:

1) some of my models have, e.g. a wall with small windows in it - print orientation can mean those holes are filled in.

2) Very large models that cross the boundary between the two lasers (at least recently) have had a nasty "jolt" across the boundary. I have designed a model to fit in only one half of the machine, but only in one orientation. If it is decided to print in another orientation then it crosses the boundary between the lasers.

I would like to control orientation for precious metals and steels. Some of my objects have non reachable parts for polishing that expose very clearly the steppings, if not printed horizontally or vertically. If we could choose print orientation that would be awesome so that we (designers) will know in advance what will customers get.
Here a picture of a pendant with the inner side exposing printing steppings due to an obliquos printing.

Wow, I had assumed that our objects were already being printed in the orientation of our models. I specifically choose the orientation of my STL file before I upload it into Shapeways. I haven't printed that many models, but every model that I've received so far seems to have been printed in the orientation that I selected, so I haven't noticed. Maybe that was just a coincidence?

Q: Do you want control over orientation?
A: Yes.

Q: What material (s) would you want it for?
A: Strong & Flexible Plastic.

Q: Why specifically do you want it? ie, What are you making and why does having a particular orientation impact that product?
A: I specialize in kinetic sculptures, so the orientation is important to me for functional reasons and not so much for visual reasons. For example, I noticed that a wheel attached to an axle that is printed "standing up" does not rotate as well as that same wheel/axle combination when it is printed "on its side."

Thank you for your consideration!