Introducing 14k Gold, read more on the blog.
Home » Community » Work in progress » Thickness Inconsistencies
Search Search  
Show: Today's Messages    Show Polls    Message Navigator
Thickness Inconsistencies [message #55278] Fri, 12 October 2012 23:45 UTC Go to next message
avatar thetimpotter  is currently offline thetimpotter
Messages: 5
Registered: March 2012
Go to my shop
Junior Member
I am having issues printing a triangular column that has the minimum thickness. When the model is measured by the shapeways team with netfabb, some column edges return a .73 height, while most others return something between .06 and .6.

What might be going on here? Why would the .stl have different measurements than the sketchup file?

Are triangles not allowed when the thickness is at the edge of design guidelines?

Triangle = .7 mm thick x 1 mm wide in sketchup
Re: Thickness Inconsistencies [message #55293 is a reply to message #55278 ] Sat, 13 October 2012 13:27 UTC Go to previous messageGo to next message
avatar stonysmith  is currently offline stonysmith
Messages: 1693
Registered: August 2008
Go to my shop
Senior Member
moderator
The production team should be sending you a picture of their measurements along with the rejection email.
Could you possibly post that picture here?


Patience, Persistance, Politeness - the 3Ps will help us get us to Perfect Printed Products
Re: Thickness Inconsistencies [message #55303 is a reply to message #55293 ] Sat, 13 October 2012 17:45 UTC Go to previous messageGo to next message
avatar Fredd  is currently offline Fredd
Messages: 350
Registered: November 2011
Go to all my models
Senior Member
This individual had a similar problem in SU. http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=msg&th=11125& amp;start=0&
One thing to remember, if your program can set unit lengths in its native format, and you export it as a STL, the unit lengths you set originally are disregarded in the STL. So uploading a STL to SW you have 2 options, each unit can be either a mm or an inch.
Posting a link to the file wouldn't hurt, also a photo as Stoney suggested.


Have any questions regarding Blender, and need fast answers, you are always welcome at the IRC Server Freenode, channel #blender. As a bonus, several there have experience in modelling for 3D prints.

Keith
Re: Thickness Inconsistencies [message #55304 is a reply to message #55293 ] Sat, 13 October 2012 17:46 UTC Go to previous messageGo to next message
avatar thetimpotter  is currently offline thetimpotter
Messages: 5
Registered: March 2012
Go to my shop
Junior Member
Certainly. There are three, I was talking about the last one in the original post.

http://i.imgur.com/mSVXB.jpg
Re: Thickness Inconsistencies [message #55313 is a reply to message #55304 ] Sat, 13 October 2012 20:27 UTC Go to previous messageGo to next message
avatar stonysmith  is currently offline stonysmith
Messages: 1693
Registered: August 2008
Go to my shop
Senior Member
moderator
Okay.. there is another topic at work here. (in addition to the notes above)

In this case, if you will study the Design Guidelines, look at the difference in definition between "Supported" and "Supporting"

index.php?t=getfile&id=21650&private=0

It's a matter of physics.. the bars in yellow are likely to break because they support the area to the right that has more mass, but the bars in red are "protected" due to the fact that they are enclosed by a support structure. I can tell you this.. even IF your item was printed successfully, due to it's shape and thickness, it's likely to never survive being shipped. That yellow area is going to break EASILY. For this model, I wish that Shapeways had some way to pack it using two peices of cardboard sandwiched together.. this will never survive the baggie.

One possible way around this is to place a thicker "sprue" around the whole thing such that everything is "supported" , and then cut the sprue off after it's printed. Unfortunately, that's going to add a bit of cost to the price.

  • Attachment: mSVXB.jpg
    (Size: 118.51KB, Downloaded 99 time(s))


Patience, Persistance, Politeness - the 3Ps will help us get us to Perfect Printed Products
Re: Thickness Inconsistencies [message #55314 is a reply to message #55313 ] Sat, 13 October 2012 21:01 UTC Go to previous messageGo to next message
avatar stonysmith  is currently offline stonysmith
Messages: 1693
Registered: August 2008
Go to my shop
Senior Member
moderator
To answer your original question..
index.php?t=getfile&id=21651&private=0

From what I've been able to determine, the tool that Shapeways uses to measure walls does so via a line perpendicular to the wall that they select.

In the case of both of these shapes, the "Diameter" may be 0.7mm, however, as you see, if they measure the triangle slightly off-center (in red) then it comes up short. What is a bit tough is the (purple) measurement. Even though the model is actually only 0.45mm in that direction, their measurement software won't report it.. it measures straight across, and will report all 8 faces of the octogon as 0.7mm.

But, also notice that the triangular shape has about half of the area of the octogon. In the printer, the octogon is much more likely to "hold together" than the triangular shape will because it has more mass to it.

  • Attachment: triangle.jpg
    (Size: 48.04KB, Downloaded 90 time(s))


Patience, Persistance, Politeness - the 3Ps will help us get us to Perfect Printed Products
Re: Thickness Inconsistencies [message #55322 is a reply to message #55314 ] Sun, 14 October 2012 00:34 UTC Go to previous message
avatar thetimpotter  is currently offline thetimpotter
Messages: 5
Registered: March 2012
Go to my shop
Junior Member
RE: Triangle - Hexagon

How interesting. Perhaps a deformed hexagon that mimics a triangle would print? What is causing the software to misread the measurement, a non-horizontal face?

I will think about how I might add a "sprue" that is easy to detach. I will at least add a quick one to see if that would solve the printing issue.

 
   
Previous Topic:Vortex bowl
Next Topic:My latest project