http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php Shapeways: Bring your creativity to life in 3D http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=22160&th=4284#msg_22160 Flugel Horn to be printed in metal and used as a pendant... I paid careful attention to the geometry specifications (ProMetal) and designed the parts to have a minimum wall thickness of 2mm (the piece is 50mm in its biggest dimension)

Here is the reject image;



In the past I have had models successfully printed with no reported problems that have wall thicknesses a lot less than 3mm, but now my Flugel Horn is rejected due to having wall thickness less than 3mm... why?

Even the design rules for stainless say upto 50mm models can have wall thicnkesses of 1mm, see; http://www.shapeways.com/blog/archives/313-Initial-Design-ru les-Stainless-Steel-3D-printing.html

Losing faith here in stainless big time

]]> stop4stuff 2011-01-05T11:40:56-00:00 http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=22176&th=4284#msg_22176
I'd say submit it again and you will probably have it reviewed by a different person, but also you may have to take some artistic license to make it printable. Either distort the shape until the parts touch or add a connection just 1.5mm thick between the flare of the horn and the tube just before the curve to join the masses more directly. Filleting the edges of the connection would probably double it's strength while not changing the mass or appearance much at all. This would also help the bronze flow better during the infiltration process and reduce the likelihood of it breaking if they are brave enough to tumble-polish it with dozens of other random metal shapes.

Perhaps you could add a loop for the pendant that also acts as support?

This is great model, don't give up on it!]]> aeron203 2011-01-05T16:48:40-00:00 http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=22179&th=4284#msg_22179 It Arrived: Musical instrument models and Flugel Horn). I understand about the geometry and have already given alot of artistic license without the model looking like a trumpet... the WSF version (smaller wall thickness) has also alot of artistic license to make it work) I could just scale up by 50% to get the 3mm wall thickness, but then the model becomes 75mm long and, frankly, too big for a 'girly pendant'

A support between the flare and tube would proportionately be the wrong size and look very wrong at 1.5mm (to scale the support would be about 0.2mm thick, and the model is all out of whack for scale anyway) the spec is to have the horn hanging with mouthpiece uppermost. The flare of the horn is 2mm thick all the way to just infront of the valves where the main tube is about 4.75mm dia. The forward-most loop of the tube starts at 2mm and expands to about 2.75mm where the frontmost valve tube is attached... the length of this 'free' (solid) pipework is around 50mm, much less than the 2mm rails on my Twin Rail mobius pendant

There are several workarounds that I can try, however time is not on my side.

Included in the workarounds are;

- Redesigning for a thicker WSF model and try to get the material to soak up a low pelting point alloy (field's metal, 62 C melting point)

- Have a 3 part mould printed in sandstone and cast using a Bismuth-Tin alloy (melting point of 138 C) that is used for GW 40K type figures.

Also I have gone a different route and am waiting on a reply.

Onwards and Upwards!]]> stop4stuff 2011-01-05T17:43:05-00:00 http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=22180&th=4284#msg_22180 Aaron's observations are mostly spot on. But the major problem and probably the reason why the design was rejected has to do with the "green strength" of this part. Green parts have about as much strength as unfired potters clay. Asymmetrical parts are always challenging. Your horn design is way cool but, with that wide bell end supported only by that skinny loop of tube, it would be extremely difficult to de-powder and get it into the furnace without breaking. An anticipated failure rate of 2:1 or more likely 3:1 is the likely reason the job was declined.

-G]]> GlenG 2011-01-05T18:02:43-00:00 http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=22181&th=4284#msg_22181 stop4stuff 2011-01-05T18:12:46-00:00 http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=22183&th=4284#msg_22183
The only other thing I can think of is adding a temporary structure to the metal part, like a 3mm thick bar attached with very short thin connections so you can cut them off and polish it flat later. That casting will probably take as much or more effort to clean up, so this seems a little more promising if it can be printed. I suspect it might get through if reinforced properly.

Either way this is turning out pretty interesting so do let us know what happens.]]> aeron203 2011-01-05T20:12:03-00:00 http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=22186&th=4284#msg_22186 Also, one heads up! Most of the so called "low melt alloys" contain elements that are not suitable for skin contact. Bismuth is a heavy metal not highly toxic but is likely to cause a black stain on human skin. Some people may even develop allergic (dermatitis) reactions.

-G]]> GlenG 2011-01-05T20:22:23-00:00 http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=22194&th=4284#msg_22194 As always, your input is very valuable to us. Even with the great customer service we'd be doing a lot more guessing without having an experienced expert available. In a business that prints basically anything there has to be some margin in order for things to work, and at some point a number has to be chosen, and that number appears to be 3mm.

Still, it's important for us to discuss the other considerations because the reality is that the success or failure of the print and of the service truly is shape dependent. For example an 8 inch tall tree of 3mm elements would be nearly impossible to de-powder. 250 copies of a 3mm sphere would cost only $35 and that just isn't sensible for your business.

I understand that we can't have a hundred Glens reviewing our models, and without a firm number the results are going to seems totally random to the customers, but I think putting more effort into educating people in addition to having a reasonable minimum will return maximum value and satisfaction to the customer and profitability for the business.

Apologies to Paul for sort of hijacking the thread with this conversation but it's obviously not OT. Maybe it would be best to start a separate discussion compiling tips to help people think through the process before investing so much effort in their model, since it seems many people are still unclear about why their models are rejected after reading the current design rules.

The horn would be amazing in silver!]]> aeron203 2011-01-05T21:33:31-00:00 http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=22197&th=4284#msg_22197

What gets my goat is that Shapeways have 'moved the goalposts' without informing customers first. And that has a direct impact about how Shapeways customers feel about the business.

@ Glenn, quite frankly, I am at the stage with this design where I am prepared to pay Shapeways just to find out if the flugel horn ca be made successfully... I didn't say anything yet about my Baritone model did I, that got rejected way before the Flugel... the beefed out one got rejected too.

But hey, like I said there are work-arounds... fwiw I'll be coating any LMP alloy cast models with a polyurethane varnish.

I don't let knock downs get me down, but I will have my say.

Like I said before...

Onwards and upwards.]]> stop4stuff 2011-01-05T22:16:20-00:00 http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=22199&th=4284#msg_22199 all of then horn designs would look great in Sterling! My best advice would be to print a master pattern in the highest res plastic that SW provides, do a little hand work to clean it up and then find a jewelry casting service to make molds and cast them in Sterling or bronze. This is not the most direct method and will likely cost 1-$200 for the first few castings. There is also a service provider in NYC that will print directly to wax on SolidScape machines. Cost will vary with the desired resolution. Again, not cheap but fantastic results.
You have a great concept here Paul. It could be quite lucrative if you find the right market. It's all a matter of how much you are willing to risk.

Good luck with it,
-G
]]> GlenG 2011-01-05T22:30:55-00:00 http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=22201&th=4284#msg_22201
I have already paid my money for an advertised service... I now have a coupon for a little more money than I paid to pay for another model/more models that may or may not fail... sorry, I am trying to build up my own business and am not very happy with goalposts being moved mid flow. This one issue has now provided me with a reason to rethink and possibly push my plans in a completely different direction that may or may not include Shapeways.

Silver would be nice, Shapeways do not offer that. From a master, I'd probably looking at 3 months turnaround for a line in silver at about £30 per piece, but that is not where I want to go.

I have yet to talk to my friend about options, he likes the stainless items that I have already and knows his daughter would wear the horn in steel whilst she would not wear (and does not wear) typical jellewery pieces... It is the look and style of the printed stainless that makes the difference.

Anyways, tomorrow is a different day and new emails about options should be incoming.

Ranted a bit, did'nt I... time to party now...


Party On!

]]> stop4stuff 2011-01-05T22:54:31-00:00 http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=22230&th=4284#msg_22230
Righto...
Good news
DMLS can be done with wall thickness down to as small as 1mm dependin upon the geometry.
Bad news
the Flugel Horn would com in at around the £300 mark as a one-off or maybe down to £90 per unit for 10 units.

Please Shapeways get this hiccup sorted out with the 'furnace boys' ]]> stop4stuff 2011-01-06T16:04:41-00:00 http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=22240&th=4284#msg_22240 Just in case you have not looked into this here is a list of SolidScape service bureaus:
<http://www.solid-scape.com/resellers_list.html#europe>
Some of these providers should offer casting services as well.

You might want to check out some of the websites dedicated to metal arts and craftsmen such as : <http://www.ganoksin.com/index.htm> This is US based but should have links to plenty of Euro orgs. Many links to services found on these sites as well.

Last word, go take a jewelry making class at a local art center and do it yourself for next to nothing. Of course this might dip into your "party time"
-G

]]> GlenG 2011-01-06T17:59:16-00:00 http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=22241&th=4284#msg_22241
I don't know how life is for you, but I do have other issues to deal with as well as a potential 6 month time investment wasted. Last night's partying was just to get away from the stuff built up during the day, and I feel like tonight might end up the same.

Always looking for the workarounds,
Paul

[edit]
p.s. In one discussion today relating to DSML, the guy was amazed that shapeways can offer stainless and accept models at such a low price.

I was wondering maybe if shapeway could develope some software that automatically simulates the thermal dynamics of the print within the upload process so that customers know beforehand whether a model would be possible in stainless... oh & btw, my twin rail mobius pendant has 6 lengths of approx 100mm of 2mm solid tube unsupported with, as yet, no reported failures... idk what the probelm is with the horn ]]> stop4stuff 2011-01-06T18:16:17-00:00 http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=22242&th=4284#msg_22242
I understand your frustrations, but in order to keep the price of stainless down, the change was needed. It's not for a lack of effort, or skill. It's just not price effective to allow parts under 3mm. I have many items myself that are now unprintable in SS that I'll either have to remodel or let go. I've read bits of the thread, but didn't see anyone suggest making your model the 3mm thick, and the areas that you want to be thinner and/or more detailed to tool by hand?

I'm sure as the process evolves we'll see the 3mm shrink. Just right now, to assure that smaller items didn't fail it would cost everyone more money as each item would have to be evaluated on upload weather or not they reach the 3mm minimum to be able to price them differently. ]]> Youknowwho4eva 2011-01-06T18:35:53-00:00 http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=22243&th=4284#msg_22243
]]> stop4stuff 2011-01-06T18:54:52-00:00 http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=22247&th=4284#msg_22247 gibell 2011-01-06T21:09:17-00:00 http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=22273&th=4284#msg_22273 I must confess that most of my Stainless Steel designs infringe one or two of these "new" rules.
As a consequence, I think it is time for me the give Stainless Steel a break, until things go back to (what used to be) normal.]]> Magic 2011-01-07T06:57:10-00:00 http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=22274&th=4284#msg_22274 Shapeways own design. Does this means a lot of the existing jewellery designs can't be printed in stainless anymore ?]]> fx2 2011-01-07T08:06:46-00:00 http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=22275&th=4284#msg_22275 But I have received no official word that design rules for stainless steel have been changed?
So I'm not about to change my design tactics until I do

Looking at the Flugel horn, it looks a lot like one of the typical "fail" examples in the initial design rules, the wine glass:
http://www.shapeways.com/blog/archives/313-Initial-Design-ru les-Stainless-Steel-3D-printing.html :

Quote:

small parts up to 50 by 50mm 95% of these parts print successfully. They can have very thin walls of below 1mm. But, the most important reason for failing is that the parts are not strong enough or do not self-support. The model will either fall apart or crush itself. Lets imagine we are trying to print a wine glass standing upright. A 1mm thick stem might work if it were printed alone. But in a wine glass the stem has to support the bowl. During production the model is very fragile. If the bowl is heavy it will simply topple over.

So far I have had no problems with items smaller than 5cm and using 1.2 mm struts, as long as there are enough of them to create an overall structurally sound design.
(think sphere structures, circles, common supports etc)

The mobius rail designs seem to be at the limit, long thin parts but still connected on more than one end, which seem to be the least trick, don't create masses connected by small items, but make sure "ends meet"

Cheers,

Stijn



]]> virtox 2011-01-07T08:28:08-00:00 http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=22276&th=4284#msg_22276


The flare of the horn has a wall thickness of 2mm... the hollow inside the flare tapers to 1mm (point A) where the tube is a solid 5mm diameter. Parts are all joined at the points marked B. The loop of the tube is supported at both ends and tapers from 2mm at the valves to 2.6mm where it is joined a B, the length is about 50mm. For scale, the background grid squares are 20mm.

If I change the model to what Glen suggested... would the model be printed?
I say no, because of this "Until that we have agreed a consistent approach our management team have taken the decision to reject any models under 3mm. (exerpt from an email recieved)

Whether or not the design would fail is imaterial as the powers that be have said 3mm walls

[edit]
If it costs more to get this model done... I'll pay for it... it may not be the business model that Shapeways are working towards, but this is turning into a mission for me.]]> stop4stuff 2011-01-07T09:07:05-00:00 http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=22277&th=4284#msg_22277

But still I can see why; the "wide" part hangs from a relatively very thin thin a part, like the wineglass example.
The problem seems that the load around point A is probably too much for the green stage. No matter if you make it 3 4 or 5 mm, It's a big heavy part just hanging.

Not sure where, but there was also a post/tutorial about it not being possible to connect two larger parts by a relatively thin middle.

And it might also just be that if the part is slightly over 50mm the rule checking applied more thorough?

Cheers,

Stijn





]]> virtox 2011-01-07T10:11:56-00:00 http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=22279&th=4284#msg_22279 stop4stuff 2011-01-07T10:24:56-00:00 http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=22287&th=4284#msg_22287
[...snip...]

Unfortunately the current approach will remain in place until that we have agreed a new approach so until then any model under 3mm should be rejected (although this does not always happen as some models have slipped through the checks and been delivered...other customers have come to hear about this and this again causes even more frustration).

We expect that the outcome of these changes will be one of the following three options:

1. Strict min. 3mm rule. All models under 3mm will be rejected, regardless of if they have been printed before or not.

2. Strict min. 3mm rule for all new submissions. All models under 3mm will be rejected, only exception thin models previously printed (=successfully printed previosly, models which requiered numerous print attempts lose us money and are simply not possible)

3. Try once approach. Make one attempt to print thin models if they fail they will be rejected, if they work they will be guaranteed for future prints.

[/...snip]

hey ho

]]> stop4stuff 2011-01-07T16:52:36-00:00 http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=22348&th=4284#msg_22348
I am usure the 3 mm rule is so strict. I recently printed new models - the average D6 and the average D8 - with a frame and struts of 2 mm of diameter in Metal.






The main problem is that, currently - for such models - as long as we do not try to print it, we don't know whether it is printable and, even worse, even if it has printed once we are unsure it can still be printed a second time if ordered by a customer. We cannot afford to have such a Damocles sword for Stainless Steel prints.

I hope this will be sort off very quickly.]]> Magic 2011-01-09T09:39:05-00:00 http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=22349&th=4284#msg_22349
the mystery to me is why this info/problem/decision is only to be found in a few forum topics or private emails.
I find this highly disturbing!

And I hate to draw conclusions from unofficial information but for most shop-owners this info is crucial to strategy and planning..

I've been spending a lot of time and money on perfecting thin (1.2mm) metal designs. (sized <<5cm)
I have yet to get a design rejected for thin walls in SS.
So curious how my latest order will fare..

Of the three mentioned strategies, only the last makes any sense.

1. Would mean my sample case is suddenly reduced to one-off pieces, namely those I got. No chance to sell them retail and a lot of time and money wasted..

2. Would mean unfair competition and a cause lot of confusion to customers: why that model is printable, but this one is not..


3. As long as this is combined with commons sense and proper rules and guidelines, both for designers and the "checkers". And probably should be more like two out- of three should succeed, to avoid accidental/random failures/passes.

-- As a shop-owner I'd be happy to chip in on the costs, to determine if models are viable for production printing. As sort of testing fee/ first time printing fee.


On the point of small items not being profitable for Shapeways, this is a concern I raised a long time ago:

For example, small earrings currently have a low production cost of $3 or $5 in SS. (as invoiced to us)
Seems unlikely that could ever be profitable for Shapeways.

Furthermore, they can easily be sold for $12.50 to $25.
Meaning most of the money made on a $25 minimum sale would go to the shop-owner as mark-up. Cutting further into Shapeways' profits.

For those cases I would expect a reasonable start-up fee (perhaps combined with the testing-fee mentioned above)
To me a minimum of prize of $10 (1cc) for metal prints seems very reasonable. Maybe even $15, it is after all a very unique material and process, which should not under-sell itself.


I do hope this vagueness is cleared up quickly, in a way least painful to shop-owners.

Stijn
]]> virtox 2011-01-09T10:13:51-00:00 http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=22352&th=4284#msg_22352 Magic 2011-01-09T12:12:25-00:00 http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=22355&th=4284#msg_22355 ]]> virtox 2011-01-09T13:43:05-00:00 http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=22375&th=4284#msg_22375
Perhaps a surcharge could be added to the CC price for untested thin walled models, e.g. $10/cc with $2.50-$5.00/cc untested surcharge. The surcharge to be refunded in the event of a successful first time print. If the model fails, the surcharge is retained and the $10/cc refunded. The model still costs $10/cc but the first time orderer shares the burden of cost of failure with Shapeways... maybe it should be compulsorary that the creator/uploader orders their own model in stainless before the design is open to public sale.

I'd be happy with what I've suggested as I buy my own designs in stainless before making them publically available.

Also, Shapeways could do a little more to help understanding by reporting back to creators/shop owners about failures... as yet none of my stainless models have had reported failures, but I did get feedback after pushing for answers that one of my designs had taken '5 or 6 attempts' to print successfully.

I think openness and communication is the key to solving this.]]> stop4stuff 2011-01-09T21:26:22-00:00 http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=22616&th=4284#msg_22616 http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=msg&&th=4 342&goto=22615#msg_22615]]> virtox 2011-01-14T12:07:28-00:00 http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=22670&th=4284#msg_22670
Hey ho... change of direction for me now.]]> stop4stuff 2011-01-15T19:43:01-00:00 http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=23478&th=4284#msg_23478
I am now in fear that at any time my model could suddenly be "un-printable" even if it's been printed 80 times before! Today it's OK, but maybe in two months suddenly the wrong person receives my order and BANG you can't order this anymore?

What really bothers me is - SS is supposed to have a low detail threshold. At what point does a model go from having walls to details? I had a model rejected based on an area that, considering it's size and distance from the body of the model, should be classified as a detail, not a wall. Too bad says SW!

As it has already been said in this thread - if we can't print parts with walls less than 3mm how can we continue to design beautiful jewellery with intricate details? That was why 3D printing was so appealing to me in the first place!!

If SW can't rectify this problem then they need to investigate wax as a printing material FOR REAL, so that we can continue to design jewellery with the small detailing we require that can be made in metal. It might be more expensive but at least we wouldn't have the FEAR of "maybe this time our model will be rejected".

Sadly even if they do, it will be too late for my business as I have to cancel orders when I can't fulfil based on SW new fickle "furnace boys" rules.]]> blinky 2011-02-06T13:20:39-00:00 http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=23480&th=4284#msg_23480
And from the 'It Arrived' forum it can be seen that some sub 3mm models get through and are printed fine.

In the last Shapeways Live, Bart said that maybe it is the design that stops a model, not neccessarily just wall thickness... I can understand that, but when I followed the ProMetal specs to the 'T' the model was rejected by both SW and by ProMetal in seperate submissions.

I'm starting to think that maybe some of us have more costs associated with broken prints and as a result have models thoroughly checked.

I've stopped designing for stainless for a while even though it is my favourite material.

Wax & even silver is looking good to me, in December's SW Live Bart said silver was a matter of weeks and not months aways... so hopefully, that will happen very soon.


]]> stop4stuff 2011-02-06T13:50:04-00:00 http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=23572&th=4284#msg_23572
First, I understand your frustrations with the process. Personally, sorry for not chiming in sooner--I've been very busy getting up to speed so I can chime in with useful information. Now, I think I can now provide some more insights into what is happening with the design rules and our plan going forward.

Once upon a time, Shapeways started working with our metal supplier and they worked very hard to print everything--even if it meant printing things multiple times over. The design rules that they forwarded us (you guys referenced the blog post with the wine glass and spaghetti pictures) were sometimes overlooked so we can deliver models, even if it meant we would have to waste a lot of materials reprinting designs.

As we started to order more parts, that sort of dedication is becoming no longer sustainable. So we have to start cracking down on the designs. Now, unfortunately, this came in the middle of our move to NYC, so I agree that the communication to you guys has been sloppy. We are working with our suppliers to get a more up to date, polished version of the design rules that would lead to a more consistent printability (also addressing the late orders problem). Currently, we have a draft from them but we have one or two more conversations before it's finalized and ready for publication. We hope to create a set of basic rules that are simple and conservative, as well as advanced rules for those who are interested in creating more complicated models--the rules here would allow for more freedom but would also be more nuanced (ex: under 3 mm is ok but it has to fit these other ratios or qualitative requirements). I'm hoping to wrap all this up in the next 3 weeks.

Going forward, we are asking that the designs are checked as soon as it reaches our suppliers, so you guys are notified sooner when a design fails. We also asked that if our suppliers see a risky model that they've managed to print after a few tries, to pass the model to the designer but inform them of the failure rate in printing--this will minimize the issue where designs that have been printed before are now all of the sudden rejected, at least now you will know when your design is in the red zone or no longer printable before the next order is placed (but still get your model if we had a lucky break with a reprint). These are just some of the things we've been discussing with our suppliers, to give you more insight into what's happening.

In general though, I also understand that there a lot of information on material design rules scattered throughout the blogs and forums. Ben(Web Front End Lead), Ana (community manager) and I are working to create a more cohesive library of documentation, a "golden source" if you will of information regarding design rules for all our material. This library will be kept up to date, and along with that a process for notifying the community of design rule changes (we will discover new printability rules given all the challenging models we get).

As for silver & wax... it is a high priority for me at the moment--your requests have not fallen on deaf ears. The problem now is price! I am trying to negotiate a better price for you guys. Most of these guys work in the one off custom jewelry industry, so they are used to setting high prices for their one-off projects. My goal is to get them down in return for high volume orders. This is a bit more complicated than our other materials since it involves both negotiating with wax printing service bureaus as well as silver casters (some of them are under the same roof, some of them aren't)--this is like introducing 2 new materials at the same time. This complexity is another reason this has dragged on for longer than I know I would have liked.

I hope this has shed some light onto some of your concerns. I know it is really upsetting to hear that your design is getting rejected, have you gotten good feedback at least on why it's rejected and how you can change your design to increase the printability?

I know this is a long post--so thanks for reading if you made it thus far. There's a lot of stuff to convey, and I want to make sure I address your issues thoroughly. I hope this helps, let me know if you have any more questions.

Best,
Nancy]]> nancyliang 2011-02-08T17:05:51-00:00 http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=23573&th=4284#msg_23573 nancyliang wrote on Tue, 08 February 2011 17:05
...., have you gotten good feedback at least on why it's rejected and how you can change your design to increase the printability?

Best,
Nancy


To answer that; no, not really. Shapeways has tried to be very helpful in that respect but the messages pointing out areas of concern on my HP pendant (just as one example) left me very confused. As someone pointed out above I considered the HP characters as detail on the pendant but I kept getting thin wall errors. And the images showing the specific points weren't helpful. Often the arrows or error text seemed to obscure the area in question and confused me.

http://www.shapeways.com/model/181474/deathly_hallows_pendan t.html?gid=ug31952

And, no, I don't recall getting specific advice on how to correct the model(s).

To make matters worse I had it printed in stainless steel and then when a customer ordered one it was suddenly unprintable - but I guess that issue has been addressed already above.

Looking forward to (affordable!) silver...

Glenn


]]> lensman 2011-02-08T17:29:40-00:00 http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=23575&th=4284#msg_23575

Can you send me the emails you got from customer service? (nancy@shapeways.com). This could be a useful case study in our design rule conversations with our suppliers. ]]> nancyliang 2011-02-08T17:41:53-00:00 http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=23576&th=4284#msg_23576
No feedback apart from the wall thickness must be more than 3mm for non-printable models.

And for models that were printed before but failed - nothing until pushed for an answer.

And likewise no specific advice apart from GlenG's here on the forums.

Like I said before, I wouldn't mind paying some sort of 'will it print' deposit, if that helps smooth the ride.

Thanks for your input Nancy.]]> stop4stuff 2011-02-08T17:41:57-00:00 http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=23577&th=4284#msg_23577 stop4stuff 2011-02-08T17:48:25-00:00 http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=23581&th=4284#msg_23581 stop4stuff wrote on Tue, 08 February 2011 17:48
Just as a suggestion Nancy, would it be possible within your colation of iformation for stainless design rules to include a library of model images/renders as examples of green/amber/red zone models?


That's a good idea! We'd have to get the designer's permission to use their models in such a way, but if you guys agree to share your models (not the 3D file, just jpgs would suffice) I don't see why not build up a library of sample pictures, made with actual models (as opposed to a plate of noodles and a wineglass picture). ]]> nancyliang 2011-02-08T18:57:06-00:00 http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=23584&th=4284#msg_23584 http://www.shapeways.com/tutorials/design_rules_for_stainles s_steel_3d_printing

It's under Support > Tutorials > Stainless Steel right now. I'm wondering how (a) easy is it to find and (b) how useful the content is in explaining our process.

Ben, Ana and I are working on revamping some of this material to make it more accessible and useful, so feedback on what we currently have is very appreciated.

Thanks!
Nancy]]> nancyliang 2011-02-08T20:46:40-00:00 http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=23586&th=4284#msg_23586
[edit] actually most of that tutorial page is the ProMetal geometry specs copied including images]]> stop4stuff 2011-02-08T20:53:58-00:00 http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=23593&th=4284#msg_23593
Shapeways has a GREAT Header with drop down menus... But when people are working with their own designs, they are not looking in support, they are looking in "My Designs" So my suggestion, in the drop down for "My Designs" I would suggest you add "Design Rules" so you have everything nice and clear, and all in one place.

Just my suggestion.

Ray]]> Ray716 2011-02-09T02:37:47-00:00 http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=23601&th=4284#msg_23601 Ray716 wrote on Wed, 09 February 2011 02:37
Shapeways has a GREAT Header with drop down menus... But when people are working with their own designs, they are not looking in support, they are looking in "My Designs" So my suggestion, in the drop down for "My Designs" I would suggest you add "Design Rules" so you have everything nice and clear, and all in one place.


I like it! We were actually just talking about how it's buried in the webpages today and where to change it. What do you think about changing "support" to something like "how to." Because when I think support, I think this is something I will use AFTER I upload something and it breaks. Whereas, how to, I will go there to get educated. ]]> nancyliang 2011-02-09T05:24:12-00:00 http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=23602&th=4284#msg_23602 SS material page links to an old blog post, instead it could link to that tutorial, less hops around. Biggest problem is outdated info (tutorial still mentions 1mm ^_^ ), and misleading photos like cute items... which should be marked with a red cross, instead of giving the impression it's possible. There should be more images of what is right (zero currently), even comparisons of wrong/right, and photos of or links to solutions.]]> stannum 2011-02-09T05:41:28-00:00 http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=23603&th=4284#msg_23603
I would be happy to provide Shapeways with pictures of many thin an small steel models, that so far have been printed.
(Then again I have no idea how many reprints it took...)

Cheers,

Stijn
]]> virtox 2011-02-09T06:02:56-00:00 http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=23606&th=4284#msg_23606 nancyliang wrote on Wed, 09 February 2011 05:24

Ray716 wrote on Wed, 09 February 2011 02:37

Shapeways has a GREAT Header with drop down menus... But when people are working with their own designs, they are not looking in support, they are looking in "My Designs" So my suggestion, in the drop down for "My Designs" I would suggest you add "Design Rules" so you have everything nice and clear, and all in one place.

I like it! We were actually just talking about how it's buried in the webpages today and where to change it. What do you think about changing "support" to something like "how to." Because when I think support, I think this is something I will use AFTER I upload something and it breaks. Whereas, how to, I will go there to get educated.


Personally, If I need a memory jogger about a materials properties etc, the obvious place to look is the materials section.

I don't think 'support' is the wrong name for the section, but hiding design rules away under tutorials is maybe not such a good thing.

]]> stop4stuff 2011-02-09T06:45:14-00:00 http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=23646&th=4284#msg_23646
Ray]]> Ray716 2011-02-10T04:45:25-00:00 http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=23671&th=4284#msg_23671
It would be very helpful for me if you send me concrete examples of models that's been rejected (with the accompanying pictures), AND models that's been successful (especially ones that have walls less than 3 mm). (my e-mail: nancy@shapeways.com) You don't need to send me the 3D files, just the name of your design or the design ID number would suffice. I can look up the files in the back end. (note: your designs are kept under confidentiality agreements and will not be disseminated outside the usage of these talks)

This will be helpful in two ways:
- Better help me understand what is happening to our designs
- Better help us and our suppliers discuss and finalize design rules that are practical but still allows you guys freedom to design, which in turn really helps everybody in our community

Thanks a bunch!]]> nancyliang 2011-02-10T15:32:52-00:00 http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=23677&th=4284#msg_23677
]]> stop4stuff 2011-02-10T15:52:14-00:00 http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=23698&th=4284#msg_23698
Glenn
]]> lensman 2011-02-10T21:36:20-00:00 http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=23706&th=4284#msg_23706
http://www.shapeways.com/model/155119/open_die__d6___design_ your_own_.html

http://www.shapeways.com/model/154706/lojban_d12___12_sided_ die.html

These are ones I know work in steel because I ordered them myself, and indeed the pictures are there. There may have been others that other people ordered in steel but I didn't; I don't know about those.

http://www.dicecollector.com/THE_DICE_THEME_SHAPEWAYS.html#C ERAMICWOMBAT shows what look like quite a few of ceramicwombat's dice with thin spikes, done in steel. So does wombat's shop.
]]> clsn 2011-02-10T23:11:35-00:00 http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=26749&th=4284#msg_26749

Shapeways ....PLEASE HAVE MERCY...and provide people who want to order in stainless steel an alternative with a reduced minimum wall thickness.

I have parts that were made of stainless steel sent by Shapeways that were under the minimum wall thickness a few months back. Since then i have not been able to have the parts remade due to the minimum wall thickness rule.

I thought silver would be my saving grace but the rule that states no multiple parts in one stl has proved me incorrect due to cost.

I love Shapeways. I love what you represent. Im begging for an alternative metal.

Give me (us as i'm sure i'm not alone) a different metal *or* increase the cost for stainless steel that falls under the minimum order thickness. I'd happily pay more to get the parts that you've already sent previously made again

I can only hope this plea doesn't fall upon deaf ears (or blind eyes as it were).]]> Plasticdreaming 2011-04-29T19:46:26-00:00