Preventing Rejections - Update on Project Caterpillar

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.

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 :cry: 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)

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

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.

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

Two meaningless emails about the same model.

[hr]

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

[hr]

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

[hr]


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

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)

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 .

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

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: https://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!

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.

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

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.

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

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!

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.

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.

Can you share the file with us, or email it to me?

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?

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.