Loose Shell Clearance Bug

Discussion in 'Bug Reporting' started by marcnoonan, Jan 12, 2018.

  1. marcnoonan
    marcnoonan Member
    Hi Shapeways Technicians,

    PLEASE NOTE THAT I AM ONLY SEEKING HELP FROM SHAPEWAYS THEMSELVES. The issue is with the loose shells auto-checker and not the mesh and I want to highlight this and confirm it won't stop a print unnecessarily.

    I've uploaded a file which I can 100% guarantee has the minimum 0.5mm clearance between the loose shells that is required for WSFP. However, I get the loose shells warning despite there being 0.525mm clearance. I reduced the width of the part in question from 2mm to 1.6mm increasing the clearance to 0.725mm on each side and I'm still getting the same warnings? The spacing on the caps that is showing as too close is actually 1.047mm, more than double the minimum. Please see here



    Can you please confirm if this can be looked into and if the loose shell clearance issue would be over-ridden by your technicians in the manual checks. This is a product that is planned to be put on sale and hopefully mass-produced so I would like to guarantee the prints will go through each time. I can email you a copy of the file if required.

    This is the one I can guarantee that each stem has a clearance of 0.525mm all round. Is the stated 0.5mm minimum clearance for WSFP correct please?


    Spot on.jpg


    Last edited: Jan 12, 2018
  2. MitchellJetten
    MitchellJetten Shapeways Employee CS Team
    The warning will always be given.
    We don't know if a model has multiple shells intentionally.

    It's just a warning for models that are supposed to be 1 single shell, like a ring for example.
    So in case that ring has 5 shells after uploading, we give the warning so the designer is like:
    hey this model is only 1 ring, 5 shells doesn't sound correct.

    If the model is supposed to have multiple shells, ignore the warning :)
    In your case it would be like: hey this model has 5 shells, the warning shows there are several shells, that's correct, so no problems here :)
  3. marcnoonan
    marcnoonan Member
    Thank You Mitchell for the clarification and explanation.....it's appreciated and will put my clients mind at rest.


  4. MitchellJetten
    MitchellJetten Shapeways Employee CS Team
    You're welcome Marc and good luck!
  5. donquijote
    donquijote Member
    This is the Loose Shells Tool description:
    Mitchell's explanation for loose shells makes totally sense to me but for the warning icon only.
    The description of the Loose Shells Tool and the red areas in the 3D-Tools of Marc's link tell a different story, though.
    For me, loose shells and clearance don't seem much related to each other. Loose shells seem more related to Part Count Tool.

    So what I still don't understand is how those red areas work. Can you give us some details? Like: is there a warning range for clearance in % or mm for each material? If so, could you make those values available and make warnings appear in a different color or something?

    Thanks in advance
    Malwen likes this.
  6. Youknowwho4eva
    Youknowwho4eva Well-Known Member
    It appears the first model with .725mm clearance is no longer available, but the one for .525mm clearance is. Looking at it, there are red warning areas, but not at the whole circumference. This is probably from tessellation in the model as well as that our 3D tool uses a voxelated version of the model. So some where in those 2, there's enough wiggle that that .025mm of cushion has eroded. If ordered, a manual checker would use the original upload to measure. So, if it was the voxelation that gave the warning, the manual checker will not see that. They'll only see the original data.
  7. UniverseBecoming
    UniverseBecoming Well-Known Member
  8. Youknowwho4eva
    Youknowwho4eva Well-Known Member
    While this is true, it does help to have the information in a public forum for others that have the same issue to be able to find a solution without also having to contact us via email
  9. UniverseBecoming
    UniverseBecoming Well-Known Member
    Agreed. I was simply thinking that the OP might not have known about the customer service email address given that it appears that they reluctantly made the public forum post. I felt that the OP's post was made reluctantly because they explicitly stated in all caps that they did not want help from the community. :)