Rejections for previously printed models

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by lensman, Nov 30, 2011.

  1. lensman
    lensman Well-Known Member

    I've just had two rejections on models that I've had successfully printed before. And these were orders from customers, not myself. I've said this before: This is one of the most frustrating things about the whole process - when successful prints become unprintable and it's a customer who finds this out before I do.

    One item was a pendant that I've had made in Stainless Steel before (my mother has it!). Now I'm told that a wall is too thin for this to be printed in SILVER for ****-sake! I could understand if this were reversed, printed in silver but cannot print in s/steel, but no, it's not. S/Steel has MUCH less tolerance than Silver and yet it gets rejected.

    Second item was another pendant based on Dr Who's TARDIS. Picture the "slats" between the panels on the door. These are what I'm told are too thin-walled. According to the reference image sent to me this should not be able to be printed in ANY material that Shapeways offers and YET I have received notifications for quite a few of these having been sold with NO PROBLEMS. Why now?!

    dr who pendant.jpg

    My sub-topic of when do Details become Walls refers to this pendant. I consider the "slats" to be DETAILS that extrude off the main body of the model. What makes them a WALL? And who decides this, because OBVIOUSLY several technicians have viewed them as I did and printed them SUCCESSFULLY. So why the rejection?

    Yes, I have posed these questions to Shapeways customer service but I post these questions here for two reasons:

    1) to find out if many other people have encountered this problem recently

    2) to express my frustration - again - at this aspect of the operation - when a customer's order gets rejected for something that has been printed before. It personally embarasses me to have someone think that I am incompetent in my designs.

    Last edited: Nov 30, 2011
  2. Youknowwho4eva
    Youknowwho4eva Shapeways Employee Community Team
    Glenn, I understand your frustration. Take a breath for me. I went to add it to the new feedback system (to be released soon) and I'll tell you it was already there and already pretty high priority. As long as it's top, it'll be addressed first, so hopefully soon there will be a "printed" flag for items that were already printed to not be checked again.
  3. lensman
    lensman Well-Known Member
    Here is the first pendant sucessfully printed in S/Steel that cannot be printed in Silver. You see the little "indentation" on the top curve? That is where I'm told there is a "thin wall"

    At this rate we won't be able to get anything printed anymore, unless maybe it's a plain old cube.


    secret love pendant.JPG
    Last edited: Nov 30, 2011
  4. lensman
    lensman Well-Known Member
    Breathing in........... Breathing out.........


    Okay, here we go.....

    Am I to read from that then, when a technician goes to print something he//she would look to see if it had been printed before, in what material, and then would NOT check the model again as to its printability? That would help, yes.

    In the meantime I've lost orders, one or two customers (not for the first time, either) and Shapeways has also likely lost customers and got some bad rep.

    I really do hope this situation is changed soon because I'd be willing to bet it's high on most designers list of top ten Shapeways peeves.


  5. Youknowwho4eva
    Youknowwho4eva Shapeways Employee Community Team
    I don't know how it will be handled, but as long as it's high priority it will be addressed. For the time I'd contact support about your issues to see if there is a better answer to why it can't be printed. Maybe it's a casting issue with silver? Only support can help you with those questions.
  6. DarioScapittaDesign
    DarioScapittaDesign New Member
    Hi guys,

    I had the same problem since the last week, also with an object that I've uploade before and was perfectly printed.

    I reordered it and... same problem!

    Today I' started to breath and counting until 100 and more...

    I'm every day in contact with the customer service and probably Christel is hating me :p but she is very patience and helpfull. The devolopment department is working on this issue.

    I hope everything will be better and everything fixed.


  7. lensman
    lensman Well-Known Member
    Yes, their plans for future checking of "thin walls" should hopefully help with the problem.

  8. CGD
    CGD New Member
    This is what one of the CS told me:

    1. Once automatic, no exceptions. So any previous models that have printed successfully millions of times will have the offended material taken off.

    2. Whether they will automatically tell you where the area the thin wall problem occurs, may be, or may not.

    Imagine uploading a new model and get rejected because of thin wall. Where does it happen? I once have a model rejected because of a joint between two track links falls below the minimum requirement after they are unified, and you need to magnify the model 500% in order to spot it. That means if you do not have the capability of making your model into a single shell, you will never be able to spot or fix the problem.
    Last edited: Dec 2, 2011
  9. lensman
    lensman Well-Known Member
    Yes, that could present a problem. I could see a lot of requests to Service to explain why they get models rejected. As you can see from my pendant this generated a thin wall error but it actually prints okay.

  10. ana_xyz
    ana_xyz New Member
    Hey Glenn, I'm sorry to hear it, that's really frustrating.

    When it comes to automatic checks, we've already been thinking about these questions a bit.

    My understanding is that the software checks will actually tell you where the issue is, which should solve more problems than it causes. We've also had some internal discussion about how to handle designs which have been printable for a long time, but are considered unprintable by the software. We've talked about either providing a grace period for you to change you designs, or in some unique cases, maybe creating permanent exceptions.

    We definitely understand how much this could shake things up for certain shopowners, and hopefully it helps to know that we're thinking about it pre-emptively.

    What has CS said so far about your case?
  11. CGD
    CGD New Member
    Hi Ana,

    I just have one of my model rejected, which has been printed many times successfully before. While you are talking internally about grace period or exceptions, my model has already been made immediately unprintable unless I fixed the problem and reorder again.

    Last edited: Dec 4, 2011
  12. lensman
    lensman Well-Known Member
    Essentially I was told that the process for stainless steel and silver are both different and that printing in s/steel doesn't mean it will print in silver.

    I didn't press the issue and have taken it off sale. What I wanted to say was that from everything I've read about others orders I'd have thought that if it had printed in silver but could not be printed in s/steel I would have accepted that; the requirements for s/steel are much more rigid than with silver. I've seen some delicate objects printed in silver and that little "kink" on the edge shouldn't have affected it.

    But, I'm moving on and trying to learn from it.

  13. lensman
    lensman Well-Known Member
    And of course, now when I check my email I get this request from a customer on my Blog that I am now going to have to turn away -

    "i really like this piece , it's exactly what I am looking for. what is the actual size ? available in gold ? have it by christmas ? price ?"

  14. pfeifferstylez
    pfeifferstylez New Member
    I don't get it. :neutral:
    Why are these classified as "walls", and not as "details" ?
  15. lensman
    lensman Well-Known Member
    That was exactly my question...

    I should also add that at the end of the "thin wall" error for the pendant there was also "Bad STL", but again that makes no sense since I have already had it printed in s/steel... However, I do understand that as SW makes changes to their design standards they have to set the quality level somewhere.

  16. pfeifferstylez
    pfeifferstylez New Member
    Yeah, but I still don't get it. :confused

    "Also, please be-aware that in the first quarter of 2012 our Thin wall check will go live, this check will determine if a model is printable in which material when you upload it.
    This means that if the model has parts below the 0.7mm, our thin wall check will reject the model already for WSF, and will make it unavailable."

    Simple example:

    (clickable thumbnail)

    This will get rejected (for WSF), because one "part" is below 0,7mm ?!

    Where is the border between "wall" and "detail" ?

    Or is the min. detail level just for "DownSkin", and everything "UpSkin" has to be conform to the min. wall rules ?
  17. GWMT
    GWMT New Member
    The minimum wall thickness value for the material determines the distance at which an extrusion from a surface becomes a 'wall' rather than a 'detail'.

    For stainless steel the minimum wall thickness is 3mm so anything that extends farther than 3mm from the surface is considered a wall and it must be no thinner than 3mm across. If the extrusion is less than 3mm tall it's considered a detail and can be thinner than 3mm. The minimum detail level for stainless is 1mm so to guarantee no printing problems the detail shouldn't be any thinner than that (at least for extrusions taller than 1mm).

    For example an extrusion from the surface 1mm wide and 2.9mm tall would be considered a detail and be accepted for printing but an extrusion 1mm wide and 3mm tall would be considered a wall and be rejected - you'd need to widen a 3mm tall extrusion to 3mm in order for it to be accepted for printing.

    For silver the minimum wall thickness is 0.6mm and minimum detail level 0.3mm; any extrusions from the surface taller than 0.6mm must be at least 0.6mm thick. A 0.5mm tall extrusion 0.3mm thick would be accepted but a 0.6mm tall extrusion 0.3mm thick would be rejected.

    pfeiffer stylez's example of a 0.3mm tall extrusion 0.5mm wide would be accepted in silver; if it was 0.6mm tall instead of 0.3mm it would be rejected by the software unless the width was increased from 0.5mm to 0.6mm.

  18. JACANT
    JACANT Well-Known Member
    I have two items in my shop that are not available in WSF, but are available in WSFP, BSF, ISF and DGSF. the answer it seems is that each axis has to be at least 2.5mm, new design rules.

    I asked surely you print in WSF before you can colour or polish the item. to get WSFP, BSF etc. Yet the item is available in these colours and polished.
    This is the answer, quote,
    "You see, we have different printer setting per material.
    Please make sure that each axis (y,x,z,) needs to be at least. This is the rules we have for the WSF material. I can see that the flower pendant in order: xxxxxxx has smaller axis. But since we had a lot of print issues in the past we changed these printer settings, so that each axis needs to be at least :2.5mm"

  19. stop4stuff
    stop4stuff Well-Known Member
    Sorry for jumping in late on this.

    I too have had models rejected for silver, the reasons varied from multiple parts, to 'wax print too fragile', the reasons seems vauge and conflicting, but at the end of the day persistant questions as to the real reason basically got the answer to down 'handling issues'. I can't go into the nitty gritty's of the design as it was for a customer, but simply put the design was lots of small things mounted on a larger thing. This answer was finally conveyed to me after nearly four months and many redesigns.

    Clear and consise communcation from Shapeways Customer Services AND Shapeways production partners to designers is a must to save everyone involved frustration, time and money.

  20. lensman
    lensman Well-Known Member
    Absolutely agree with that. Rejections are, for me, the most frustrating part of the whole process. I wouldn't mind so much if they were my orders but when they come from customers it affects me more.