Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Z, that's the first thing I thought when I read it. Hmmm. :)
Round3r, Whoa. Well. I have valued your input and contributions to the board. I wish you the best on your reentry. GLTU.
Johnny that is an excellent idea!!
Thanks much. I'm hoping that all this dot connecting will produce a very nice pps. Have a great weekend
Good Luck Dadx4 and Congrats in advance on the healthy grandchild!
MB, Yes, The possibility of another direction always exists; however, I choose to believe that GE will stay the course with SGLB. The choice to do a JTDA with Sigma Labs was not made lightly as both companies will share their IP to further develop PrintRite 3D to meet GE's needs.
The AM testing is such a long and intensive process that I doubt GE would change direction to go with another untested closed loop solution. SGLB was the only company doing this a year ago.
GE has LEAP deadlines to meet by next year. It would be very difficult to switch gears and start another JTDA with another company. GE does not have their own closed loop AM process; otherwise, no JTDA with SGLB would have been required. It's all IMHO of course.
I believe that we are in a great position and I know that this delays can test one's patience. I have my worries and do routine searches for GE JTDA every so often and so far so good. No other JTDA's with another company to do in process quality assurance or closed-loop.
I believe that GE and Honeywell have the resources and funding to assist SGLB with developing what is required of PrintRite 3D to meet industry needs. I noticed today that GE is selling it's finance divison to focus on manufacturing and remember last year when GE sold their appliance division. GE is making an enormous bet that manufacturing is their future and AM is a huge part of it. GE is freeing up billions that could be invested in manufacturing. I keep wondering if an acquisition of SGLB could be in the works. Only time will tell. I wish you a great weekend MB.
This article addressed Sigma Labs closed loop process last year. I'm good with SGLB since I believe that we are doing closed loop or just about to.
http://oakshirefinancial.com/2014/03/19/going-long-stigma-labs/
Unlike other micro-cap companies in the 3D space which are long on claims but short on real products or potential, Sigma is already doing business with manufacturing giant GE. GE has asked Sigma to develop its PrintRite3D system to the point where it will operate as a “closed loop”— feeding information back to the printer so it can make real time adjustments. GE’s key concern, and what Sigma Labs is best prepared to address, is unmelted metal powder entrapment in the additive manufacturing process.
Regarding the partnership, Christine Furstoss, Technical Director for Manufacturing and Materials Technologies at GE, stated “we have a joint technology development agreement with Sigma Labs Inc. to develop in-process inspection technologies of additive components with the goal of reducing production time up to 25 percent.” Currently, Sigma is the only company known to be working on this closed loop inspection technology, and their impressive array of patents protecting the process should make it difficult for other companies to compete any time soon.
I agree. The shared knowledge on this board has been outstanding. There are a number of posters whose intellectual ports combined with credible DD allowed me to appreciate the importance and potential of SGLB's AM product line.
I'm appreciating the current pps run and will appreciate upcoming contracts to confirm what we longs have concluded for a while. It's a pleasure to be associated with the longs on this board and have a stake in this gem. I'm looking forward to the next several years.
Very Nice Find. Thanks for the post!
Here hear ya. I was down 67% and added more at a nickel. It is nice to see my red percentage decrease. SGLB has so much upside potential and I'm looking forward to all the dot connecting to payoff big. I'm excited to see the renewed interest. Contract announcements will really get SGLB moving. GO SGLB. Long and Strong here.
Dadx4. Thanks for the FYI a few days back. I appreciate it
I agree. I'm thinking that we may be done with the sub dime pps by the end of the month to never return. We shall see :) It's gonna be an exciting ride as more milestones are met.
Thanks for your DD and explanations over the last couple years.
Yep, I agree with you. Talk it down to Load it up! GLTA!
Jackle, I like this part "GE invests $1.8B annually in advanced technologies, such as 3D aero designs, Ceramic Matrix Composite materials, and additive manufactured components."
The partnership with GE will be beneficial for SGLB. I can envision all their AM parts being verified via PrintRite3D well into the future and maybe even some of their parts being manufactured by SGLB's multiple ESO printers :) Thanks for your many contributions to the board.
Just more confirmation of why I like Mark Cola's business acumen. http://www.forbes.com/sites/panosmourdoukoutas/2015/03/30/why-3d-printer-stocks-are-ripe-for-ma-deals/
The shift into a service model will help 3D printer companies overcome a number of customer adoption problems – particularly, a rapidly evolving technology, which makes prospective buyers hesitant to commit to a certain model. “The problem, then, derives from the fact that it’s difficult to sell machines to manufacture things when the technology is still rapidly evolving,” writes Barron’s Tiernan Ray. “The big three, I think, realize this, and they are moving more and more to a services business, where instead of selling printers, they take orders and make the objects themselves.”
Articles like this continue to confirm that SGLB is making the right move by providing AM services.
That's much Silversmith. Nice Find! I'm looking forward to the growth of AM and IPQA along with it. I believe there will be a steady uptrend with SGLB for many years as all of the AM testing slowly winds down and AM production winds up. SGLB is perfectly positioned with the BIG players. This will be an exciting ride and the price to get on this train will increase as it continues to achieve benchmarks like DEFORM, NIST/ASTM quality standards, FAA certification and as Big AM players proceed with AM plans.
Thanks JJ. I'm looking forward to that joint presentation as well. You made me search for it and here it is. May will approach RAPIDly! lol!! Thanks much.
JJ, Thanks much for your contributions to the board. I appreciate the technical breakdown of Sigma's IPQA process and your blog. Glad to see you posting again.
This article describes the process and challenges concerning process monitoring. It's a nice read.
http://www.industrial-lasers.com/articles/print/volume-29/issue-5/features/process-monitoring-in-laser-additive-manufacturing.html
Process monitoring in laser additive manufacturing
09/12/2014
Sensing and data analysis approaches work to meet demand
COREY DUNSKY
Within the past 18 months, additive manufacturing (AM) of metal parts has drawn an enormous surge of industrial interest. According to industry expert Terry Wohlers (Wohlers Associates, Inc.; Ft. Collins, CO), while the AM industry as a whole grew by 34.9 percent in 2013, the metal AM segment experienced growth of over 75 percent. Indeed, Wohlers commented recently that metal AM "has come farther in 10 years than plastic [AM] did in 25 years" [1]. Industries driving metal AM processes forward include the automotive sector, medical technology, and particularly aerospace. GE Aviation's planned AM production of their LEAP engine's fuel nozzles (see "Additive manufacturing at GE Aviation" in the November/December 2013 issue of ILS) as well as EADS's evaluation of AM structural components for Airbus aircraft indicate that powder-bed metal AM is a technology on the threshold of industrial acceptance.
Sponsored Content
Don’t Miss Our Newsletters
Subscribe to Industrial Laser Solutions email to get the latest industry news and product information right in your inbox.
Despite this, questions remain about process reliability and the repeatability of finished parts' material properties. As noted in a recent interview with Dr. Florian Bechmann, head of development at OEM equipment maker Concept Laser GmbH (Lichtenfels, Germany), increasingly in metal AM machines, "customers expect active process monitoring and series production capability, i.e., reproducibility at an industrial level" [2]. In situ, real-time monitoring of the selective laser melting (SLM) AM process promises to address these concerns, but the monitoring technology is still in its early days. Here, we review the state of the art of this highly active area of AM research and equipment development.
Technology basics
Laser additive manufacturing (LAM) machines are of two types: powder bed and powder-fed. The intense recent interest has focused on the latter, and this discussion is confined to it. FIGURE 1 shows a schematic of a generic powder bed system where the bed is created by raking powder across the work area, which rests on the build platform in an environmentally controlled chamber. Laser energy is delivered to the surface of the bed, locally melting and fusing the powder in areas where solid metal is desired.
Schematic illustration of an AM powder bed system
FIGURE 1. Schematic illustration of an AM powder bed system.
Typically, each pass of the laser melts down through and re-solidifies several layers, which are commonly 20–150µm thick. After each laser exposure, additional powder is raked across the work area and the process is repeated to create a solid, three-dimensional (3D) component. A single "build" can contain thousands of layers, so each run can take tens to hundreds of hours. Dozens of identical or different parts may be created in each build.
Due to the repeated layer-upon-layer melting and rapid solidification of the metal AM process, parts experience a complex thermal history involving directional heat transfer. Some of the major alloys for aerospace and medical/dental applications may also experience repeated solid-state phase transformations. These factors complicate the analysis of the finished part's microstructural properties, relative to those of parts made by conventional means. The directional heat extraction frequently results in grain structures that are columnar in the z-direction (perpendicular to the build plane) and, as a recent review of metal AM noted, "Microstructural and mechanical property anisotropy is ubiquitous in AM with the z-direction generally being the weakest." [3] Typical defects in the SLM process include micro-porosity and lack of fusion between neighboring layers. Of particular concern for aerospace applications are fatigue cracks initiating at pores close to the part surface, while surface roughness has also been shown to affect fatigue life [4].
Taken together, particularly for structurally critical components, these issues mean that qualification and certification are significant challenges to widespread adoption of AM. Recently, AM technology reviews have repeatedly called for real-time, closed-loop process controls and sensors to ensure quality, consistency, and reproducibility across AM machines [5]. The overall goal is robust layer-by-layer quality assessment with spatial resolution below 1 mm2 that will eliminate today's post-build inspection or destructive testing. Leading aerospace manufacturers are enthusiastically supportive: Greg Morris, GE Aviation's business development leader for AM, says, "Today, post-build inspection procedures account for as much as 25 percent of the time required to produce an additively manufactured engine component. By conducting those inspection procedures while the component is being built, [we] will expedite production rates for GE's additive-manufactured engine components like the LEAP fuel nozzle" [6].
Machine and process variability
The fundamental issue addressed by process monitoring is variability in the state of the AM machine or the laser-material interaction, which in turn can perturb the metal's microstructure or macroscopic mechanical properties. Environmental factors such as build plate and chamber ambient temperature, chamber oxygen concentration, and flow rate of inert gas across the powder surface play a role in process shifts and the formation of defects. Laser power, focused spot size, and power-density variation in the z-direction are critical parameters governing potential fluctuations in the material's thermal excursions on each laser pass. Particle size distribution and morphology affect how the powder packs within each layer, influencing finished surface quality and density of LAM-produced components [7]. Key motion parameters include scan speed and hatch (x-y) spacing, though modern galvanometer-based scanners do a good job of holding these sufficiently steady and reproducible. The layer creation or "re-coating" process must also be highly consistent, both in terms of in-layer thickness uniformity and layer-to-layer repeatability. And finally, part geometry can play a role in the heat transfer process. Conductive heat transfer to underlying material can differ at overhangs and sharp corners, giving rise to stress deformations as well as porosity, pinholes, or microcracks. Jim Fendrick, VP of North America operations at SLM Solutions NA, Inc., notes, "What controls the process is the local thermal condition, and geometry does matter."
Approaches to quality assurance
Given the large number of parameters influencing the material's cumulative thermal exposure, strategies for implementing in situ quality assurance (QA) on AM machines fall into three categories:
1. Sensors for monitoring and controlling various aspects of the machine state;
2. Techniques for assessing defects or irregularities in the powder-bed surface or layer thickness; and
3. Direct sensing of the small laser-material interaction zone, or "melt pool."
Leading OEM AM system vendors such as SLM Solutions GmbH (Lübeck, Germany), Concept Laser, and EOS GmbH (Krailling, Germany) are approaching these challenges with a modular hardware and software approach. EOS gives the generic name 'EOSTATE' to its modules, while Concept Laser refers to theirs as QM (quality management) modules. SLM Solutions' latest systems feature up to six modules, each named according to its function.
Sensing the machine state
This was the first aspect of "process monitoring" to be implemented on commercial AM tools. Control of the in-chamber conditions is the initial step. Temperature and residual oxygen content of the inert atmosphere, temperature of the build plate and pressure drop across the system's gas-scrubbing filter are monitored, regulated, and logged. Concept Laser's QMatmosphere module regulates the chamber O2 concentration, while EOS's EOSTATE Base monitors several chamber and other machine conditions. SLM Solutions' Sensors module monitors temperature at several locations throughout the machine as well as filter conditions and O2 concentration in the chamber, logging these data every two seconds.
The next level of machine-state sensing involves the laser and optics. As of the time of writing, laser/optics monitoring typically ranges from simple logging of nominal states of laser subsystems and scanner self-calibrations (EOS's EOSTATE Base), to measurement and control of laser power (EOS's EOSTATE LaserMeasurement; Concept Laser's QMlaser; and SLM Solutions' Laser Power module).
Because laser power density governs both the size of the melt pool and temperatures reached as the beam passes over the powder, controlling the location of the beam waist or caustic relative to the powder surface is also important. SLM Solutions accomplishes this with their Caustic Control module. Light emission is collected on-axis and is split off to a sensor. The sensor continuously detects focal spot diameter, focal plane position, and beam irradiance profile. Drift or sudden changes in focus conditions trigger alerts or halt the build process.
AM tool vendors have also moved to monitor and control the uniformity of the powder bed. This typically involves acquiring visible-light images of the entire bed, in which non-uniformities show up as contrasting features. EOS's latest machines incorporate this function in their EOSTATE PowderBed module, which logs two images per layer for offline review. Similarly, SLM Solutions' Layer Control System module grabs an image of the layer surface after each powder re-coat and again after each laser exposure. The images are automatically analyzed and anomalies detected and flagged as the build proceeds. When builds consist of many identical components, localized analysis of sub-portions of the image can reveal process errors on individual parts. This creates the possibility of ceasing further build-up of defective parts while continuing with the rest, saving time and materials.
Concept Laser's QMcoating module takes more active control of the layer re-coating process. It monitors the layer surface while powder is being applied and detects and compensates for variations in layer thickness from layer to layer or across the build area (FIGURE 2).
Concept Laser's QMcoating system regulates thickness of the powder layer
FIGURE 2. Concept Laser's QMcoating system regulates thickness of the powder layer. (Courtesy: Concept Laser)
Monitoring the melt pool
Since the microstructural properties of AM parts are governed by the material's thermal history, the ultimate objective in AM process monitoring is to capture the temperature reached at all 3D locations within a part. Such a so-called "heat map," however, involves a tremendous quantity of data. Today, sensors, signal-processing algorithms, and data-storage strategies are under active development that can begin to address the challenges of point-by-point collection and archiving of thermal information. OEM equipment vendors, innovation-oriented small companies, and government research labs have current development programs.
The task is to gather information that either directly or indirectly indicates the temperature in a small region surrounding the laser focus, known as the "melt pool." Ideally, direct, spatially resolved temperature measurements throughout individual areas of about 1 mm2 would be obtained. In addition, taking a page from the laser welding world, substantial efforts are also underway to measure melt pool size and shape. The task is significantly more difficult than it is for laser welding or powder-fed AM processes, though, since the high beam scanning speeds (~ 1m/s) and required fine spatial resolution mean high-bandwidth signal acquisition and processing are needed, as well as massive data storage.
Two approaches to melt-pool sensing are currently being pursued: imaging and collection of emitted light. For imaging, both infrared (IR) and visible-wavelength cameras are being explored, though the high required framing rates (several-thousand frames per second) are beyond the reach of all but the highest-end IR devices. For emission detection, variations of optical pyrometry or spectroscopy are employed. The most common arrangement consists of a photodiode with or without an upstream IR bandpass filter. Two such filtered detectors can be used to implement the two-color pyrometry technique.
Concept Laser's QMmeltpool system both images and analyzes light emission of the melt pool to extract thermal information
FIGURE 3. Concept Laser's QMmeltpool system both images and analyzes light emission of the melt pool to extract thermal information. (Courtesy: Concept Laser)
In many cases, equipment vendors are developing hybrid sensors that utilize both imaging and emission sensing. FIGURE 3 shows a sketch of Concept Laser's implementation of such a scheme in their QMmeltpool module. The coaxial visible-wavelength camera, with ~ 1 × 1mm field of view and high spatial resolution, acquires images at framing rates as high as 4000 frames/s. The photodiode signal can provide even higher-frequency information, if desired. To cope with the deluge of data, information is consolidated and stored for each entire layer, rather than all individual locations within the layer. According to Bechmann, the camera takes a "very detailed picture" and can detect low-energy melt pool conditions due to lens contamination or laser aging, as well as deviations in the powder dosing factor [2]. FIGURE 4 shows the difference that reduced laser power makes in a part containing small "window" features.
Effect of laser power variation on fine part features: reference build job (a) and build job with reduced laser power (b). Note the occlusion of the part's 'window' features in (b)
FIGURE 4. Effect of laser power variation on fine part features: reference build job (a) and build job with reduced laser power (b). Note the occlusion of the part's "window" features in (b). (Courtesy: Concept Laser)
SLM Solutions' Melt Pool Control module, currently in development, relies on fast single-point IR emission measurements at two wavelengths. After analysis, data are presented as 2D maps of thermal energy. Data acquisition and analysis is accomplished at each point in ~ 70µs for a high, effective sampling rate of ~ 14kHz. More significantly, the system will soon be able to dynamically adjust laser output power at this rate, achieving true closed-loop power control based on melt pool information. FIGURE 5 shows a fine lattice test structure where the effect of melt pool control is evident.
Fine lattice test structure (a); its detail as built without Melt Pool Control used for laser power regulation (b); and its detail as built using laser power regulation (c)
FIGURE 5. Fine lattice test structure (a); its detail as built without Melt Pool Control used for laser power regulation (b); and its detail as built using laser power regulation (c). (Courtesy: SLM Solutions)
For melt pool monitoring, EOS has taken a somewhat different approach. Rather than pursuing in-house development, the company has partnered with plasmo Industrietechnik GmbH (Vienna, Austria), whose fastprocessobserver system has been field-proven in laser welding environments. The system utilizes one or more off-axis photodiodes to collect broadband light emission from the laser-induced plasma. The signals are analyzed in the time and frequency domains, employing a number of proprietary signal-processing algorithms. Anomalies detected by the analysis can be correlated with different types of defects once the system is "trained" with reference known-defective and defect-free process conditions. Challenges for adoption in powder-bed AM environments include the much higher required sampling and signal-processing rates [8]. As of press time, plasmo's monitoring system has been integrated with EOS's machines and is undergoing evaluation at a major end user.
Summary and outlook
In late 2011, Prabhjot Singh, manager of GE's Additive Manufacturing Lab, observed: "[An AM] part is made out of thousands of layers, and each layer is a potential failure mode. We still don't understand why a part comes out slightly differently on one machine than it does on another, or even on the same machine on a different day." [9]
In large part, that assessment is still accurate today. In the meantime, early adopters like GE Aviation have spent years learning the nuances of their AM tools, characterizing the process windows and sensitivities, creating process databases, and qualifying each machine. The early adopters will likely begin their production ramps in the next 12–18 months without process monitoring or closed-loop laser power control on their production equipment, relying instead on their deep knowledge base to keep the machines producing good parts.
The sensors and sensed quantities being pursued today for AM process monitoring are mostly derived from experience with established processes such as laser welding. As such, they may or may not turn out to be the best means of identifying AM process anomalies in situ. It is still the early days for metal AM, and the equipment and powder materials are evolving rapidly. So, too, will sensing and data analysis technologies. Parallel efforts are currently underway to carry out physics-based simulations of the laser-powder bed interactions, and to establish detailed databases tying material properties to process parameters and powder characteristics. In the next several years, these may help illuminate the optimal quantities to monitor, point by point, in or near the melt pool, as well as the best sensors to use. Meanwhile, rapid innovation will continue, though the advent of truly robust process monitoring and control is probably still a few years away. As major manufacturers plan for volume production of metal AM parts, we should expect to see more emphasis being placed in this area and much continued development activity. The AM process monitoring race is on, and the winning technologies and competitors have yet to be identified, much less declared.
http://www.navytimes.com/story/military/tech/2015/03/21/navy-aircraft-3d-printing-repairs-fa-18/24959201/
I like this part of the article.
"4. Metal. Vice Adm. David Dunaway, head of NAVAIR, has called for 3-D printing with metal in the next three years.
That's a tall order, Draguicevich said. It would require being able to get the parts the same every time, which their machines can't guarantee."
GO SGLB
Johnny, I agree. I believe that new investors and maybe some old ones are coming back. They realize that Mark Cola is doing what he said he'd do. Inspect was delivered on time and Deform appears to have met the timeframe as well with the recent PR. SGLB is well positioned to take advantage and be the AM solution for In process Quality Assurance. I will continue to patiently wait as my timeframe for holding is still years or until a buyout. I continue to remain excited about the future of SGLB in the AM market. I look forward to what I believe will be several large orders for PrintRite and seeing more AM printers in SGLB's facility. Exciting times are ahead. GTLA!!
I love these sporty days!
Thanks Jackle! This continues to confirm what us longs are here for!
Thanks Wick, Nice find here.
Yes Ted, exactly! Boeing recognized IPQA's importance three years ago and now they announce their 3d parts to print on their planes. This is more potential business for SGLB. The story continues to improve. SGLB is working and testing with Fortune 500 companies for a few years now and production is around the corner. The big boys are not gonna decide last minute to utilize another quality assurance process that they have not tested. SGLB is getting so close to liftoff!!
Awesome as IPQA is approved by Boeing. http://b6sigma.com/index.php?mact=News,cntnt01,detail,0&cntnt01articleid=36&cntnt01origid=15&cntnt01returnid=59
Anyone know when the 2014 10K is due out? I think it should be out no later than March 31st. I was wondering if anyone heard an earlier date maybe from chris w.?
Thanks much for the post. SGLB continues to move in the right direction. I'm very comfortable and excited about the future of my investment here. These technology agreements with various companies continue to validate the importance of PrintRite3D. I'm patiently waiting as I believe revenues will increase significantly as quality AM standards are finalized and FAA certification of LEAP occurs. SGLB will be perfectly positioned to take advantage of the new business that will be coming. GTLA and Happy Friday!
Wow the timing of this article. I was just posting about this. A must read for us longs! I snagged a couple sentences from the article but please read it for yourselves.
GE Aviation invests millions in new jet engine
“Virtually all the GE suppliers that we know anything about in the region are going full-tilt,” said Gary Conley, president of nonprofit manufacturing industry consultant TechSolve. “The long-term outlook for any of the companies participating in the GE supply chain looks very positive.”
“The one message we’re constantly working with our supply base is continued capacity growth,” he said. “The growth that is expected with these new engines coming online is growth that’s expected to last for decades.”
http://www.journal-news.com/news/news/ge-aviation-invests-millions-in-new-jet-engine/nkD6s/
Thanks Jackle, Mr3DP, Chef and many others for all of the DD that you provide and opinions shared. I do appreciate reading legitimate posts. I completely forgot to add using the funds to release the Inspect product last year. I really believe in this company and continue to appreciate the moves that are being made. I feel great about this investment and will continue to do so as long as I see funds being used to grow the company.
The relationships that SGLB has formed with Fortune 500 companies and government agencies is undeniable. It is a huge accomplishment for such a small company to do Joint Technology Development with GE and Honeywell. PrintRite3D will be used by these firms as they have worked jointly and tested and validated IPQA for about two years now actually maybe three with GE Aviation when I go back to the Morris Tech days. GE Aviation LEAP engine goes into Production next year. I'm anticipating another GE contract by this years end. Honeywell/Darpa Phase Two is finished mid 2016 and I anticipate further news coming out about continued cooperation with Honeywell/DARPA. I'm anticipating an uplisting in 2016 as well.
Good Luck ALL.
Why I still invest in SGLB. I am a long term investor and I'm still in. I am posting this for the long investors. I post here and there but I read this board everyday. SGLB is a company that I believe in despite the pps not being where I'd love for it to be. I am down in paper on my investment as I brought many shares in the high teens and low 20's. I have continued to buy shares as the pps has gone down as I viewed the declining pps as a buying opportunity. I won't lie and say that the declining pps since the end of 2013 was not bothersome as was the 100 odd million dilution. SGLB needed the injection of cash at the time. I sat back and observed what SGLB did with the funds acquired via the dilution since the beginning of last year. Here's my observation. They 1) purchased a EOS printer. 2) Hired additional personnel 3) Joined AMC 4) Formed Materialize and Adurant partnership and 5) gave Mark a bonus. I'm sure I left out a couple things.
OK so let's address how the funds were utilized.
1) EOS printer
They purchased the printer that their main customer GE Aviation uses and can use it to showcase their PrintRite 3D suite to many more potential customers such as the AMC crew when they host it in the fall this year. The EOS Printer will give them the ability to generate income outside of PrintRite 3D suite as they can build AM prototypes for many. This AM prototype business is a growing one as I discussed many posts ago. I consider this a great use of the funds.
"The global market for 3D printers and services is expected to grow from $2.5 billion in 2013 to $16.2 billion in 2018, which represents a compound annual growth rate of 45.7%. "
http://www.computerworld.com/article/2824142/two-thirds-of-industrial-manufacturers-use-3d-printing.html
2) Hired additional personnel
They hired an applications engineer and an Investor Relations guy and another as I recall. someone on this board will recall the hires. The application engineer job summary was Position Summary: Successfully execute application engineering work in the area of In-Process Quality Assurance™ (IPQA®) for advanced manufacturing and 3D metal printing. The responsible candidate will assist customers engineering staff with the successful implementation of B6 Sigma's PrintRite3D® product line for real-time, nondestructive inspection for advanced manufacturing and 3D metal printing.
. Investor Relations well.. A few shareholders on this board were dying for an IR guy to get more PR's and exposure which I believe that Chris Whitty is doing great in this role. The SGLB datasheets were finally updated and more timely responses to investors questions.
I consider the additional personnel necessary to continue grow and expose the PrintRite3D to more potential customers and investors.
3) Joined AMC
AMC has some of the biggest names in the AM game. Lockheed Martin, Rolls Royce, GE Aviation, EOS, UTC Aerospace Systems and more and these guys have stablished contracts to build and test AM parts and SGLB will be hosting them this fall. Look at what some of this players are doing in th AM space.
Lockheed Martin is the prime contractor on the NASA Orion project and "A vent in the Orion capsule that was made using additive manufacturing — the industrial version of 3-D printing — performed optimally, opening the door for future components to be manufactured in this manner. "
http://www.denverpost.com/business/ci_27553010/nasas-orion-initial-data-yields-few-surprises-guides
Lockheed and Honeywell are on the latest America Makes contract with 3D Systems" to develop a precision closed loop and advanced manufacturing and monitoring platform, designed to deliver the accuracy, functionality and repeatability specifications demanded for flight worthy aerospace parts."
http://www.engineering.com/3DPrinting/3DPrintingArticles/ArticleID/9531/3D-Systems-Granted-Two-Military-Contracts.aspx
Rolls-Royce "to Get Largest-Ever 3D Printed Component Off the Ground, Flight-Testing Engine Later This Year"
http://3dprint.com/45820/rolls-royce-largest-3d-printed/
GE Aviation - I don't think I even need the links to the billions of orders for LEAP and GE9X engines whose fuel nozzles and other parts will be AM. We all are aware of the JTDA with Sigma Labs.
http://www.manufacturing.net/news/2014/10/leap-jet-engine-fuels-strong-orders-for-ge
UTC Aerospace Systems "is supporting the development of Boeing's CST-100 Commercial Crew Transportation System, which won a $4.2B Commercial Crew Transportation Capability Contract (CCtCap) from NASA on September 16, 2014. UTC Aerospace Systems is a unit of United Technologies Corp.
UTC Aerospace Systems is using state-of-the art tools and processes, including additive manufacturing to provide affordable, comprehensive design, integration, qualification and production for the CST-100. Delivery is due in 2016 for a 2017 flight to the International Space Station (ISS). "
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/utc-aerospace-systems-supports-boeing-cst-100-vehicle-2014-11-06
SGLB is now positioned with major AM players and has a forum to showcase their PrintRite3D and their expertise so joining AMC is a good use of funds.
4) Materialize and Adurant
Materialize is considering a major player in AM.
Major players in the market include 3D Systems, Inc. (U.S.), Stratasys Ltd. (U.S.), ExOne (U.S.), Arcam AB (Sweden), EnvisionTEC (Germany), EOS (Germany), Materialise NV (Belgium), and MCor Technologies Ltd. (Ireland).
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/global-additive-manufacturing--material-plastics-metals-and-ceramics-market---analysis--forecast-to-2014---2020-300005014.html
Karel Brans, Strategic Partnership Manager of Materialise, notes, “With Streamics automation and control system, the platform supports the workflow in an AM environment, automating several steps along the way and assuring quality and traceability. Linking the Sigma Labs PrintRite3D® product to our software platform enables our mutual users to benefit from this valuable technology from within their trusted Materialise environment.”
http://www.materialise.com/press/materialise-joins-a-new-cooperation-agreement-with-sigma-labs-inc
Sigma Labs is working with Adurant Sigma Labs, Inc. Has Engaged Oracle® Partner Adurant Technologies, LLC to Address Big Data Challenges in Additive Manufacturing of Metal Parts "we must provide our customers with the tools and methods they will need to manage the terabytes of data per part that will be generated as a result of using PrintRite3D® systems as integrated functions within their overall advanced manufacturing enterprise. We have tasked Adurant Technologies to help us develop the architecture, data integration and reporting requirements that will meet these needs and interface seamlessly with enterprise systems from ORACLE Corporation® and SAP AG®. This is an emerging problem for all of additive manufacturing, and we intend to be a leader in offering this critical data management tool."
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/sigma-labs-inc-has-engaged-oracle-partner-adurant-technologies-llc-to-address-big-data-challenges-in-additive-manufacturing-of-metal-parts-2014-06-12
Look at what manufacturers are saying about Big Data
"47% of manufacturers expect big data analytics to have a major impact on company performance making it core to the future of digital factories."
http://www.forbes.com/sites/louiscolumbus/2015/02/15/big-data-analytics-mobile-technologies-and-robotics-defining-the-future-of-digital-factories/
It sounds to me like Mark Cola making the right moves to position SGLB for success.
5) gave Mark a bonus
I remember a few who screamed and hollared over the bonus that Mark received; however, I personally thought it was well deserved for a CEO who makes less that most IT test engineers that I know. I believe that Mark was making about 90K a year and he got a 150K bonus. I believe that if Mark was being careless with the funds then he would've given himself a big raise to go with the bonus or just take the money and run. Mark has not done this but he is using the money to grow the business by making and maintaining connections with the biggest of companies GE and Honeywell and Lockheed and Rolls Royce. These companies are interested and doing business with SGLB because SGLB's patented IPQA process solves real AM quality issues and more importantly. Printrite3D saves them money.
That's my take on SGLB's dilution via private placements and what position management is placing the company in. All signs are pointing to growth. Look at what folks are saying about AM.
"This year will be the year that additive manufacturing starts to deliver a real return on investment for those companies that have made the leap, according to Espen Olsen, European director for aerospace and defence at IFS.
Olsen cites the confidence and investment of major players, such as Rolls-Royce and GE Aviation, in the technology as a clear indicator for the direction of travel for the rest of the aerospace industry. "
http://www.mro-network.com/opinion/2015/01/3d-printing-take-2015/4584
"It has been widely predicted that additive manufacturing — or 3-D printing — will become ubiquitous within the Aerospace and Defense (A&D) industry. A&D is already a huge trendsetter in terms of adopting additive manufacturing and contributing 10.2 percent to the industry's $2.2 billion global revenue in 2012 — and all indications are that this will continue to grow. Rolls-Royce and General Electric have already announced that they plan to produce parts for aviation engines that are lighter and faster to make through additive manufacturing.
In 2014 we saw the huge potential for this technology in aviation. In 2015, as a recent Deloitte University Press report highlighted, I believe it will really show its worth in terms of reducing material costs, decreasing labor content and increasing availability of parts at point of use, having a dramatic impact on the supply chain. We will start to see real ROI. -"
http://www.aviationtoday.com/av/commercial/The-Top-Five-Key-Civil-Aviation-MRO-Trends-to-Watch-Out-for-in-2015_83917.html#.VOgGnCzzlDQ
I continue to invest as AM articles continue to point to growth with more companies, governments, and universities getting in on the AM act. This AM has been 30 years in the making. I'm willing to wait a few years to see SGLB benefit. I implore investors to look at the AM market in general and see if this is an industry that is growing. Does SGLB's PrintRite3D fit? Is this what the AM industry looking for? Does it solve a need? Will is make or save money? IMO the answers are Yes. SGLB's patented IPQA process which they exclusively own is addressing AM industry's need and saving time and money. I believe that as long as AM is a growth industry and SGLB is addressing the needs of their customers then us investors are in a good place. We just need to be vigilant of the AM arena and the players and what they need. Good Luck All and Have a great weekend.
Excellent Dollars1! Thanks much for this transcript. It is most insightful!
Thanks Blue. I was wondering what was driving this latest pop!
Thanks Z. This continues to confirm DD that SGLB's IPQA process is of great interest to the AM community. SGLB will have the opportunity to demonstrate IPQA in front of an audience of the AM players with contract awards from aerospace, America Makes, AFRL, etc.. We are talking about Lockheed Martin, Rolls Royce, EOS, NIST, NASA, our JTDA partner GE Aviation and more. There should be no more talk of SGLB not being a real company. They are meeting at SGLB headquarters this fall. Everything is falling into place with my expectations. Good Luck Everyone.
Joey, My mistake go with what Don said; however, I know with more awareness and an uplisting then many more shareholders of record will come. Thanks for the correction Don.
Yes. You are correct.
Absolutely and I'm anticipating more orders for Printrite 3D as production of the AM aerospace parts ramps up. I appreciate all of your SGLB posts and DD to the board.
Print My Plane: 3D Technology Catches Up
"For many of us, 3D printing is an upcoming technology that periodically hits the news when someone prints a whole rifle or (reportedly) a whole car over 44 hours.
However, the real value of 3D printing lies in precision engineering, and the people at GE Aviation have been quick to realise that. Greg Morris, additive business development and strategy leader at GE Aviation, explains that the firm uses a technology called Direct Metal Laser Sintering."
http://gulfbusiness.com/2015/02/print-plane-3d-technology-catches/#.VN90ECzzlDQ