I suggest that whoever first posted the article mentioning DEFORM contact the source of the article to clarify--or contact SGLB. We are not talking about divulging "trade secrets"if the brand name of the software being used is mentioned in the article in reference to a user. Right?
"I do see your point; however, in this set of slides provided by T&L SFTC is not given any credit but Sigma LAbs is given credit."
Yes, SFTC is not acknowledged in the October 2017 Data Fusion slides, but ESI, the maker of the ProCAST software, which is also mentioned along with DEFORM in the Dream3D slides, is also not acknowledged.
But, more importantly, the Dream3D slides are from a presentation made in July 2015 during a CMU Workshop on Methods for 3D Microstructural Studies. So I don’t think that any acknowledgements in the 2017 slides can be used to reach any conclusions about a slide presentation from two years earlier.
I do agree with you about the end of the statement “…DEFORM and ProCAST produce continuous descriptions of field variables at the part geometry scale”, which seems consistent with application of Sigma’s DEFORM to quantify the full scale geometry of the part. I also see the similarities between Sigma’s DEFORM and ProCast based on this description:
"ProCAST software, based on powerful Finite Element Technology, is well suited to also predict distortions and residual stresses and can address more specific processes like semi-solid, core blowing, centrifugal, lost foam and continuous casting."
So including Sigma’s DEFORM would seem to fit. However, another strike against concluding that the DEFORM in the July 2015 slides is from Sigma is that the first contract for DEFORM was only announced in May 2015 for installation at the Honeywell AM facility in Phoenix later the year. So DEFORM had just finished in-house development and testing at Sigma’s lab so it seems unlikely that referencing it in a presentation would be meaningful to many attendees.
The 2015 presentation and the work shop where focused on metallurgy and the microstructure of metals and did not provide any technical details or discussion about DEFORM and it uses, just a simple one-line mention. So even if it was Sigma’s, I don’t see much to get excited about with this 2 year old presentation.
The fact that Mark Cola and Sigma are listed as a program contributor in last month’s presentation and that PrintRite was also specifically called out (Slide 26) as an industry program and the in-situ building block in the registration data within Dream3D, tells me that Sigma is moving along with the industry players and PrintRite is being incorporated into other industry programs.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
