Replies to post #139547 on Liquidmetal Technologies Inc (LQMT)

[CIMA7]

So what does this mean for us?

[longinus]

1) The RDC machine has developed over 6 years

2) Parts are, indeed, spit out in seconds

3) Process is totally different from the Engel IM method

4) None of it infringes upon LQMT patent base.

1) Indeed, and it still has yet to be scaled up to a commercially useful format.

2) A customized Engel machine, or similar IM machine, perfectly optimized to produce exactly one part (as Apple or another extremely high volume manufacturer would do) could reduce cycle times to seconds, as well. The science behind perfectly optimized RDCF is not much faster than the science behind perfectly optimized IM.

3) In RDCF, pressure is applied to the ingot before inductive heating begins. In IM, inductive heating is applied to the ingot before pressure begins. This is essentially the only difference. RDCF is more efficient in terms of applying the minimal heat necessary for the least time necessary, but as I mentioned in #2, an IM machine can be fine tuned to perform very similarly on high-volume runs. Additionally, Glassimetal's demonstrated part quality is so far very inferior to LQMT's.

4) I find that extremely hard to believe, but I don't have the free time to prove it.

Johnson's RDCF tech is just another way to skin a cat. His alloy identification software is probably the real value in Glassimetal.