Sounds about right, but no one knows. Ruport's answer as to why there aren't more big end users trialing the current PR3D solution was that Sigma is very selective and that they only have enough resources to go around. But only Baker, Airbus, and probably Oerlikon...anyone else still wondering about this?
A while back In one of Sigma’s previous partnerships the research they were helping with was the predictive outcome of an AM print based on the CAD and running a piece of software running simulations by providing simulation data against PrintRite3D instead of PrintRite3D getting it from the sensors. There was actuallyba component of the SGLB Software suite that provided that capability. I hadn’t heard much talk that idea for a while until today.
I think option 1 merging with simulation software is the plan. Materialise and ANSYS are both good calls. Think they both make a ton of sense and conversations have been had with both companies I believe.
Yea I agree with Viper. He's definitely talking about Option #1. And ANSYS would be the perfect fit for us. They have mountains of cash. According to Rice and Ruport, PR3D TODAY produces quality assessments BETTER than some CT machines. Imagine how much faster ANSYS could do the following using PR3D real-time results?! "CT scanning allows manufacturers to look inside parts made with additive manufacturing to measure complex internal designs. A printed object can be CT scanned, and the images can be passed through Simpleware software and into ANSYS' software so designers can compare the physical object to the original CAD file."
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
