Cad CaM Responses #1

Cad CaM Responses #1

This has been difficult to break up the message into 200 line chunks. I would
like to suggest that in the future, IF it is a TECHNICAL conversation, that
responses should be posted to the whole list so it is more like a discussion.


Original Post

Dear Colleagues:

Although I am a member of the CAD CAM society, I was unable to attend the

gathering at the Academy meeting.

However, I was told it was poorly attended and enthusiasm was low.

Instead of seeing the rapid spread of CAD CAM, it seems we are seeing it

decline.


In my mind this is a technology to be embraced. However, I think there may be

some fundamental errors in our thinking.

CAD CAM should ultimately lead to the solution of massive need in developing

countries as well as the more developed countries


My feeling is that the fundamental road block has been in capturing an

appropriate and accurate image.


We first had the Provel digitizer which has its problems with mechanical

capture especially with corners. The Provel is no longer being supported so

it seems that it is dying a natural death, if my information is correct.


We have had different laser systems that attempt to capture the shape of the

residuum without contact. Sometimes these required the patient to not move

for a relatively prolonged period of time. Then there is the distinct

question in my mind if we even want an image like that, and if it is useful.


Then we have these clever systems of wands that contact the skin directly.

While Tracer and BioSculptor have this feature available, and many

practitioners report achieving satisfactory results with experience, I still

question its value for the majority of practitioners and the needs of the

world. There is a learning curve involved in capturing soft tissue that some

may never achieve. Certainly it takes time and expense that many others

cannot afford.


BioSculptor has produced a non contact laser probe that is capable of

digitizing both a cast and the positive model. In my mind this allows people

to use their existing casting skills and then have that accurately

transferred and carved. As one increases computer skills the socket can be

further refined


The down side is that these are very expensive machines. I would like to see

BioSculptor, Tracer, Capod, and others, not focus on keeping people's hands

free of plaster and focus on inexpensive, reliable, low cost portable laser

probes that are compatible with all the systems.

What if they joined forces? Or perhaps a third party could create the Laser

Probe Digitizer that can interface with all the systems.

Then the standard would be the same and the competition would be for

software, and central fab service and integrated pt management.


While I know there are claims and true capability for tracing the inside of

the socket with both Tracer and BioSculptor, I think it would be far more

efficient to have a laser probe. Anyone who has traced the inside of the

socket with these systems will know that it is possible but it isn't that

convenient.


I envision a Provel sized digitizer that has a non contact laser probe

capable of digitizing the cast or a positive model. Any engineers looking for

a project?


I think this is the next step for CAD CAM to go if it is to be adopted on a

world wide scale.

Furthermore, I envision a system where the practitioner marks the precise

areas he wants reduced with a pen so that he still uses his senses to

determine as much as possible without having to draw on the computer screen

with a mouse.


I think it will be easier and faster and more accurate and less expensive to

teach people to cast properly or utilize their current skills and then put

the cast in an accurate digitizer.


Mark Benveniste CP


___________________________________