CAD CAM Responses #3

CAD CAM Responses #3

I did not know that there was a CAD CAM society, this is something that I


would like to join.



Your comments on the CAD systems are similar in some ways to my thinking.


firstly cost is an issue and that 3 rd world economies would benefit from


fast inexpensive prosthesis. Where I differ a little is the Tracer approach


to the laser systems, I believe that a combination would be great where the


laser would capture the exact shape and the hand digitiser would capture the


more dynamic point for example the soft tissue compared to bony areas, areas


of higher pressure and areas of lower pressure.



The comments regarding taking a cast then digitising has merits except it is


far to slow, using Tracer the positive would have been cut by the time the


negative was digitised, in fact the positive may also have been thermoformed


by this time.



I believe more discussions like this would benefit the industry and patient


care.



Best wishes



Gary Seaman


_______________________________


I enjoyed reading your comments on this subject. My limited experience

with this ever evolving technology still has me asking what are we

trying to accomplish here?

I have used the older Seattle program, and recently the Tracer Cad.

I see systems of this nature advantageous if someone were going to

another country or area, measuring multiple units, then returning with

the stored data, or transferring it electronically to a central fab

facility, as well as for the person who central fabs, and / or orders

everything off the shelf.

Obviously, they are impressive, great advertising gimmicks, and I'm sure

only limited by the expertise level of the user.

What am I missing????

Thank you,

Monty L Young CP


______________________________


  We bought Freescan in January. We are getting the insole carver next week.

 I bought Freescan to use it for spinal and pedorthics.


I assume that the Vorum scanner will digitize in aaop format. The capod

freescan does also. the problem with the Freescan is that it doesn't export

the landmark data in aaop format yet therefore when I manipulate it in

Biosculptor the are no landmarks. capod is fixing this for me.


I am spending some time to integrate various systems to obtain the best

solutions for our cad-cam needs. You just have to go out and talk to the

vendors to see what they will do for you.


Our experience with Biosculptor has been good for the most part. I should

say our experience with cad-cam has been good. Biosculptor has in my opinion

the best manipulation software out there. It is very intuitive due to the

manipulation model they use. It is based on how we rectify plaster models in

the field.


Biosculptor has been good when we have problems with our system. The

engineers are pretty helpful.

Cad-cam has reduced our labor costs, increased productivity, and helped us

make better orthoses and prosthetics. For me it was scary to get into

cad-cam but it was also a no-brainer. We calculated that our $150,000. cost

was paid back in the first 6 months due to increased productivity. It is

also my belief that you can get into cad-cam for about $90,000. for a full

suite now-a-days.

Buck


End of responses