Welcome to the Podiatry Arena forums

You are currently viewing our podiatry forum as a guest which gives you limited access to view all podiatry discussions and access our other features. By joining our free global community of Podiatrists and other interested foot health care professionals you will have access to post podiatry topics (answer and ask questions), communicate privately with other members, upload content, view attachments, receive a weekly email update of new discussions, access other special features. Registered users do not get displayed the advertisements in posted messages. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our global Podiatry community today!

  1. Everything that you are ever going to want to know about running shoes: Running Shoes Boot Camp Online, for taking it to the next level? See here for more.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Have you considered the Critical Thinking and Skeptical Boot Camp, for taking it to the next level? See here for more.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. Have you considered the Clinical Biomechanics Boot Camp Online, for taking it to the next level? See here for more.
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Have you considered the Clinical Biomechanics Boot Camp Online, for taking it to the next level? See here for more.
Dismiss Notice
Have you liked us on Facebook to get our updates? Please do. Click here for our Facebook page.
Dismiss Notice
Do you get the weekly newsletter that Podiatry Arena sends out to update everybody? If not, click here to organise this.

CAD/CAM orthotic manufacturing systems.

Discussion in 'Biomechanics, Sports and Foot orthoses' started by Kursh Mohammed, Jul 18, 2010.

  1. Kursh Mohammed

    Kursh Mohammed Active Member

    Members do not see these Ads. Sign Up.
    There a number of CAD-CAM orthotic manufacturing systems out on the market.
    Some very established easy to use, accurate systems and some not so good.

    We have the Paromed – Parocontour system in place only for EVA orthotics, great system, extremely accurate, very quick and friendly to use.

    Any Pods or lab technicians know of any systems that are good for plastic materials?
  2. Admin2

    Admin2 Administrator Staff Member

  3. Kursh Mohammed

    Kursh Mohammed Active Member

    I really want to find out if any Pods or techs are using the Sharp Shape orthotic CADCAM system?
    And really any one with any feedback to what they are currently using.
  4. Craig Payne

    Craig Payne Moderator

    Sharpe Shape is the most widely used of the systems; my best guess is that it probably makes up just over half of the cad/cam installations in labs. However, most podiatrists would have no idea what system their lab uses unless they have the scanner from sharpe Shape (I do not recall if they brand their scanners)
  5. Kursh Mohammed

    Kursh Mohammed Active Member

    I'm not sure if they just brand the scanners they have - I'm probably guessing so.
    I haven't come across Sharp Shape before.
    We have the Paromed - Parocontour in our lab, it's a great milling machine, easy to build the orthotics' using the software, very accurate devices!

    I understand the sharp shape uses the rootian model to build foot positives and mill out orthoses? Am I right???
  6. Craig Payne

    Craig Payne Moderator

    You can use any system to build orthotics based on any model.
  7. joejared

    joejared Active Member

    2 of my customers use Sharpshape as well as OreTek and their doctors definitely did notice the differences. There are specific geometric constants in a sharpshape device that, which combined with their machining grooves, make their type of device easy to identify. A couple of the labs also have Delcam, which has yet to have made any real impact on OreTek production counts. One of the labs, not too long ago, made the decision to manufacture orthoses almost exclusively using OreTek and limited Sharpshape production to 2nd pairs. For the past several months, they've become the #1 producing lab in the network as a result. One method of comparison for any cad cam orthotics manufacturing system is to what the wet lab was producing before going cad cam. Ideally, there should be little difference.
  8. Phil Wells

    Phil Wells Active Member

    The most important thing to ask any CAD supplier is how flexible they are.
    You can test their understanding by asking questions such as can you do Blake Inverted devices, Rootian protocols, Cast sectioning etc.
    Often they will try and convince you that there way is the best and the other methods are not worthwhile.
    DON'T fall for this and insist that the system can do everything you need now and that they will work with you to make it do anything you might need in the future.

    I have seen Sharpe Shape, Paromed, Go Tech, Amfit, Orthomodel etc and they all have some great features but non of them can do everything.

    Don't fall for 'flim flam' and make an informed decision based on your future needs - it will really help in the long run.

  9. Indeed. I asked Phil to make something double top secret for me the other day, and completely different. He said "OK". Which is cool. Have you finished them yet, Phil? ;)
  10. Phil Wells

    Phil Wells Active Member

    No as the bad guys have been sniffing around and the top secret project was taken to a hidden bunker.
    They have now left so I will do tomorrow.

  11. Kursh Mohammed

    Kursh Mohammed Active Member

    That does make sense. Some CAD software are not able to do what you want them to do, some are quite restricted.
    I understand that you are using the Delcam, after looking through the testimonial on the Delcam website.
    Is the Orthomodel a really high quality CADCAM system? Are there points which enable the system to be a superior to others?
    And also are there any limitations to the system that have been customised to your needs which enhances your system?

    I have been talking to a colleague of mine in another department who use Blatchford’s who are their contractor; Blatchford’s use the Delcam Orthomdel, and the clinicians haven't been too impressed with the finished orthotics. Though, not sure if Blatchford’s have figured out how to use the software or if the Delcam Orthomdel is a very limited piece of kit?
  12. Phil Wells

    Phil Wells Active Member

    I do use Delcam but not Orthomdel at the moment.
    I use their high powered design and milling software - Copycad, Powershape and Powermill.
    Not as quick as Orthomodel and infinitely harder to learn to use but I can design almost anything on it - Blakes to Root etc.
    Re the finished devices, this is usually more down to the milling software interface with the milling machine. We use very large, industrial machinery (Bridgeport, Pacer and AXYZ) that facilitate accurate and very fast milling e.g. 2 pairs of polyprop insole can take as little as 10 minutes to machine with a 3mm stepover. We use a 1mm stepover which takes on average 18 minutes for the 2 pairs.
    With EVA and polyurethane milling, the milling strategies are more complex. Heel cup height, material density are a couple of variables that impact on quality.
    One of the biggest influences is tooling geometry which has taken us 8 years to develop but we are now close to perfecting.

    I am hoping to start using Orthomodel soon but please understand (As Delcam do) I will always be impartial when recommending any system.

    Just out of interest I recently purchased the IQube scanner and it is the dogs danglies.

  13. The OrthoModel - is it really a custom prescription orthotic CAD suite? Are you able to design a pair of device to your custom need? Can you design a orthotic shape and use it again and again (a design you have created which is your shape and unique to you or your company) - NOPE You can't do any of that. The CAD suite is restricted only allowing you to build an orthotic using stadard stock templates!

    I ask WHY? Is it really a prescription orthotic CAM suite - I have to argue that it isn't and until they develop a more easy to use suite that is precisely accurate - then it can only in my eyes be a CAM machine that creates orthotics to fit your feet with corrections (posts). No custom about that at all!

    Phil - you have the software to make what you like - design what you want. Why would you want the OrthoModel when it is inferior than your copycad, powermill and powershape used in conjunction (all from delcam)?

    I just see the orthomodel to create simple prefabricated orthotics in mass volume if you have the right milling machine set up. If i'm wrong - I want delcam to prove me wrong and explain it isn't.

    The antatomical function - it gives you that custom option. Though that function is desired to use for RA deformity etc

    I really can imagine the 3 software you have Phil will be way difficult to learn - but your orthotics will be like no others, accurate and tip top!

    You want to be abe to buy a CADCAM suite that is freindly and easy to use - and give you an orthotic the way you want it. I'm not it's fundamentally flawed but so behind in comparison to Sharp Shape.

    No problem with the scanning equipment they have - like you I would say it's the bulls danglies! ;)

  14. Kursh Mohammed

    Kursh Mohammed Active Member

    Well you want a system to be easy to use and easy accessible, whilst you design and fabricate what you want, is the OrthoModel really restricted?

    Your right Phil you want the company to be able to meet your demands after all you are buying such a expensive piece kit, and along the journey technicians and pods will find new ideas to develop and add into the software. If the software doesn’t enable customization like the simple things like met domes to orthotic shapes – the CAD will be able to further developed.
  15. Phil Wells

    Phil Wells Active Member

    Dear mystery poster (Can we have names please)

    Let me try and answer what I think you are asking


  16. Kursh Mohammed

    Kursh Mohammed Active Member

    In my opinion Delcam OrthoModel after reading through on their website, it has the potential to be one of the best custom orthotic CADCAM system in place. There are always update on every software, imagine where we will be in the next 5 years!
  17. Chris Lawrie

    Chris Lawrie Member

    Hello All
    My name is Chris Lawrie and i look after Delcam's Medical solutions, including OrthoModel and iQube (foot scanner).
    Our solution is developed using intelligence from Podiatrsist and Orthotists all over the world coupled with our experience in design and manufacture (a marriage which has worked well to date).
    The software aims to be all things to all Practitioners & Labs needing custom orthotic insole from templates to 100% anatomical devices; using the scan of the foot (we do not do prefabs...yet).
    We are a big company, with over 300 offices in 80 countries and we pride ourselves in good long term support...but i would say that :0)
    I guess the best way to get picture of what we can and cannot yet do is to take a look at the software via webex.

    As Phil will tell you we do not claim to own the knowledge of thousands of Practitioners but we are trying to create a product which is flexible and powerful enough to cater for everyone (the power of CADCAM is in how it captures and uses your knowledge).

    I am on holiday for 2 weeks, but we can plan a webex any time after mid August to suit your diaries.

    Hope you don't mind me contributing

    Chris Lawrie
    Delcam - Healthcare Business Development Manager
  18. It’s Matt,

    Well how unfair is that of delcam to develop and tune up your software and leave others limited. It should be same for all.

    You pay for what you get and in this circumstance you pay for a lot to delcam to get a little back.

    Phil, are you telling me that the current orthomodel is a bespoke custom orthotic design suite, nowhere near. I’ll explain...
    Once you have the scan image of the foot, the next step is design a orthotic.
    A set design stored on the system by delcam is used to match the sized requirement of the foot scan. “A set design stored on the system by delcam” WHAT IS CUSTOM BESOPOKE ABOUT THAT???



    The anatomical function allows a more bespoke orthotic like I previously said. Though this part of the cam is designed for use for a more deformed foot, the software don’t let the exact design to be saved to be used on another foot (LIMITED) it’s bespoke but massively limited to what you add.
    No contradicting myself, this anatomical function is created with a huge flaw. This was one of the new updates for this year!

    The iqube foot scanner – its only got more cameras that the last model that they brought out with a foot rest. Wohooooooo, more cameras, though it works super, no qualms about that.
  19. I don't know much about Delcam's orthomodel system, so I can't comment too much. I will ask this: Matt, how much experience do you have with commercial 3D CAD systems such as solidworks, rhino etc?

    In terms of scanners more cameras would appear to be a good thing.
  20. I don't have any experience to other cadcam apart from delcam.
    Well yes the more cameras the better it is - my concern isn't with the scanner, it's great we've got it! Probably best out there!

    But the concern is how far from bespoke the software is! The software can visually look poor but you want to buid the orthotic how you like - this you can't do!
  21. joejared

    joejared Active Member

    That's exactly how it is with OreTek. If one customer asks for a feature, it becomes available to all. The specific customer's implementation of the new feature remains confidential, but the new version is as easy as typing 'getupdate' for any customer, client or client/server alike. Most prefer to wait for updates until an update has what they want, and only rarely are all customers in sync, but that's their choice, not mine.

    When and how a customer pays makes a big difference in terms of business models. Delcam and Sharpshape are similarly priced, all up front. Both charge considerable amounts for updates and features. In the case of Delcam, I believe they also charge 12 1/2% per year for their software licenses as well in addition to a technical support fee.

    History has taught me one thing about fees. If I charge for technical support, my customers are less willing to ask for help, their work is slowed, and royalties suffer. Also, and from a new customer perspective, the idea of paying more than $1000 for the loan or lease to buy equipment tends to create a large overhead, increasing minimum quantities from 60 pair/month to around 300 pair, just to break even. My last installation costs my customer approximately $300.00 /month for hardware expenses for a new Client/Server. In the past year, excluding shipping/travel expenses, it has cost my customers from just under $2K to as high as $20K to produce their own devices, with the higher priced unit having 2 scanners, one chip collector, and one new router. In at least one new installation, a considerable amount of new code was required to meet their standards.
  22. When you say Delcam, I presume you mean orthomodel as oppose to to the full CAD software. So if I were to give you the full Delcam CAD software and CAM software and a scan of a foot, how long do you think it would take you to learn how to use the software and then make "custom foot orthoses" for each and every scan? Answer- a significant amount of time. You get what you pay for, you get something you can use out of the box. You want to make fully custom devices? Buy some proper CAD software, and learn how to use it.
  23. Phil Wells

    Phil Wells Active Member

    Matt (thanks for the name)

    I will definitely investigate Orthomodel more closely as I may be assuming some things. I don't have an up-dated version of it I have just seen the latest releases - I am still just using CopyCad etc. so no favourable treatment here!!!
    Also due to the fact I am a bit ahead of it, I have never really questioned the actual mechanics. However I have challenged it a couple of times and it has produced very accurate orthoses.
    Regarding the stored shapes, these are necessary for any system as they can be used to define the outer boundaries of the orthotic as defined by the SHOES.
    Without this (I am speak from experience) the orthotics designed purely from a scan are usually to big or the wrong shape for the patients footwear.
    That is the only aspect of CAD/CM that should be library. However you still need it to ignore these pre-designed parameters when bespoke shoes are used.

    I can definitely understand any reasonably competent practitioner having frustrations with any CAD/CAM system as they will never be able to everything they may need clinically. Again one of the advantages I have in using the 'pure' CAD system.

    The main reason for the extra cameras on the I-Qube was that increased depth capture - very useful when scanning casts and deep foam boxes.

    I would have hoped that if you have already bought Orthomodel that they would be giving you up-dates etc. However you probably need to take out some sort of service contract which I know can be expensive. Hopefully it is not a case of buyer beware!!!

    I will try and critique Orthomodel more carefully and give an honest opinion ASAP. As I have previously said, I am not their sales person and will always be honest.

  24. admin

    admin Administrator Staff Member

    Apoloies. This message above got held up in the moderation que and may have been missed by some.
    (BTW: All posts by members with fewer than five posts which contain a link are sent for moderation - its part of the spam fighting that goes on around here)
  25. CraigT

    CraigT Well-Known Member

    I am somewhat confused...
    You state that you have very little experience with CADCAM apart from orthomodel, yet you say...
    I looked at Delcam a couple of years ago and felt that it seemed to be very similar to other systems where the scan is used to match the best fit from a library of orthoses. This has developed considerably since than to include an option where the surface of the scan is used to determine the shape itself- the progress they have made is significant in this time frame.
    We expect to have a Delcam system up and running this year and fully expect to have a significant period of time where we will be learning how to get it do manufacture the devices exactly the way we want. This would be the case with all systems- We have an AMFIT and are still learning new tricks with this after 3 years.
    I have always manufactured my own devices and am very pedantic with respect to design- the Delcam seems to be the closest fit to our requirements, and the company seems to listen to practitioners to help develop it.

    In addition-
    I have met and spoken with Phil at length about CADCAM systems and can attest to the above statement- he has been a fantastic help! Cheers Phil!:drinks
  26. eseo2010

    eseo2010 Welcome New Poster

    Hi all,

    Just popped back in after a long time away from this stuff - Phil knows me from Orthomed days (shhh! dont mention them :)) and I can verify that hes a stand-up guy who knows his stuff.

    I have moved on to another sphere now but still retain links with the podiatry scene, but i can verify that IMHO the Delcam software including OrthoModel is the best on the market by far, and if their past history is anything to go by it will only get better. (No I havent moved on to be a Delcam employee in case your wondering). They are a quality outfit who make quality software and my own humble little claim to fame is to have been the person who first introduced them to the world of foot orthotics many years ago when we tried to semi-automate the design process using the orthoscanner system.

    We chose to use CopyCAD via OLE automation from VB6 and it worked really well - i still have a variant running in my office here today - but Delcam have taken the software to heights that i could only have dreamed of - so well done to them.

    As I say I have no vested interest or anything to gain from these comments other than to back up Phils observations.

    ps good to hear that after all these years some of the same old arguments get trotted out :)
  27. joejared

    joejared Active Member

    I'd call this a rather important development. :-/

Share This Page