Any Australian podaitrist using Delcam scanning and milling systems?

Members do not see these Ads. Sign Up.

Just wondering if there are any pods in Australia using a complete Delcam foot scan and orthotic milling system in their practices... or alternatively any stand alone orthotic labs using this system.. Was hoping to get some fedback regarding the pros and cons of having such a sytem onsite.. particularly if it is cost effective. i already have a lab technician onsite utilising traditional plaster casts and manual fabrication and am considerating a move into cad/cam devices. Replies on here or pvt messsage fine.

 

I have the system- I am Australian, but not in Australia!
I have just returned from the Delcam Orthotic Technology Forum. The consensus seems to be that once you are up and running it is without question cost effective- assuming you want your lab tech to make more orthoses more efficiently... but there is a learning curve!
It most likely depends on your scale as to whether it would be cost effective for you.
We have the system as I like to have the combination of having full control over the design, as well as manufacturing efficiency (we do all design and manufacture ourselves).
Cheers

 

Mate I wouldn't bother considering the Delcam, it's a load crap being frankly blunt.
The software you receive will not be the same as you would if you bought sharp shape or paromed.

If you have a bit of money to invest into a CAD CAM system, talk to an engineer who can assist you on how to advise you best, seriously stay away.

They market themselves very well, have a look at the other threads from a year ago or so and don't jump into it, THIS GOES OUT TO EVERYONE WHO IS THIKING OF LOOKING INTO IT.

ALSO I KNOW I AM GOING TO GET PEOPLE QUESTIONING MY OPINION, ALL I HAVE TO SAY IS I AM A USER AND WE WERE ONE OF THE VERY FIRST COMPANIES IN THE UK TO TO BUY INTO THE COCK AN BULL **** AND WE REGRET IT EVER SINCE.

GO AND SPEAK TO SHARP SHAPE OR EVEN BETTER ORETEK!

 

I have Oretek and for about $15,000 you get a 3d laser scanner, CNC Router, software, and computers! Training is free and no charge for software updates. You pay $2.00 royalty per pair of shells and $1.00 for positives.

Steven

 

Where do I begin?

The milling machine they provide from Central CNC is inadequate to churn out orthotic after orthotic daily. They need spend time on the mechanical side of it rather than making stupid irrelevant complicated tweaks that take hours to design an orthotic.

No disrespect to Delcam and the marketing team, but this software package really needs a kick up the backside and more involvement from people who know what they are talking about. I don't know who they are listening to but it's just many thousands of miles away from being acceptable!

Ask delcam for a demo, why would they refuse. Use blatchfords and see the identical shells you receive back!

 

Hi Matt- (I had to go back to your old posts to find a name)
Are you currently using Orthomodel? If so, what version are you using?
I am asking because your experience is very different to mine... perhaps if you have a version which is a few years old???

 

To the topic in general,

If you were to ask for samples of milled orthoses from our lab, polyprop/nylon/acetal or any of the other polymers that we manufacture from, then you would receive a designed and manufactured device that is completely bespoke and to a standard that i rarely received as a practitioner.

The devices would be very consistent with a customers prescribing habits and requests. As i am sure others would claim.

If our practitioner is not happy with the device at time of issue, in terms of what is received, as opposed to expectation, then we will alter the design and re issue on a same day turnaround. With this fact in mind, i simply could not afford to have problems like this regularly. Hence our systems have to be able to deliver volumetric and so bespoke orthoses. We use Delcam, along with another free hand CAD package as of recently.

Having said the above i do not believe that the process that we follow is replicated in all labs, there are undoubtedly labs chucking non bespoke (non volumetric) rubbish out of the door using insole based systems and yet claiming them to be custom orthoses as we have all come to expect.

We must also look at the practitioner, for accepting these devices and making some of these companies very successful. The issue is....Where does custom end and mass produced re sized insole models begin?

I guess it could be argued for a trading standards defense, that the devices are custom as they have individual prescriptions and size and arch height. But in my book that is not what any of my clients are ordering. Hence the reference to PFOLA's standards should be used in my view to avoid "confusion" down the line.

The above does not mean that i have a preference or bias to any method, clinically or as a Lab owner. Only within my company and professional life, i feel strongly that the product supplied should be as expected and ordered, without compromise or indeed areas of grey.

Irrespective of system used, there will always be companies willing to use the easy method. That is a fault of the user, not the Software used.

The fact of it is, Matt is correct in that the Delcam system takes time to design custom orthoses as volumetric devices. It is not a fast route to manufacture at all, unless non volumetric manufacture is sought.

I would also argue that there is a very steep learning curve associated with designing orthoses in the volumetric manner. I undertake all designs as a podiatrist. I really do not think that the results of a tech would be fit for purpose without a LOT of training.

Training anybody to use these systems to make insoles would take a few days to weeks. To design anatomically correct orthoses will take a lot longer and constant supervision is required.

Furthermore the system requires additional development in the anatomical design aspect. As there are issues on this front, in terms of stability and some of the basic functions and needs associated with volumetric plastic orthoses design.

The key is understanding as a user, what is appropriate, where and when.

To design a pair of devices correctly and properly takes around 30 minutes on this system. That is extrinsic of scanning/blocking/batching/Toolpathing/milling/cutting out of block/grinding/adhesives/topcovers/finishing/checking/package and dispatch.

The machine that Matt, mentions is not sufficient to cut plastic all day, in my opinion. It may well be fine for 10 pairs a week but i don't know in honesty. Machining and selection is a whole other problem.

As for the cost effectiveness of setting up an entire center, it depends upon your pocket !!!

I don't know or understand why you would even consider it for personal use. But you may be wealthy!

The reality is it depends upon location as to true payback. But at 15 units a week personally, i would never have even given it a fleeting thought. And if i were busier personally in clinic, then there would be no reason due to time restraints, hassle and noise alone!! The busier the practitioner, the greater a monetary value upon his time. It would be better to streamline with scanning and order manager and use a lab that you can build a full relationship with and trust in the product and service.

These systems are often purchased by large organizations and hence the people offering opinions on them are lacking in real world views as to Value and cost vs expectation.

Our company, as many smaller labs in the UK, who offer a superb product and friendly professional service, have paid for these products with hard earned monies and a lot of sacrifice. We did so on the belief of delivering the best we can irrespective.

Apologies for the ramble:wacko:

There is more. But hopefully that adds to the body of experiences in an open and honest manner.

 

Craig I have the latest service pack! We produce over 80-100 orthotics a day excluding AFO's, I have been working with CAD CAM for a long time now. You have o put yourself in my shoes and say can this program work for a factory based business - consistent output - I'm afraid my answer is it cannot!

 

Hello all.

Thought I would post my "2 cents" worth as I have been using the Delcam system for 2 years now. To be completely honest my experience has been the complete opposite from -

The Delcam system has simply been outstanding from my point of view. In relation to the machining component your problem may lie with your equipment. Here in Australia Delcam recommends using Matcam routers and these are just simply brilliant - am yet to have any significant issues with them. Our two can run all day and can produce upto 300-400 pairs a week without missing a beat - http://www.matcam.com.au/

The best part about the software is it is continually being updated. There have been many things along the way that have needed to be rectified within the software and these have been done and improved. Orthomodel is not just simply a turn key solution. It requires time and skill to use, however the ability to make full custom made orthotics with it is impressive and I would highly recommend it to any one out there needing to make large numbers of custom foot orthotics.

I am confused how you say it takes hours to make a pair of orthotics. Are you referring to loading time of the software or actual design and tweaking? From our end, it takes anywhere from a couple of minutes up to 15-20min to design a pair of full custom orthotics.

Every user can have a different experienced and is entitled to their opinion, but mine is the exact opposite to that of the above poster. I believe CraigT has summed it up pretty well -

CraigT how was the Delcam conference? I was wanting to go, but come around to quick and couldnt get away. Did you get a lot out of it?

Kind regards,
Dean

 

There are significant differences in systems depending on your practice. Paromed has been focussed on this hardware for many years and continues to invest heavily in R&D and ongoing product innovation...that said it is "horses for courses".

A key consideration will be your requirements and whether you realistically have the volume and inclination for manufacture, or if you are best suited to remain on the patient/clinical side and leave the manufacture to others. Are you the type of person who wants to play with the technology, explore the boundaries, maybe overlay in shoe pressure measurement to cad/cam modelling? or do you have the volume sufficient to support the decision to mill?

I pose these questions all the time, as depending on volume and your own personality/practice, there are pros and cons to consider before investing in a milling machine (and the elephant in the room - investing in the right system!) In Australia we offer paromed as an in-clinic milling solution, as a central fab service, or a large format solution for bigger volumes...as I said "horses for courses".

Kind regards,
Dieter
Paromed Aust/NZ

 

Hi Dean

I think it was actually myself that commented upon the time to design volumetric devices.

From the point of the package being open, to the point of saving the .ort or exporting the Model, it takes a good 20+ minutes for us. We do get regular 10% system freezes with designs.

But to compare apples with apples, that is a bespoke device and as such requires full editing, within the anatomical tabs selection, cross section included. This is for a polyprop device. Editing with regional modification and also the advanced editor tab. We also push the system a lot in terms of sheer device editing.

To the general thread and original poster: As an example of system capability, when required for demo purposes.
We use the system to mill an un-edited foot capture/cast but not through the Orthotics package, to maintain seperation and confirm that there is no alteration taking place.

A device is designed to conform completely to the unaltered positive of the foot and is milled. Without fail the system performs in the real world. If you are using EVA there is a button to press that will automatically undertake the task.

The original time point was in relation to claims of outputting orthoses designs in "minutes". When in reality the process take a lot longer than inferred.
But that is not a Delcam fault. You can output standard templates in a few minutes, i guess, i contest not bespoke designs..... I am willing to be proven wrong

As with you, our machining process is running very smoothly, Delcam guided and assisted us well out of contract requirements when we were setting up. All to assist and build our knowledge base of machining.

When our machine provider let us down, it was Delcam who stepped in and used influence to sort the mess out, helping us avoid lengthy disputes. At one point the evidence was gathered using software and data collection instruments worth a fortune...all at no cost.

Delcam completely re-designed all of our tool strategies a number of times and remembering back, did so on a charitable basis. The type of engineers and level of staff that were deployed to assist were well outside the monies that were paid for the product!!!

The toolpaths for cutting are superb and give the very best looking devices along with superb accuracy and speed.

When we actually require help from Delcam as a company, they assist immediately. If there is a problem they help 1st, question later.

There are areas of development required, to make the system better. But that is the same with all products. The more product that Delcam give, the more we want as a lab

I do remain curious as to the elements missing from Orthomodel, that Matt has picked up on though?

 

I can concur with both Steven and Dean.
Certainly it takes time to design true custom orthoses. I initially got the system for the benefits of efficiency, but did not think that it would really be as good as my old techniques with plaster with respect to the customisation... but I thought it would be close...

My experience has been that it is not as efficient as I had hoped as it does take time to do a truly custom orthosis, but it is still far faster than traditional methods, and is faster than our AMFIT when we were milling positive models.

Having said that, I have found it very close to the level of customisation of traditional plaster methods... and as we are developing our knowledge it is coming closer and closer. In addition you can do designs with this system which you cannot do with traditional methods. For example- we are doing variable thickness orthoses which are coming out lighter and stiffer than carbon composites.

Is the system perfect? no- there are occasional bugs, and I do send Delcam a wishlist of things I would like to see every so often. Most of these are related to helping me make specific changes more efficiently.

It is still evolving and it is exciting to see where Delcam are going with it... This was the highlight of the recent Technology Forum for me- seeing the direction that Delcam is headed with their software development.

Dean- The tech forum was very interesting, but it would be a big call to say it would be worth the trip from Australia. It was great to meet others using different CADCAM systems and seeing what the future could look like (additive manufacture etc!)

 

I have to admit I was a little supprised at Matt's (Rightway Poddy) comments until I read all his previous posts on this informative forum. There could be an ulterior motive behind his negativity, but judge for yourselves.
I have also had the Delcam OrthoModel/Mill package for a couple of years now and have to agree with the majority here. There was a short learning curve involved with the system and that is to be expected with any system. We now directly Mill 200 to 300 custom Orthotics per week in flexable and rigid materials without a problem.
My honest opinion of the software is its second to none, and believe me we looked long and hard at every option before deciding.
Can this program work for a factory based business - consistent output - Yes Matt it does

 

Hi Everyone,

My name is Dan Swatton and I am Delcam Healthcare Technical Product Manager. My responsibilities include the continued improvement of our Ortho products which include the 3D iQube scanners (Standard & Mini), OrthoModel & Mill and OrderManager.

Firstly I would like to thank everyone for the feedback of which most was positive and in the case of Matt highly unfortunately negative. Matt - I would be only too happy to listen to your concerns so I can understand where we can help. Please email me at dns@delcam.com and i'll respond promptly.

The same applies to all those using or thinking of using Delcam products. Feel free to contact me with any concerns, ideas or general feedback. We will always listen and endeavour to improve the software where we can to make sure the software fulfills the varied work environments.

Thanks DAN

 

Hi All

Hey Dean, thank you for the wonderful vote of confidence, never knew you were so happy?? Thanks mate.

And to answer the question as to "any Australian Podiatrists......." yes, and there are quite a few today - without counting, more than 15 JUST with Matcam machines, and some with more than one.
Now with the launch of our own flipframe, allowing for +-10 PAIRS to be machined (Both sides) as well as optimised tooling to suit - cycle times have never been better and are measured in minutes.
I am attaching some pictures of the setup recently installed at Townsville Podiatry.