Microvista

CT software for the in-line inspection of solder joints in mass production

Florian Franz — Mon, 12 Oct 2026 10:00:00 +0000

A manufacturer of power electronic components was already using CT to inspect solder joints on heat sinks, but the evaluation macros were generating too many false rejects. Microvista has developed CT software featuring AI models that automatically recognises five component types and provides a pass or fail decision for each component ID. In the attributive MSA involving 120 assessments, no defective part was approved.

Background: CT inspection of solder joints in a production line setting

The project began with an enquiry from a manufacturer of power electronic components. Solder joints on heat sinks are inspected using industrial computed tomography. The CT scanner was already providing the necessary volumetric data: five heat sinks are scanned simultaneously within seven minutes. The solder quality assessment was carried out using evaluation macros, but this generated too many false rejects. As a result, many results had to be checked manually. This took time, tied up staff and prevented the components from being sorted directly in line with the production cycle.

Test criteria for pore detection and solder quality

The crux of the enquiry was therefore clear: the CT inspection was technically feasible, but the evaluation process was not yet aligned with the production cycle. The software was intended to reduce the manual inspection workload, minimise false rejects and ultimately provide a decision on each component that could be used for release.

Customer specifications were used to establish specific rules for each inspection area: relevant soldered areas, permissible pore content, critical material content and limits for ‘pass’ or ‘fail’. The database consisted of actual ‘pass’ and ‘fail’ parts and covered positional deviations, noise, fluctuating scan quality, sheet metal bending and varying solder patterns. The validation plan was also finalised.

From the manual testing process to software logic

At the same time, real CT data and existing assessments were examined. The aim was not simply to replicate the existing inspection process. The software had to reflect the technical logic behind the decision: How is the component aligned? Where are the relevant solder areas? Which areas should be included in the assessment? Where do particular challenges arise as a result of varying scan quality or complex geometries? It is precisely these questions that determine whether the automated assessment will prove viable in subsequent series production.

Even before each CT scan began, the component ID and component position were clearly matched. This ensured the traceability of each individual system throughout the entire test campaign.

After the scan, the components were automatically separated and the belt pulley was aligned for analysis. The alignment was a crucial step in this process. The relevant spalling was located on the upper edge of the belt pulley. In order to detect this reliably, the entire circumference of the pulley had to be precisely registered in each data set.

Based on this registration, a stack of images was generated that extended along the axis of rotation of the belt pulley. This made it possible to systematically assess the entire circumference of the component. Spalling could be identified quickly and reproducibly.

Automatic CT analysis using AI models

On this basis, a multi-stage analysis chain was developed for automatic CT analysis. The software isolates the five components within the CT volume, registers each component using reference points, and extracts the relevant soldered areas, including sheet metal bends. AI models were trained for different inspection regions to segment the soldered areas and analyse for pores or material defects. The end result is an inspection result for each component ID, including an assessment, measured values and the basis for the decision.

The application has been designed for five component types. Following the scan, the CT system transfers the relevant system settings to the software. The analysis module then identifies the component type and automatically loads the appropriate analysis chain, including test ranges, limit values and AI models.

1

Scan and reconstruction

five heat sinks at once in seven minutes
2

Identify part type

system setting loads the matching analysis chain
3

Separate and register

each part in the volume, aligned via reference points
4

AI analysis

segment solder areas, evaluate pores and material regions
5

OK or NOK

result per part ID with measured values and reasoning
6

InspectHub

results, viewer and reports, changes logged

Connection to the CT system, data analysis and the InspectHub portal

To support production-oriented workflows, the software has been integrated with the existing CT infrastructure. Following scanning and reconstruction, the volumetric data is automatically transferred to the CT analysis system. The operator views the results on the analysis screen, checks them in the viewer if necessary, and transfers them – with optional follow-up assessment – to the InspectHub portal. There, inspection results, the viewer and quality reports are all stored in one place. Quality staff can search for components, check for anomalies and trace decisions made for each component.

Roles and perspective on the results

The machine operator needs a clear view of each individual component at each cycle: bounding boxes for anomalies, size templates, segmentation and the rationale for the pass or fail decision. The display must make it possible to identify the fault within a few seconds.

The quality manager begins by reviewing the statistics. They can view affected parts, defect types and borderline cases by batch, time period or inspection area. The individual part remains accessible so that the reasons for non-conformities and any manual investigations can be traced.

A phased approach to the roll-out

The roll-out begins with an assisted assessment. The software carries out an automatic preliminary assessment; the machine operator checks the results in the viewer and confirms them. This feedback highlights borderline cases and helps to further refine the evaluation.

Once validation has been successfully completed, the software carries out the assessment independently. Only random samples or defined special cases are checked manually. The assisted assessment becomes an inline check, which provides a reliable ‘IO’ or ‘NIO’ decision immediately after the CT scan.

Stage 1

Assisted assessment

The software pre-assesses, the operator checks the results in the viewer and confirms them. The feedback reveals borderline cases.

Approval

Attribute MSA

120 assessments

Stage 2

Inline inspection

The software assesses independently. Only random samples and defined special cases are checked manually.

Validation of automated CT assessment using attributive MSA

For the acceptance test, it had to be clear what decision the software was supposed to make. It must clearly distinguish between good and defective parts. Critical parts must not be incorrectly approved.

The validation of automated CT assessment is carried out using an attributive MSA. The process checks whether the software’s output corresponds to the defined reference decision. Although the attributive MSA assesses only the classification as IO or NIO, this decision is based on specific measured values which are recorded by the software and documented in the test result.

The test scope comprised 60 components, each with two CT scans, resulting in 120 assessments. No NIO component was approved as IO. In each scan run, one IO component was assessed as NIO. This resulted in an overall agreement rate of 98.3 per cent and an error rate of 1.7 per cent. The rate of ‘NIO components rated as IO’ was 0 per cent, whilst the rate of ‘IO components rated as NIO’ was 5 per cent. The software therefore generated pseudo-rejects in two cases, but did not allow any defective components to pass.

Software decision

NOK

ReferenceOK

38good parts correctly released

2false reject: good part rated NOK

ReferenceNOK

0defective parts released

80defective parts correctly rejected

Result: documented in-line inspection for mass production

The end result is a digital audit trail stretching from the CT scan right through to the documented decision in mass production. Each inspection result is linked to a component ID. The areas relevant to the decision are clearly displayed for the operator in the viewer and documented in the InspectHub portal.

Threshold values, test rules and software version are stored in the results dataset. Manual changes are logged along with the user and the time. This enables the customer to use the CT software from a technical perspective and to approve it in terms of quality.

CT Inspection of Drive Systems Following Spalling on a Pulley

Florian Franz — Mon, 05 Oct 2026 09:00:00 +0000

In some plastic-based belt pulleys used in electric drive systems, material had broken off in isolated instances. If the fragments become loose inside the housing, the drive may seize up. Microvista inspected 5,960 systems individually using industrial CT scanning, each one traceable via its component ID: 3.3 per cent had to be rejected, whilst the majority could be reused.

Initial situation

In the case of electric drive systems, isolated instances were identified where material had broken away from a plastic-based pulley.

The loss of material itself did not pose the main risk. The critical issue was the possibility that fragments might become dislodged within the housing and become trapped between the belt and the drive components. In the worst-case scenario, this could lead to a blockage of the drive system.

There was a lack of reliable information regarding the affected systems. Without reliable data on the condition of each individual component, there was a risk that large quantities of fully functional products would be discarded as a precautionary measure.

Objective

The aim was not merely to identify instances of flaking. The key was to provide a reliable basis of information so that well-informed decisions could be made:

Which systems can still be used?
Which systems need to be phased out?
How can the risk to the end customer be reliably managed?
How can as much of the value already created as possible be retained?
Is there a pattern to the way faults occur (e.g. always in the same place, of the same magnitude)?
What needs to be changed about the process?

Solution

A total of 5,960 drive systems were inspected using industrial computed tomography. Two drive systems were scanned at a time. The scanning time was around 6 minutes per system.

Even before each CT scan began, the component ID and component position were clearly matched. This ensured the traceability of each individual system throughout the entire test campaign.

Based on this registration, an image stack was generated that extended along the axis of rotation of the belt pulley. This made it possible to systematically assess the entire circumference of the component. Spalling could be identified quickly and reproducibly.

From component ID to sorting decision

1

Assign ID

part ID and position recorded before every scan
2

CT scan

two systems at once, about 6 min per system
3

Separate and align

automatic, full pulley circumference registered precisely
4

Image stack

along the axis of rotation, entire circumference assessable
5

Assess and sort

by the operator, deliberately without software automation
6

InspectHub

result and CT images available to the customer immediately

Deliberately no automatic rating

Automatic defect detection could have been implemented without any technical difficulties. In this particular case, however, it would not have generated any additional throughput. Whilst the scan was running, the operator had sufficient time to assess and sort the components that had been scanned previously, as well as to prepare the next batch of components.

Additional software costs would have been incurred without delivering any time savings in the process. For this reason, the most economically viable solution was chosen.
What changes need to be made to the process?

CT system

Scan pair 1

Scan pair 2

Scan pair 3

Operator

Prepare pair 2

Assess pair 1, prepare pair 3

Assess pair 2, prepare pair 4

Time

Data provision via InspectHub

Once the assessment had been completed, the inspection results and the underlying CT image data were made available immediately on the InspectHub portal. This meant that all the relevant information was directly available to the customer:

Traceability via the component ID
Centralised access to all test results
Immediate availability of image data
Seamless collaboration between Quality, Production and Development
A documented basis for decision-making for future evidence

Result

The CT scan revealed that the actual reject rate was just 3.3 per cent.

Before the investigation began, it was unclear how many components were affected by critical spalling. It was only the CT-based assessment that provided the necessary basis for decision-making to specifically sort out the affected components and continue to use the vast majority of those already produced. In this way, both product safety and value creation were safeguarded. Overall, the following added value was achieved in this case:

100% inspection of the relevant characteristic Enquire now with no obligation
Traceability via component ID
Reliable assessment of the total wheel circumference
Quick sorting decision after scanning
Avoiding unnecessary stoppages and scrap costs
Preserving value already created
Underpinning technical decisions with reliable data
Real-time insight into the progress of inspections and a documented basis for decision-making to support future evidence via the InspectHub portal

Five titanium spheres determine the precision of a medical robot. This is how each one was verified.

Florian Franz — Mon, 28 Sep 2026 09:00:00 +0000

With Micromate™, Interventional Systems develops a robotic and navigation solution for minimally invasive procedures. The accuracy of the system is anchored to five titanium landmarks in the end-effector assembly. Using industrial CT, Microvista provides traceable proof that each one lies within the drawing tolerance, as an end-of-line control.

At a glance
Customer	Interventional Systems (iSYS Medizintechnik GmbH), specialist in robot-assisted systems for minimally invasive interventions, manufacturer of the Micromate™ system
Industry	Medical robotics
Field of application	Interventional radiology and related disciplines, CT- and fluoroscopy-guided procedures
Task	Non-destructive measurement of five titanium landmarks in the end effector assembly
Method	Industrial computed tomography as an end-of-line inspection
System	Several CT systems with flat-panel detectors, plus the matching analysis software
Parameters	225 kV · 480 µA · 500 ms · 2,880 projections · 103 µm voxel size
Result	Traceable proof for each assembly that every landmark lies within the drawing tolerance, completely non-destructive
Benefit	A reliable basis for automatic sphere detection in the clinical CT and the subsequent optical navigation

The customer

Interventional Systems (iSYS Medizintechnik GmbH) is a medical technology company specializing in robot-assisted systems for minimally invasive interventions. With Micromate™, the company develops and markets a precise navigation and robotic solution for CT- and fluoroscopy-guided procedures. The goals are clearly defined: to make needle placements more accurate, to reduce radiation exposure for patients and medical staff, and to make clinical workflows more efficient. The solutions are used internationally in interventional radiology and related disciplines.

Micromate is mounted directly to the patient table. For spatial orientation, five titanium spheres in the end-effector assembly serve as landmarks. They are detected automatically in the CT image, from which the robot determines its position relative to the patient. If the spheres sit accurately, this determination is precise enough for the navigation to continue purely optically, without further CT scans of the patient. The manufacturing accuracy of the spheres therefore feeds directly into the company’s goals, because every scan saved means less radiation exposure and a faster workflow.

The challenge

For this to hold, the spheres must sit exactly where the design specifies, within tight tolerances. If one deviates, it distorts the automatic detection in the CT image and therefore the registration to the patient. The spheres, however, sit hidden inside the assembly. Tactile and optical measuring methods cannot reach them, and taking the part apart is out of the question because it would destroy the very positional relationships to be checked. What was needed, then, was a proof that inspects every assembly without touching it.

Die The solution

Microvista digitizes the assembly completely using industrial computed tomography. This scan takes place once during manufacturing and should not be confused with the imaging used during the procedure. The part is X-rayed from many directions and reconstructed into a complete three-dimensional volume, inside and out, in a single scan.

A reliable result starts with the right acquisition parameters. For the metallic end-effector assembly the following values were used:

Parameter	Value	Purpose
Tube voltage	225 kV	enough energy to penetrate the metal
Tube current	480 µA	sufficient signal for high-contrast images
Integration time	500 ms	low-noise individual projections
Projections	2,880	dense sampling for a low-artifact volume
Voxel size	103 µm	fine resolution for reliable determination of the sphere centers

Each titanium sphere is reconstructed as a complete volumetric body. From thousands of surface points we calculate the geometric center. Titanium stands out clearly from the surrounding material. The center of each sphere is then determined as a best-fit sphere and compared against the drawing in a nominal-actual comparison, for each axis individually and as a spatial overall value. This yields a clear statement for every sphere: within tolerance or not. The whole process is implemented as an end-of-line control; the technical drawing with the specifications was all it took as a basis.

The result

For every assembly it is documented in a traceable way whether each of the five landmarks lies within the drawing tolerance, fully non-destructively. This ensures that the automatic sphere detection in the CT image builds on a geometrically sound assembly and that the optical navigation works without further CT scans of the patient. On request, the complete 3D data set can be archived. Microvista was able to deliver the required positioning data after a first trial.

The fact that Interventional Systems has firmly established this end-of-line control shows how consistently the team prioritizes precision and patient safety.

“

We approached Microvista to implement an end-of-line CT control method for our end-effector assembly, which had quite tight tolerance requirements. All it took was a technical drawing with specifications, and they were able to provide us with the necessary landmark positioning data after a first trial. Overall, it was a very smooth process with great results.

„

– Pedro Pinto, Head of Development, Interventional Systems –

About Microvista

Microvista has been providing industrial computed tomography as a service since 2008, for customers in medical technology, the automotive and aerospace industry, battery technology, additive manufacturing, archaeology and the foundry sector. Several CT systems are available for different part sizes and inspection tasks, together with the matching evaluation software.

Would you like to reliably prove the position of your landmarks? Talk to our CT experts and request your individual quote.

APQP with Reliable Measurement Data

Florian Franz — Wed, 23 Sep 2026 09:07:04 +0000

APQP plans quality before series production begins; industrial CT delivers the measurement data that makes this planning reliable. To turn requirements, FMEA and control plans into sound decisions, you need measurements on the real part. CT complements classical metrology wherever internal structures, concealed geometries or defects have to be evaluated non-destructively and in three dimensions.

Putting APQP into practice right now? The check items for all five phases are available as an Excel checklist to tick off, with status dashboard and schedule.

Planning quality also means planning measurability

Advanced Product Quality Planning (APQP) is a structured approach to quality planning from product idea to stable series production. It is meant to ensure that the required steps in each phase are completed on time and that the product satisfies the customer. The underlying idea: quality assurance starts in the design and planning stage, not later in series production. The method connects customer requirements, product development, process development, validation and continuous improvement. A binding framework is provided by established methods:

QFD (Quality Function Deployment) to translate customer requirements,
DFMEA and PFMEA to assess design and process risks,
the control plan for process control [6],
measurement system analysis (MSA) and SPC for capable measurements and stable processes.

These methods, however, depend on reliable information. Only measurements on the real part show whether a design feature can actually be manufactured, how process parameters affect product quality, and whether the series process meets the requirements reproducibly. Metrology is therefore not a downstream inspection step but a central source of information for the entire APQP process.

Key point: APQP defines what has to be achieved and controlled. Metrology delivers the objective evidence. Industrial CT extends that evidence to the complete part volume.

The role of metrology in APQP

A consistent measurement strategy answers four questions right at the start of the project:

Which product and process characteristics are critical to quality or function?
Which measurement method can capture these characteristics with the required accuracy?
Is the measurement system suitable for development trials, capability studies and later series inspection?
How are measurement data documented, compared and fed back into FMEA, control plan and process control?

Not every characteristic calls for the same method. Tactile coordinate metrology is often highly accurate for accessible single dimensions; optical systems capture surfaces quickly and across large areas; 2D X-ray, ultrasonic testing and other non-destructive methods each answer specific questions.

Industrial CT becomes particularly interesting when several external and internal characteristics are to be examined in one shared 3D data set.

What industrial CT adds

In CT, the part is X-rayed from many directions and reconstructed as a three-dimensional volume. External and internal structures can thus be examined non-destructively. Depending on part size, material, inspection task and required resolution, the following evaluations are possible in particular:

dimensional inspection and actual/nominal comparison against CAD data,
measurement of wall thicknesses, internal dimensions and hard-to-reach geometries,
analysis of pores, shrinkage cavities, cracks and inclusions by size and position,
verification of assembly, joining and connection states, including at assembly level,
comparison of prototypes, variants, tools, cavities and process states,
archiving of a digital 3D record for later evaluations.

CT therefore does not simply replace other measurement methods. It closes an information gap: while conventional methods usually deliver selected accessible characteristics or projections, CT can capture many relevant characteristics spatially, non-destructively and in their mutual context.

Metrology and CT across the five APQP phases

The greatest benefit arises when the inspection strategy is not defined only at sampling. It should be developed in parallel with the product and the manufacturing process, phase by phase.

Planning and definition

Customer requirements, quality targets, critical characteristics. Measurability is settled now, not in phase 4.

Product development

DFMEA, building and measuring prototypes: does the real part match the design, including internal features?

Process development

PFMEA, control plan, inspection planning. Measurement data from trial parts secure the process window.

Validation

Production run under series conditions, MSA, first article inspection, capability evidence: the basis for PPAP approval.

Series

SPC, trend monitoring, root cause analysis. In-process inspection detects drift before scrap occurs.

Between the phases sit quality gates where the transition to the next phase is decided.

Phase 1: Planning and definition

At the start, it is defined what the product has to deliver and how that will later be measured.

Goal of the phase. First, the needs and expectations of the customer are understood, for example from the design specification; then the project frame is defined, along with quality and reliability targets and the fundamental product and process risks.

Role of metrology. Critical characteristics must not only be specified but also be measurable. Already at this stage it should be clarified which accuracy is required, how inspections will later be performed and which data will be needed for approvals.

Contribution of industrial CT. Based on CAD data, material, part size and required detail detectability, it can be assessed early whether CT is technically suitable. This avoids untestable specifications, unrealistic resolution requirements or later capacity bottlenecks.

Possible deliverables: preliminary measurement and inspection concept, feasibility analysis of CT suitability, documented manufacturing feasibility review with the supplier, definition of critical characteristics and data requirements.

Phase 2: Product design and development

In this phase, prototypes show whether the design delivers what the engineering promises.

Goal of the phase. The product design is detailed, risks are assessed in the DFMEA and prototypes are built.

Role of metrology. Measurement data verify whether the real part meets the design assumptions. They support design reviews, tolerance decisions and the assessment of special characteristics. What matters is not only the deviation from nominal but also its possible functional impact.

Contribution of industrial CT. CT accelerates development loops because prototypes can be examined completely without disassembly or sectioning; the comparison against CAD data makes local deviations immediately visible.

Possible deliverables: prototype findings, actual/nominal comparisons, verified DFMEA assumptions and pointers for design optimization.

Phase 3: Process design and development

Phase 3 still deals with the product design, but the focus shifts to the process: this is where product measurement turns into process knowledge.

Goal of the phase. The manufacturing sequence is designed, process risks are assessed in the PFMEA (process FMEA), and a robust process and a suitable control plan are developed.

Role of metrology. Parts from trial runs and pre-series are linked to process parameters. This reveals which settings, tools or cavities influence relevant quality characteristics and where a reliable process window lies.

Contribution of industrial CT. CT delivers quantitative target values for trial planning and root cause analysis, for example pore volume, defect sizes, positional deviations, distortion or wall thicknesses. Because the part remains undamaged, CT findings can also be correlated with functional or load tests on the same part. A practical example: with hairpin stators, the pore assessment of the weld serves as the target value that is correlated with the welding parameters; on this basis Microvista has evaluated more than 100,000 hairpin welds.

Possible deliverables: data basis for PFMEA and control plan, cause-and-effect relationships, comparison of process variants, tools or cavities, and definition of a robust process window.

Phase 4: Product and process validation

This phase decides on approval: this is where FAIR, PPA/PPF and PPAP evidence is produced.

Goal of the phase. Under near-series conditions, it is demonstrated that product and manufacturing process meet the requirements of the customer reproducibly.

Role of metrology. The measurement systems used must be suitable and deliver traceable results. Measurement system analysis, first article inspection and capability studies create the data basis for PPA/PPF [5] and PPAP [2]. A distinction must be made between product conformity and process capability: one good part does not yet prove a stable process.

Contribution of industrial CT. CT provides complete 3D data sets for first articles. Decisive in this phase: for capability values, the characteristic, evaluation method, sample and suitability of the measurement process must be clearly defined. Not every CT evaluation automatically qualifies as a measurement process suitable for capability studies.

Possible deliverables: FAIR and PPA/PPF or PPAP evidence, documented measurement results, inspection reports, MSA results and capability data for defined characteristics.

Phase 5: Feedback, assessment and corrective action

After the start of series production, it becomes clear whether the process remains under control.

Goal of the phase. After SOP, process performance, product quality and customer feedback are monitored; deviations lead to corrective and improvement actions. The aim is the long-term fulfilment of customer requirements and the reduction of variation within production; the target result is minimized variation in the manufacturing processes.

Role of metrology. Series measurements reveal trends, process drift and changes in variation. Good measurement data enable SPC, targeted reaction plans and a fact-based root cause analysis for complaints or blocked lots.

Contribution of industrial CT. In-process CT makes internal quality characteristics statistically evaluable as well. Automated evaluation workflows and defined inspection decisions enable reproducible inspections. In case of deviations, CT also delivers detailed information for root cause analysis and effectiveness checks.

Possible deliverables: trend and SPC data, evidence of stable series quality, root cause analyses, effectiveness checks, and updated FMEAs and control plans.

Overview: from APQP question to CT contribution

The table summarizes the 5 phases: which measurement question is at the centre of each, what CT contributes and what value that has for APQP.

Phase	Key measurement question	CT contribution	Value for APQP
1 Planning	Can the critical characteristics be measured reliably at all?	Feasibility assessment of penetrability, resolution and inspection concept	Secure measurability early
2 Product	Does the real part match the design, including internal features?	3D actual/nominal comparison, internal dimensions, wall thicknesses, defect and assembly analysis	Objectify design decisions
3 Process	How do parameters and tooling affect part quality?	Quantitative CT characteristics from trial and pre-series parts	Secure the process window and PFMEA
4 Validation	Are requirements met reproducibly?	Defined measurement and inspection reports for FAIR, PPA/PPF and PPAP, and capability evidence	Base approval on reliable data
5 Series	Does the process remain stable and under control?	Series inspection, trend analysis, automated evaluation and root cause analysis	Detect drift early and improve

From measurement data to process understanding and predicted quality

CT data become particularly valuable when they are not viewed in isolation but connected with process and functional data. For every examined part, for example, machine parameters, material batch, tool or cavity, CT characteristics and the results of a functional test can be brought together.

Step by step, this builds a reliable cause-and-effect model: which process variables change which internal quality characteristics, and which of these characteristics influence function?

CT initially serves as a high-resolution quality reference. On this basis, statistical or AI-based models can later estimate part quality directly from process data (predicted quality). CT samples remain important to validate these predictions and to detect changes in the process.

Process data

Machine parameters
Material batch
Tool and cavity

CT characteristics

Pore volume and defect sizes
Wall thicknesses and dimensions
Distortion

Functional testing

Load tests
Leak testing
on the same, undamaged part

↓↓↓

Cause-and-effect model Which process variables change which internal quality characteristics, and which characteristics influence function?

↓

Predicted quality Statistical or AI-based models estimate part quality directly from process data

Regular CT samples verify whether the predictions hold and whether the process has changed.

Prerequisites for reliable CT results

Even a powerful inspection method does not automatically produce reliable quality evidence. For use in APQP, the following points should be clearly defined:

inspection task and the characteristic to be assessed, including tolerance or acceptance criterion,
suitable scan parameters, resolution, part orientation and reconstruction conditions,
consistent evaluation and segmentation rules,
validation of the measurement or detection capability for the specific task,
traceability, documentation and versioning of the evaluation software,
representative samples and a clear approach to measurement uncertainty and borderline cases.

The decisive question is therefore not only: “Can we scan the part?” But: “Can we measure or detect the relevant characteristic with sufficient confidence and derive a reliable APQP decision from it?”

When CT adds particular value

The use of industrial CT offers particularly high value when at least one of the following conditions applies:

quality-critical characteristics are internal or geometrically hard to access,
destruction or disassembly would alter the finding or prevent further tests,
several dimensional, defect and assembly characteristics are to be assessed from the same data set,
process variants or trial parts have to be compared quickly and comprehensively,
a spatial correlation of defects to functional surfaces is required,
in case of complaints or scrap, the cause has to be narrowed down without guesswork.

If one of these points applies to a critical characteristic, CT inspection belongs in the APQP measurement strategy from the very beginning.

How Microvista supports the APQP process

Microvista supports companies not only with individual CT inspections but with an end-to-end data and inspection strategy along the product life cycle:

feasibility assessment and design of the CT inspection task,
prototype and variant inspection for short development loops,
CT measurement series for process development and securing process windows,
dimensional and non-destructive inspections for FAIR, PPA/PPF and PPAP,
temporary additional inspection capacity for pre-series and ramp-up,
in-process inspection, automated evaluation and support with quality problems.

Industrial CT thus evolves from a mere defect detector into a development and process tool: it makes quality measurable, explains relationships and delivers the objective data basis for decisions in APQP.

Frequently asked questions

What does APQP stand for?

APQP stands for Advanced Product Quality Planning. The APQP method is a structured approach to quality planning across the entire product development process, from the definition and development of a product to stable series production [1]. The method connects quality planning with project management; the structured process is divided into five phases connected by quality gates. Core goals are the long-term fulfilment of customer requirements, defect prevention instead of defect detection, and the reduction of variation in the manufacturing processes. APQP is thus a central process in quality management. The methodology is taught by the AIAG reference manual and corresponding training courses.

Where does APQP come from?

APQP was developed in 1982 by the three American car manufacturers Chrysler, General Motors and Ford. Their joint task force for supplier quality requirements drove the harmonization of the manuals, from which the QS-9000 guidelines published in 1994 emerged. Today APQP is based on the reference manual of the Automotive Industry Action Group (AIAG), in its 3rd edition since 2024 [1].

What is the difference between APQP and PPAP?

APQP is the overarching planning process across all five phases. PPAP (Production Part Approval Process) is the approval procedure at the end of phase 4: sampling according to PPAP demonstrates to the customer that product and process are ready for series production [2]. PPAP is thus a component and result of APQP, not a competing method.

In which industries is APQP applied?

APQP is a binding requirement in the automotive industry via IATF 16949 [3]. Aerospace uses AS9145, a directly derived standard [4]. Medical technology and other regulated industries increasingly adopt the methodology voluntarily to secure the quality of products and processes.

Which methods and tools are used in the APQP process?

The central tools are the FMEA (as DFMEA for the product, as PFMEA for the process), the control plan as the instrument of process control [6], measurement system analysis (MSA) to qualify the measurement systems, SPC to monitor series production, and QFD to translate customer requirements. The result forms the basis for creating control plans; the formal conclusion of validation is the PPAP [2].

What role do suppliers play in the APQP process?

A central one. Suppliers are ideally involved as early as phase 1, because quality planning has to extend across the entire supply chain. One of the early deliverables is therefore the documented manufacturing feasibility review with the supplier.

What are the benefits of APQP?

Defects detected early cost a fraction of what rework in series production costs: APQP shifts defect prevention to the start of the project. Add clear responsibilities via quality gates, reliable evidence for approval, and a predictable ramp-up with fewer complaints.

In which APQP phases is industrial CT used?

In principle in all five phases: from the feasibility assessment of the inspection task through prototype and process development to validation, series monitoring and root cause analysis. Intensity and evaluation scope change from phase to phase.

Does CT replace classical metrology?

No. CT is part of a coordinated measurement strategy. For easily accessible single dimensions, tactile or optical methods can be more economical or more accurate. CT is particularly strong for internal, concealed and combined characteristics.

Can CT be used for PPAP or PPA/PPF?

Yes, provided the specific inspection task, the evaluation method and the suitability of the measurement process are defined traceably. CT reports can deliver dimensional results, wall thicknesses, and defect or assembly assessments for the approval, among other things.

Can process capability be calculated from CT data?

Yes, for clearly defined quantitative characteristics and given a suitable measurement process and a representative sample. A single CT inspection or a purely visual assessment is not sufficient for capability evidence.

When should the CT inspection be planned?

Ideally as early as the definition of special characteristics, and not shortly before sampling. This allows technical feasibility, measurement capability, inspection time, cost and required capacity to be taken into account in good time.

Sources and normative context

The statements in this article are based on the following standards and manuals:

3D Contract Measurement of Complex Parts

Florian Franz

In a nutshell: Contract measurement is an external measurement service in which a specialized service provider performs dimensional inspections of components and workpieces on behalf of the customer and documents the measurement results in a traceable report. Typical methods include tactile coordinate measurement, optical scanning, and industrial computed tomography (CT).

Companies that do not have their own in-house measurement technology or whose capacities are reaching their limits often face the question: How can components be inspected reliably and with full traceability? This is exactly where our 3D contract measurement service comes in. We handle the dimensional measurement of your components on your behalf from quick dimensional checks of individual parts to complete initial sampling of complex assemblies and provide you with reliable, documented measurement results for your quality assurance. Instead of investing in expensive equipment yourself, you can rely on our facilities, our expertise, and in particular industrial computed tomography, which allows even complex geometries to be measured non-destructively.

What is a wage survey, and when is it worthwhile?

Contract measurement is an external measurement service in which a specialized service provider performs dimensional inspections of your components. Instead of setting up their own measurement laboratory, companies send their workpieces to a partner who has the necessary equipment, expertise, and appropriate measurement methods. The scope ranges from the simple measurement of a single part to the complete initial sampling of entire assemblies from the receipt of the parts through the measurement process to the final, documented report.

Contract measurement is particularly useful when measurement tasks are complex, in-house measurement equipment is at full capacity, or a short-term bottleneck needs to be bridged. Many companies also use contract measurement as an external, documented second opinion, for example, in the case of complaints or disputed tolerances. Precise contract measurement thus provides certainty without disrupting ongoing production.

Small and medium-sized enterprises, in particular, benefit from receiving high-quality measurement results without having to maintain a permanent staff or expensive equipment. Outsourced measurement therefore means not only purchasing capacity but also gaining access to expert knowledge and established testing processes documented in accordance with recognized standards.

What measurement technology is used in 3D contract measurement?

Modern measurement technology is at the heart of every professional measurement service. Depending on the requirements, different systems are used: tactile coordinate measuring machines for high-precision individual measurements, optical scanners for the rapid capture of large surfaces, and industrial computed tomography for viewing the interior of enclosed components. The choice of measuring device depends on the material, geometry, and inspection objective.

For simple, easily accessible measurements, a tactile method in which a probe scans the surface point by point is often sufficient. However, as soon as free-form surfaces, thin-walled plastic parts, or internal structures come into play, optical and tomographic measurement methods demonstrate their strengths. An experienced service provider selects the most reliable method for each specific application, rather than attempting to solve every task with a single device.

The range of measurement tasks is broad: it extends from the rapid verification of a single dimension to the complete capture of a geometry and the inspection of safety-critical components. A good partner will therefore advise you in advance on which approach reliably meets the required measurement uncertainty and which measurement data you actually need for subsequent processing.

How does industrial computed tomography work in contract measurement?

Industrial computed tomography (CT) uses X-rays to scan a component from multiple angles and, depending on the material, wall thickness, resolution, and measurement strategy, reconstructs a three-dimensional volume dataset that can reveal both internal and external structures. Unlike tactile or optical methods, CT can thus also detect undercuts, cavities, and assembled components without disassembling or destroying the part. In the context of dimensional metrology, this does not refer to just any CT, but rather to CT used as a sensing technology in coordinate measuring machines. Of particular relevance here are the DIN EN ISO 10360 series of standards and the application guidelines with identical content VDI/VDE 2617 Part 13 and VDI/VDE 2630 Part 1.3 for CMMs with CT sensors. Part 11, which is specifically tailored to CT, is currently available only as a draft (ISO/DIS 10360-11 or DIN EN ISO 10360-11:2021-04) and should not be cited as a valid final standard.

Essentially, the measurement process consists of three steps: volume acquisition, surface reconstruction, and evaluation against the target values. The software automatically evaluates radii, chamfers, bores, and complex contours and generates traceable reports. This creates a precise digital representation of a physical workpiece that can be used for further analysis, such as wall thickness analyses or porosity assessment of castings.

At Microvista, this process is designed for throughput and reproducibility: Once a part’s volume data set has been captured, numerous features, cross-sections, and target-actual comparisons can be analyzed retrospectively without having to measure the part again, all within the limits of resolution, material, radiopacity, and measurement strategy.

How are complex geometries and free-form surfaces measured?

Complex geometries pose the greatest challenge in metrology. Enclosures with undercuts, additively manufactured structures, or organically shaped design components can hardly be fully captured using individual point measurements. This is where surface- and volume-based 3D measurement methods come into play, combining millions of points into a complete model.

Free-form surfaces are measured optically or via computed tomography and then aligned with the CAD model. The result is a color-coded target-actual comparison that displays every deviation across the entire surface. This allows designers to see at a glance where a component deviates from specifications and whether the manufacturing process needs to be readjusted.

For nested assemblies or components with internal structures, industrial CT provides results that would be impossible to achieve with traditional methods. Component geometries that previously required destructive testing such as sawing and cross-sectional analysis can now be analyzed completely and non-destructively. The component generally remains mechanically intact and, depending on the application, can be reused after contract measurement.

What happens during the analysis and CAD comparison?

Simply collecting data is only the first step. The true value of a dimensional inspection lies in the analysis and comparison with the CAD data. In this process, the measured points are superimposed on the digital design template, so that any deviation ranging from micrometers to millimeters (mm) is visible and documented.

CAD comparisons not only show whether a dimension is within tolerance, but also in which direction and to what extent deviations occur. This detailed representation helps identify systematic errors in manufacturing early on and take targeted corrective action. In addition, reports for initial sampling or ongoing quality control can be generated from the measurement data.

Another application is reverse engineering: If no model is available, the scan data can be used to derive a dimensionally accurate, processable CAD model, the accuracy of which depends on resolution, data quality, and surface reconstruction. Especially for older components without digital documentation, this is often the only way to reproduce a replacement part with dimensional accuracy.

What role does wage measurement play in quality assurance?

In quality assurance, contract measurement is a key component for verifying dimensional accuracy throughout the entire value chain. Whether during incoming inspection, initial sampling, or the release of production runs, documented measurement results form the basis for decision-making and for communication with customers and suppliers.

Many industries today require traceably documented inspections conducted in accordance with recognized rules, such as relevant standards and guidelines like VDI/VDE 2630. A service provider with a quality management system certified to DIN EN ISO 9001 demonstrates defined and regularly audited processes. Furthermore, the reliability of individual results stems from measurements conducted in accordance with standards and a traceably documented report that can withstand a customer audit.

Precisely because an external partner performs the testing and documents the results, the measurement results gain additional credibility. An external, documented test report often resolves disputes between suppliers and customers more quickly, as both parties can rely on the same documented values.

How does wage measurement support mass production and high-volume production?

Not every measurement task involves a single prototype part. As soon as a larger number of parts needs to be inspected, internal capacities quickly reach their limits. Mass-production measurements tie up personnel and machines for days on end and can thus become a bottleneck in day-to-day operations.

This is where external measurement services excel in terms of scalability. Specialized service providers have multiple systems and well-established, partially automated processes that allow even large volumes to be handled with short turnaround times. CT, in particular, is well-suited for series testing because once a test program is created, it can be applied to every subsequent part—even across large batches—using the same test strategy and reproducible evaluation conditions.

Outsourcing such measurements frees up in-house resources for core tasks. This shortens turnaround times in-house and makes planning more predictable, as inspection capacity can be flexibly procured.

What equipment and testing instruments are needed to ensure reliable results?

Reliable measurement results require more than just a single measuring instrument. What is needed is a coordinated set of equipment comprising coordinate measuring machines, optical systems, and high-performance CT systems for a variety of component sizes and materials—from delicate plastic parts to dense metal components. Only this combination can cover the entire spectrum of measurement tasks.

An expert knows how to perform a measurement procedure for a specific material and which approach yields the best results. This metrological expertise distinguishes a high-performance service provider from a mere machine operator.

As a service provider specializing in industrial computed tomography, we at Microvista operate several CT systems across different performance classes and assess, even before a project is commissioned, whether a component is suitable for the process. For many customers, this preliminary feasibility assessment is the most important consideration of all—even more so than price.

When does it make more sense to rent measurement equipment rather than use your own?

The decision between in-house measurement technology and external contract measurement depends on the volume, variety, and complexity of the inspection tasks. For those who inspect similar parts on a daily basis, an in-house system is often more cost-effective. However, as soon as the tasks vary, occur infrequently, or become particularly demanding, the cost-benefit analysis shifts in favor of contract measurement.

An in-house measurement lab incurs high fixed costs for equipment, maintenance, software, and personnel. Outsourced measurement, on the other hand, is a variable cost that is incurred only when measurements are actually taken. For complex geometries that require specialized methods such as CT, access to external specialized equipment is usually the more economical and faster solution, especially since CT systems are among the most expensive investments in dimensional metrology.

Request a Quote for Your 3D Contract Measurement

Do you have a component that needs to be measured, but aren’t sure if industrial computed tomography is the right method? Send us your request, including the material, approximate dimensions, and testing objective. We’ll assess the feasibility, recommend the appropriate measurement method, and provide you with the turnaround time and terms all with no obligation and in a transparent manner. This way, you’ll know what measurement results to expect before placing an order.

Frequently Asked Questions About 3D Contract Measurement

Which components can be measured using industrial CT?

Generally, components made of plastic, metals, and many other materials, ranging from a few millimeters to medium-sized assemblies. How well a part can be imaged depends primarily on the material and wall thickness. That is why we assess feasibility before every order and let you know whether computed tomography is likely to be the appropriate method for your measurement task.

How much does a 3D contract measurement cost?

The price depends on the procedure, component size, quantity, and scope of the analysis. A single CT scan with standard analysis is priced differently than a documented initial sampling or a production run measurement. Send us your request, and you’ll receive a transparent, no-obligation quote.

Will my component be damaged during the measurement?

No, generally not. Industrial computed tomography is a non-destructive process: The part is scanned with radiation—it is not disassembled or cut open—and remains mechanically unchanged afterward, unlike with traditional cross-sectional images. For radiation-sensitive materials, electronics, or specific material combinations, we assess suitability in advance.

How long does a wage survey take?

That depends on the complexity and quantity. Individual parts can often be measured on very short notice, while documented series measurements may require a bit more lead time. We’ll provide you with a binding lead time in our quote, especially if you need to bridge a bottleneck.

What documents do you need from me?

To perform a target-actual comparison, we need your CAD data as well as the dimensions and tolerances to be checked. If no model is available, we can also perform a simple measurement or use reverse engineering, in which we derive a new CAD model from the scan data.

In what format will I receive the measurement results?

You will receive a clearly documented measurement report via our secure InspectHub portal.

Sources and Related Standards

DIN EN ISO 10360-1: Terms Used in Acceptance and Verification Testing for Coordinate Measuring Machines

DIN EN ISO 10360-2: Acceptance and Verification Testing for CMMs in Length Measurements

DIN EN ISO 10360-7: CMMs with image processing systems, for distinguishing between optical sensors

VDI/VDE 2630 Blatt 1.1: Fundamentals and Terminology of CT in Dimensional Measurement Technology

VDI/VDE 2630 Blatt 1.2: Factors Affecting CT Measurement Results and Recommendations

VDI/VDE 2617 Blatt 13 / VDI/VDE 2630 Blatt 1.3: Application Guide to DIN EN ISO 10360 for CMMs with CT Sensors

VDI/VDE 2630 Blatt 1.4: Classification and Comparison of Various Dimensional Measurement Methods

VDI/VDE 2630 Blatt 2.1: Determination of Task-Specific Measurement Uncertainty and Test Process Suitability of CMMs with CT Sensors

DIN EN ISO 15530-3: Determination of Measurement Uncertainty Using Calibrated Workpieces or Standards

DIN EN ISO 14253-1: Decision Rules for Conformity and Nonconformity, Taking Measurement Uncertainty into Account

DIN EN ISO 9001: Requirements for Quality Management Systems

Case Study: Fully automated CT series inspection of sterile medical devices

Florian Franz — Tue, 16 Jun 2026 13:17:30 +0000

“

Working with Microvista was an extremely professional and straightforward experience for us. Whilst other service providers turned down our complex, in-production testing project, Microvista rose to the challenge straight away following a brief analysis. Thanks to the rapid and non-destructive CT analysis, we were able to ensure our manufacturing quality whilst saving many thousands of euros in potential costs for destructive testing. We were particularly impressed by the open communication and close collaboration with our contact person.

„

– Director, Head of Area Quality –

Several service providers pulled out

A leading medical technology manufacturer produces complex assemblies for clinical use. The devices consist of mechanical components and various materials. After production, several devices are packed in a sealed box in a sterile condition.

A crucial step was missing between packaging and dispatch: a 100% inspection of every single assembly. Complete, documented, traceable. Quality management demanded it, regulatory requirements demanded it, and responsibility towards patients and users demanded it anyway.

The obstacle was the packaging itself. It was not permitted to be opened. Any opening would have compromised sterility and thus triggered re-sterilisation, re-packaging and re-approval. Given the volumes involved, this was simply not an option.

Several CT service providers rejected the project. Too complex, too many components per box, no automated solution available.

What made this project difficult

Sterility: The products were already packaged in sterile conditions. The testing method had to be entirely contactless, capable of working through the sealed packaging.
Quantity: This involved ongoing series production with high volumes. The inspection process had to fit into the production cycle, not the other way round.
Complex assembly: Each device consists of several individual functional parts. All components had to be recorded and assessed simultaneously.
Multiple devices per box: The devices were not delivered individually, but in a single box. Nevertheless, each assembly had to be individually tested, assessed and documented.
Traceability: Each device had to be assigned to a specific location within the box. In the event of a NIO finding, it had to be immediately clear which box, which layer and which device was involved.

Anyone who tackles one of these issues has a task to complete. Those who have to tackle them all at once have a project that overwhelms most service providers.

How Microvista solved it

After a brief analysis, it became clear that it was possible. Not using standard processes, but with a solution tailored precisely to this requirement.

The scan: one cardboard box, several devices, six minutes

The entire box was placed unopened into the CT scanner. No unpacking, no repositioning, no sorting. One scan, six minutes, several devices. Thanks to the parallel reconstruction of the data, the effective inspection time was one minute per device. Sterility was fully maintained throughout the process.

The data pipeline: from scan to test result

Once the scan was complete, the entire workflow ran without any manual intervention. The volume was reconstructed, the cardboard box was automatically aligned within the dataset, and the various assemblies were automatically separated and assigned to their respective positions. A standardised inspection image was generated for each device, always aligned identically and always in the same format. The operator received a clearly structured image for each device and made the Pass/Fail assessment. No searching, no interpreting, no guessing.

Traceability: from the box to the individual device

A two-stage system was implemented to enable the customer to take immediate action in the event of an NIO finding.

Each box contained an accompanying note. For each layer position, the note indicated whether the device was OK or NOK. The logistics team knew immediately which box needed to be opened and which layer needed to be replaced. Fault-free boxes remained sealed. The printout was generated directly from the portal, thereby eliminating the risk of manual transcription errors.

At the same time, all results were transmitted live to the Microvista InspectHub portal. This portal stores the OK/NOK assessment for each device, the corresponding test image and the allocation of device, box and layer, supplemented by a live progress indicator and the complete history. A reporting module with export functions to CSV and PDF completes the portal. Even if a delivery note was lost, the allocation could still be retrieved at any time via the box number. This meant the process was fully traceable at all times, even during audits.

Validation: Radiation compatibility

Before the series went into production, one question needed to be answered: does the CT scan alter the materials used in the product? The customer had a sample batch of devices examined by its own quality assurance department following the scan. The result was clear: there were no changes whatsoever to the materials. The testing method was officially approved.

Microvista also provided a formal radiation statement. This included the specific radiation intensity per scan, proof that only a single scan was performed per box, and a list of all tested batches with dates, batch numbers and radiation exposure data. This provided transparent and regulatory-compliant evidence.

The result

The effective testing time was one minute per device. In total, more than 15,000 assemblies were tested, meaning the process is also suitable for high production volumes. Sterility was maintained throughout. No packaging was opened, re-sterilisation was not required, and there was no risk of contamination at any point.

Data processing was fully automated, from scanning to the test image. This ensured high reproducibility and a clear, uniform structure. Faulty devices could be precisely located using the layer number system, so that the logistics team knew immediately which device in which box needed replacing. Traceability remained digital throughout, accessible at any time, exportable and audit-proof.

This also significantly reduced the workload for logistics. Fault-free boxes did not need to be opened, manual sorting was eliminated, and there was no need for any searching whatsoever. Intervention was only required where it was actually necessary.

What other companies can learn from this

This case study is by no means an isolated instance in the medical technology sector. Time and again, there are products that are already packaged in sterile form yet still need to be inspected, or complex assemblies where disassembly is not an option. Added to this are high-volume production runs where manual inspection would be too slow and prone to errors, and regulatory requirements that demand comprehensive documentation and traceability.

If you are facing a similarly challenging task, please get in touch with us.

Microvista nominated for the Hugo Junkers Prize 2025

Caroline Meisenburg Silva — Mon, 11 May 2026 07:36:02 +0000

Microvista nominated for the Hugo Junkers Prize 2025

SCANEXPRESS mobile CT system among Saxony-Anhalt’s 20 most innovative projects.

Blankenburg, [15 November 2025] – Microvista GmbH has been nominated for the 2025 Hugo Junkers Prize for its SCANEXPRESS mobile CT system. This nomination places Microvista among the 20 most innovative projects in Saxony-Anhalt competing for the state’s most prestigious innovation award this year. The prestigious award recognises research and development achievements that make an important contribution to the future viability of the economy and society.

Industrial CT inspection goes mobile

With SCANEXPRESS, Microvista brings computer tomography directly into the production halls. Instead of transporting components to the laboratory, which is time-consuming and costly, companies can now carry out their tests flexibly on site. The system is suitable for various materials such as plastics and metals and is designed for high throughput in series production. It delivers fast results, reduces waste and facilitates seamless quality assurance. ‘Our mobile CT is designed to be a problem solver. Wherever intensive quality testing is required on a temporary, often unexpected basis, it is available to our customers at short notice,’ says Prof. Dr. Lutz Hagner, one of the two managing directors of Microvista GmbH.

Pitch completed in front of the jury

As part of the competition, the nominees presented their projects to a jury on 11 November 2025. On behalf of Microvista, CEO Dr Robin Höhne presented the SCANEXPRESS mobile CT system and explained its technological and economic added value for the industry.

Recognition for practical innovation

The winners of the Hugo Junkers Prize 2025 will be announced at the award ceremony on 11 June 2026 in Magdeburg. The nomination highlights SCANEXPRESS‘s strength: a practical solution that combines technological precision with economic efficiency. Industries with high quality requirements – such as automotive manufacturing and medical technology – benefit particularly from its flexible application.

Reverse Engineering and 3D Scanning: From Physical Component to CAD Model

Florian Franz — Wed, 25 Mar 2026 07:41:47 +0000

You have a component, but no design documentation. Or the existing documentation no longer matches the actual part, because changes have been made over the years that were never documented. An industrial plant is being dismantled and rebuilt at another site, but the CAD data for key components is missing. A spare part is needed, but the manufacturer no longer exists.

Reverse engineering using a 3D scanner solves precisely these problems: the physical object is scanned, the scan data is converted into a digital model, and this is used to create a CAD data set for reproduction, documentation or further development. This allows physical objects to be converted into digital models: precisely, completely and reproducibly. But which 3D scanner is the right one, and when is a surface scan not sufficient?

No CAD? No manufacturer? Here’s how to get your data anyway.

In industrial practice, there are often situations where a physical component exists but the digital data is missing. The most common reasons for reverse engineering and 3D scanning:

No design documentation available: The CAD data has been lost, is out of date, or was never created. Old machines, components manufactured by hand, or products from manufacturers that no longer exist. The part is there, but the digital information is missing.
The documentation does not match the component: Over the years, changes have been made that were never documented. The drawing says A, the part says B. For reproduction or retrofitting, you need the current condition, not the intended condition from 15 years ago.
Retrofitting and plant relocation: An industrial plant is dismantled and rebuilt at a different site. Pipework, housings and brackets must be recorded accurately, reflecting their actual condition, not as described in the files.
A spare part is needed, but the manufacturer no longer exists: A worn-out gear, a broken housing, a cast part that is no longer available. The only reference is the physical object itself.
Product development based on an existing part: An existing product needs to be optimised or a new prototype developed. The quickest way: scan, create a digital replica and edit it in CAD, rather than

In all these cases, reverse engineering using 3D scanning provides the foundation: a precise digital data set that accurately replicates the physical object. This enables reproduction, documentation or further development, even without existing design documentation.

Which 3D scanners are suitable for reverse engineering?

There are various types of 3D scanners available for reverse engineering. Each device has its strengths and limitations. The right choice depends on the object, the accuracy requirements and whether internal structures also need to be captured.

Optical 3D scanners (strip light, laser)

Optical 3D scanners use structured light or lasers to capture the visible surface of an object. They are particularly well suited to free-form surfaces, organic shapes and design objects. The accuracy is typically between 0.02 and 0.1 mm.

Strengths: Fast scanning of large surfaces, high detail resolution in visible areas, relatively inexpensive to purchase.

Limitations: Internal structures, undercuts and hidden areas cannot be captured. Glossy, transparent or dark surfaces often require pre-treatment (matting). For complex assemblies, multiple scans from different angles are required, which must be merged manually or automatically. Missing areas occur wherever there is no line of sight.

Industrial computed tomography (CT)

Industrial CT scans the entire object with X-rays and generates a complete 3D volume model. Unlike optical 3D scanners, CT also captures internal geometries, cavities, channels and hidden features. All in a single scan, without the need for disassembly.

Advantages: Complete capture of internal and external geometry, non-destructive, no surface pre-treatment required, a single data set for all features. In addition to geometry, CT also enables the analysis of material defects such as porosity or inclusions. The precision of modern CT systems reaches values of less than 10 micrometres.

Limitations: Limited by material density, component size and material composition. Materials that are difficult to penetrate, such as thick-walled steel, or components with significant variations in wall thickness can cause artefacts. The scanning time is longer than with optical methods, but there is no need for post-processing of missing areas.

Tactile coordinate measuring machines (CMMs)

Tactile measuring devices scan individual points on the surface. They offer the highest accuracy (up to 0.001 mm), but do not capture volumetric data and are too slow for the spatial capture of complex free-form surfaces. In reverse engineering, they are therefore primarily used for targeted re-measurement of critical dimensions, rather than as the main scanner.

Advantages: The highest accuracy of any method, traceable to national standards, regardless of surface finish. Ideal for validating individual dimensions following a 3D scan.

Limitations: Very slow with many measurement points; no surface data; no volume data. Not suitable for the complete capture of a component as the basis for a CAD model. Useful as a supplement, not as the sole data source.

Tactile, optical or CT: Which 3D scanner should you choose for reverse engineering?

Choosing the right process is not a question of ‘better or worse’, but depends on the component and the task at hand. Each process has clear strengths and clear limitations:

Criterion	Tactile (CMM)	Optical 3D Scanner	Industrial CT
Capture	Individual points on the surface	Visible surface as point cloud	Volume: interior and exterior
Internal Geometries	Only with direct access, very limited	Not capturable	Fully capturable
Assembled Assemblies	Disassembly usually required	Disassembly required (line of sight)	Scanning in assembled state possible
Surface	Uncritical, as long as probeable	Critical (glossy/transparent)	Mostly uncritical
Missing Areas	Unmeasured points are missing	Common with undercuts	None, since volumetric
Accuracy	up to 0.001 mm	0.02 to 0.1 mm	0.015 to 0.05 mm
Speed	Slow with many features	Fast for surfaces	Longer, but everything in one scan
Suitability for Freeform Surfaces	Barely suitable (too few points)	Very well suited	Very well suited
Data Basis for CAD	Individual measurements, no surface data	Surface model	Complete volume model

The reverse engineering process: from 3D scan to CAD model

Step 1: Scanning and data capture

The physical object is scanned. With optical 3D scanners, scans are taken from various angles and then stitched together. With CT, the component is captured in a single pass, including all internal geometries. In both cases, the result is a point cloud: a cloud of millions of individual 3D points that describes the object’s spatial geometry.

Step 2: Data preparation and STL mesh model

Step 3: Surface reconstruction

The real challenge in reverse engineering: parametric surfaces are extracted from the triangular mesh, which can then be edited, dimensioned and used for manufacturing in CAD software. Depending on the component, two approaches are used:

Automatic surface reconstruction: The software automatically recognises basic geometric shapes (planes, cylinders, cones, curves) and generates parametric elements. Suitable for prismatic components with clear geometries. The speed of this approach significantly accelerates the process.

Design-based reconstruction: An experienced engineer manually remodels the component in CAD software, using the scan data as a reference. This is required for complex free-form surfaces, organic shapes, or when a ‘clean’ parametric model with a feature tree is to be designed. This approach facilitates subsequent changes to the design.

Step 4: Create and export the CAD model

The finished CAD model is exported in the desired format, such as STEP, IGES or a native format (SolidWorks, CATIA, Siemens NX, Autodesk Inventor). The file can be imported directly into existing CAD tools and used for production, simulation or optimisation. A final comparison of the model against the original scan data ensures that the model corresponds to the physical object.

Practical examples: When is CT-based reverse engineering worthwhile?

Case 1: Retrofitting of an industrial plant. The documentation is no longer up to date.

A production facility is to be relocated to a new site. Although old drawings exist for several housing and connecting components, these no longer reflect the current state of affairs because changes have been made over the years that were never documented. A 3D optical scanner captures the external geometry, but the wall thicknesses, internal channels and sealing surfaces remain invisible. CT-based reverse engineering solves this: the component is fully captured in its current state, inside and out. The result is CAD data that reflects the actual current state and serves as the basis for remanufacturing and reconstruction at the new site.

Case 2: Reproduction of a component without existing CAD data

A turbocharger housing with internal flow channels is to be remanufactured. The manufacturer no longer exists, and no CAD data is available. The relevant features (channel cross-sections, wall thicknesses, transitions) are located entirely inside the object. None of these are visible from the outside or can be captured by an optical 3D scanner. Dismantling the component would damage sealing surfaces and fits. The CT scan generates a complete 3D volume model, an engineer carries out the reverse engineering of the surfaces, and the component can be digitally reconstructed: with all internal geometries, non-destructively and without dismantling.

Reverse Engineering at Microvista: Process and Services

Microvista offers reverse engineering as a service for components with complex internal geometries. Our industrial CT systems can scan objects with a maximum outer diameter of 715 mm and a length of up to 1600 mm. We can also process materials that are difficult to penetrate, such as iron, steel or dense alloys.

Every project begins with a consultation: we clarify your application, the required file formats, tolerances and whether automatic or constructive surface reconstruction is appropriate. This is followed by the workflow described above, from the CT scan to the finished CAD model.

Delivery options:

For companies without their own CT facilities, this service provides access to high-resolution 3D scanning without the need to invest in their own equipment.

Frequently asked questions about reverse engineering using 3D scanning

Which 3D scanner is best suited for reverse engineering?

That depends on the component. For objects with purely external geometry and accessible surfaces, an optical 3D scanner is often sufficient. However, when internal structures, hidden features or assembled components need to be captured, industrial CT is the more suitable method. We can help you choose the right option.

We have a component but no design documentation. Can you help?

That is exactly what reverse engineering is for. We scan your existing component using CT, capture all the geometries – including the internal ones – and provide you with a CAD model for reproduction, documentation or further development. Existing drawings are not required.

Is reverse engineering suitable for retrofitting and plant relocation?

Yes, that is one of the most common applications. When an industrial plant is dismantled and rebuilt at a different site, the existing documentation often no longer matches the current state of the plant. 3D scanning captures the actual condition and provides the data needed for reconstruction, including all changes that have never been documented over the years.

How accurate is reverse engineering using 3D scanners?

The achievable accuracy depends on the scanning technology and the size of the component. Optical 3D scanners achieve 0.02 to 0.1 mm, whilst industrial CT scanners achieve 0.015 to 0.05 mm. For prototype manufacturing, 0.1 mm is usually sufficient. For fits and functionally critical dimensions, a combination of scanning and targeted re-measurement is recommended. The precision of the scan alone does not guarantee an accurate CAD model. The quality of the surface reconstruction is equally crucial.

How much does reverse engineering cost as a service?

The cost depends on the size of the component, its complexity and the scope of delivery. A simple CT scan with STL output is significantly cheaper than a full reverse engineering process resulting in a parametric CAD model. Please contact us for a personalised quote.

Can every component be scanned using CT?

Not every application. CT has limitations when dealing with very large or extremely dense components. Our systems can scan objects with a maximum outer diameter of 715 mm and a length of 1600 mm, weighing up to 200 kg. Materials such as aluminium, plastic and light metals are ideal. Heavy metals such as steel also work, but require a corresponding tube power. For purely external geometries, an optical device may be more efficient.

What file formats does Microvista provide?

Depending on your requirements: STL mesh models, STEP, IGES or native CAD formats. The data can be imported directly into your existing CAD environment.

Industrial CT Market Trends 2026

Florian Franz — Wed, 21 Jan 2026 15:39:41 +0000

The industrial computed tomography market will reach $548 million in 2025. By 2030, it will exceed $830 million – growing at 8.7% annually. These figures from the latest market report confirm what we’re seeing on the ground: CT has evolved from a niche inspection method to a cornerstone of modern quality assurance.

What's driving this growth?

Electric mobility as catalyst

The EV battery supply chain is becoming the largest growth driver. New regulations like China’s GB38031-2025 make non-destructive testing mandatory. BMW is already piloting inline CT with 30-second cycles for prismatic cells. Electronics and semiconductors are growing fastest at 11.1% CAGR – driven by miniaturization requiring sub-micron resolution.

Asia-Pacific leads

With 37.3% market share and 11.9% CAGR, Asia-Pacific is the most dynamic region. China, Japan, and South Korea are investing heavily in manufacturing quality – from EV batteries to 3D NAND memory.

Automotive remains the core market

27.6% of total market revenue comes from automotive. The shift toward lightweight construction, composites, and additive manufacturing continuously increases demand for volumetric validation.

Assembly analysis as growth segment

Assembly analysis is growing at 10.1% CAGR – a sign that CT is evolving beyond pure defect detection toward complete dimensional verification.

What does this mean in practice?

The technology is democratizing. Desktop systems under $100,000 make CT accessible to smaller manufacturers. At the same time, AI-powered automated defect recognition (ADR), dual-energy sources, and faster detector technology are advancing high-end applications.

At Microvista, we see this development every day: customers who sent samples to labs three years ago now inspect 100% of their serial parts on-site – with our mobile CT system ScanExpress. The combination of hardware, software, and cloud platform makes the difference.

The report confirms what we’ve been driving for years: CT is transforming from a specialized testing method into an integrated quality platform.

Which development do you see as most critical for your industry? Looking forward to the discussion in the comments.

Source: https://www.mordorintelligence.com/industry-reports/computed-tomography-testing-market

Innovative Method for evaluating Hairpin Stators

Max Marnitz — Wed, 21 Jan 2026 13:46:21 +0000

21/01/2026

Why are hairpins and hairpin stators being scanned?

Since the performance and reliability of an electric motor depend to a large extent on the quality of the stator fabrication, the hairpin welds, among other things, must also be inspected during production. Non-destructive industrial computed tomography is used to create three-dimensional images that can be used to determine whether the hairpin welds have been produced in accordance with the (automotive) manufacturer’s specifications. Typical defects in the manufacturing process are, for example, pores, material accumulations and bonding defects, which can affect the performance or service life of the engine.

Microvista has already scanned

0 +

hairpin welds in the automotive industry

What are the challenges of CT-scanning hairpin stators?

There are several hundred hairpin welds on a stator, which are closely spaced in several rows and nominally have no difference. The challenge lies in separating the individual welds and assigning them unambiguously. Since the hairpins are made of copper, CT scanning hairpin stators is likely to produce image artifacts that can affect image quality and accuracy. Image artifacts can be caused, for example, by scattered radiation, noise or blurring. However, this can be minimized and controlled by an optimal scanning process. This is aggravated by unavoidable position fluctuations, which are caused by the geometry of the hairpins, but also by the global position of the stator in the scanning device. Thus, no exact position of the hairpin welds can be assumed.

How does Microvista still manage to scan hairpin stators with great precision?

Our solution is: binary codes!
This is how we proceed: Each Hairpin Stator that is to be scanned by us is given a “crown”, i.e. we place an additional polymer ring on the sheet metal assembly of the stator. The positioning of the ring is always the same by using an existing groove on the stator. At the level of the hairpin welds, 12 binary codes are evenly distributed around the circumference of the ring. Each code is made up of 4 indentations, with the binary code being represented via the depth (0001 = shallow shallow deep).

What are the advantages of this innovation?

During the evaluation of the scans, the binary codes are determined in addition to the relevant stator. Based on the respective binary code, we can therefore conclude the position on the stator and thus reliably determine the individual pin IDs. The big advantage here is that we do not have to make any assumptions about the rotational position of the stator. Based on the codes, we always know where we are in the scan volume and which pin is currently in front of us – this is interesting when higher resolutions are relevant for the evaluation. In addition, we can also evaluate different partial scans of a stator with the same software, e.g. a half, quarter or eighth stator.

Thus, the binary codes provide us with a precise reference point to determine the exact position of all hairpin welds. This forms the basis for automated image processing, which enables efficient and accurate analysis of the entire hairpin stator.  

Learn more about the inspection of hairpin stators here: Quality assurance for hairpin stators

Microvista

CT software for the in-line inspection of solder joints in mass production

Background: CT inspection of solder joints in a production line setting

Test criteria for pore detection and solder quality

From the manual testing process to software logic

Automatic CT analysis using AI models

Connection to the CT system, data analysis and the InspectHub portal

Roles and perspective on the results

A phased approach to the roll-out

Validation of automated CT assessment using attributive MSA

Result: documented in-line inspection for mass production

CT Inspection of Drive Systems Following Spalling on a Pulley

Initial situation

Objective

Solution

From component ID to sorting decision

Deliberately no automatic rating

Data provision via InspectHub

Result

Five titanium spheres determine the precision of a medical robot. This is how each one was verified.

The customer

The challenge

Die The solution

The result

About Microvista

APQP with Reliable Measurement Data

Content

Planning quality also means planning measurability

The role of metrology in APQP

What industrial CT adds

Metrology and CT across the five APQP phases

Phase 1: Planning and definition

Phase 2: Product design and development

Phase 3: Process design and development

Phase 4: Product and process validation

Phase 5: Feedback, assessment and corrective action

Overview: from APQP question to CT contribution

From measurement data to process understanding and predicted quality

Prerequisites for reliable CT results

When CT adds particular value

How Microvista supports the APQP process

Frequently asked questions

Sources and normative context

3D Contract Measurement of Complex Parts

Inhaltsverzeichnis

What is a wage survey, and when is it worthwhile?

What measurement technology is used in 3D contract measurement?

How does industrial computed tomography work in contract measurement?

How are complex geometries and free-form surfaces measured?

What happens during the analysis and CAD comparison?

What role does wage measurement play in quality assurance?

How does wage measurement support mass production and high-volume production?

What equipment and testing instruments are needed to ensure reliable results?

When does it make more sense to rent measurement equipment rather than use your own?

Request a Quote for Your 3D Contract Measurement

Frequently Asked Questions About 3D Contract Measurement

Sources and Related Standards

Case Study: Fully automated CT series inspection of sterile medical devices

Several service providers pulled out

What made this project difficult

How Microvista solved it

The scan: one cardboard box, several devices, six minutes

The data pipeline: from scan to test result

Traceability: from the box to the individual device

Validation: Radiation compatibility

The result

What other companies can learn from this

Microvista nominated for the Hugo Junkers Prize 2025

Microvista nominated for the Hugo Junkers Prize 2025

Industrial CT inspection goes mobile

Pitch completed in front of the jury

Recognition for practical innovation

Reverse Engineering and 3D Scanning: From Physical Component to CAD Model

No CAD? No manufacturer? Here’s how to get your data anyway.

Which 3D scanners are suitable for reverse engineering?

Optical 3D scanners (strip light, laser)

Industrial computed tomography (CT)

Tactile coordinate measuring machines (CMMs)

Tactile, optical or CT: Which 3D scanner should you choose for reverse engineering?

The reverse engineering process: from 3D scan to CAD model