A bounding box is not a quote
Size alone misses feature access, removable volume, bends, cutouts, secondary work, and process fit.
Geometry analysis for quotes
Turn CAD geometry into evidence an estimator can challenge.
Local geometry analysis for manufacturing quotes: process ranking, stock, features, setups, DFM findings, sheet development, multi-solid grouping, and calibration.
Analysis quality
A bounding box is evidence—not an estimate.
Black-box automation is hard to trust
An unexplained price cannot be reviewed, calibrated, or defended to another estimator.
Assemblies create false simplicity
A multi-solid model can hide repeated components, purchased items, and different manufacturing routes.
01 / 03
Versioned, local, and source-bound
The production scanner uses a pinned OpenCascade worker for STEP and IGES and merges geometry results with available model metadata. Every result carries a schema version and SHA-256 identity for the source file.
That identity protects later quote stages from quietly relying on analysis from an older revision. Geometry meshes support the local viewer, while structured evidence drives process and costing review.
- Pinned geometry environment
- Source SHA-256
- Versioned analysis schema
- Local 3D viewer
02 / 03
Different processes need different evidence
Milling, turning, sheet work, additive, and mixed-process parts are not scored from one generic complexity number. Each process path produces appropriate stock, features, setups, DFM, and cost drivers.
Sheet development validates geometry before using the contour. Multi-solid files group identical signatures and can map them to BOM make rows, but automated component rollup activates only when identities, quantities, materials, revisions, and signatures reconcile.
- Process-specific analysis
- Recognized topology
- Validated sheet development
- Multi-solid BOM mapping
03 / 03
Calibration is part of the product
A geometry engine can be repeatable and still be wrong for a particular shop. RapidRFQ captures estimator feedback and accepted CAM or production evidence so the shop can measure error instead of assuming universal accuracy.
The commercial promise is faster, more consistent estimator work with visible controls—not autonomous pricing for every file. That boundary lets pilot shops improve accuracy without hiding uncertainty from the person responsible for the quote.
- Estimator corrections
- CAM comparison
- Shop-specific timing evidence
- Confidence and approval gates
Straight answers
How to judge the geometry evidence.
Is geometry analysis automatic?
The analysis runs automatically on supported files, but its manufacturing and pricing conclusions remain estimator-controlled.
Does it read drawings too?
The RFQ workflow extracts selected requirements from PDF drawings and specifications with source and confidence evidence; it does not claim universal PMI interpretation.
How is accuracy measured?
Pilot calibration compares predicted setup, cycle, stock, flat, nest, and saw-cut assumptions with shop or CAM evidence.
Challenge the analysis
Use a model that makes simple automation fail.
We’ll compare the recognized evidence, confidence, review flags, and cost drivers with what your estimator and CAM system know.