Everything after the scanner — evaluation, automation, integration, reporting. Engagements start small on purpose.
Every engagement follows the same shape: a fixed-fee look at your pipeline first, then one bounded workflow proven against your current method, then production. You always know what the next step costs before committing to it, and every stage produces something you keep even if we stop there.
fixed fee · from $3,500 · start here
I look at one or two real workflows end to end — scan to report to wherever the data dies — baseline the manual touch time, map what fails silently versus loudly, and hand back a prioritised backlog with an architecture and an honest ROI. A plan you could hand to someone else, including me not being needed.
scoped from the assessment
One bounded automation, built on your representative data, with an output-equivalence test against your current approved method. Your metrology approver signs off on the comparison, not on my say-so.
scoped from the pilot
The pilot turned into something maintainable: a packaged App with a version, a test suite, structured logging, and documentation. Plus the path out of the software island — Q-DAS, PiWeb, CSV, or a direct handoff to your quality system, so the report is a view of the data rather than its only home.
standalone or with any stage above
Measurement data your whole company can open: web-based 3D viewers of inspection results, internal dashboards over measurement history, and rendered views of your own parts and processes for reviews and documentation. Built from your data, running on your infrastructure — no per-seat licences for people who just need to see.
for regulated shops
Intended-use statement, requirements traced to test cases, an executed protocol, and the App pinned to the software release it was validated against. Built so the answer to “how do you know this is right” is a document, not a conversation.
The person who scopes the work does the work — there is no junior handoff, and that is verifiable in a way team pitches are not. The discipline that makes it safe: everything I build is versioned, tested, documented and handed over so your team can run it without me; the inspection method stays yours, approved by your named metrology owner; and every automation ships with the table of choices that produced its numbers — fitting criteria, filters, decision rules — in writing. If I think a method is wrong, you hear it before the automation is built, not after.
Metrology Maven is a one-person practice run by a working metrologist based in Charlotte, North Carolina — roughly a decade in dimensional metrology before consulting. Complex GD&T and dimensional inspection of gas turbine components; structured-light scanning with Python automation of the inspection routines; optical CMMs, measuring microscopes, X-ray CT, and optical profilometry; custom measurement software — data pipelines, processing interfaces, and web applications — built for working metrology groups rather than as demos. Graduate-level training in precision metrology (M.S., mechanical engineering).
The short version: a metrologist who writes software, in that order. Plenty of people can write the Python. Fewer will notice the datum frame is built from the wrong three features.
The most useful first message is one workflow and one sentence about where it hurts — how many parts, how often, and what someone currently does by hand. That is enough for me to tell you whether this is worth either of our time. I read every message personally and usually reply within one business day: hello [at] metrologymaven [dot] io