From Endoscope Research to a Platform Built to Expand

How an opportunity in medical imaging became a compact platform for many kinds of image-quality testing

Company: Imatest LLC

Role: Mechanical Engineer and product development lead

Scope: Market and customer research, mechanical architecture, SolidWorks CAD, prototyping, validation, suppliers, documentation, and production release

Outcome: A released modular platform spanning 52 test configurations

The starting point

We had identified medical imaging as an industry worth expanding into. Industry contacts working with endoscopes had previously asked whether we offered equipment for their testing needs. When the opportunity came back into focus, I was asked to research the market, reconnect with those contacts, and determine what we could build.

My research found a small number of capable but high-cost endoscope-testing systems. The wide variation in endoscope sizes and specifications created room for a more adjustable, customizable, and accessible solution.

Imatest already had the Modular Test Stand, a highly configurable system capable of supporting many forms of image-quality testing. It also required substantial dedicated space. The shorter working distances involved in endoscope testing created an opportunity to apply the modular thinking behind the MTS to a smaller, more practical platform.

I saw an opportunity to build a common platform that could support endoscope testing while adapting to other forms of image-quality testing. I developed two rail-length options so customers could choose between a compact footprint and additional working distance.

The challenge became larger and more interesting: how could we create one compact system that was precise and repeatable enough for camera testing, flexible enough for very different applications, and practical to manufacture, configure, sell, and support?

Finding the platform beyond the endoscope

I worked with industry contacts, customers, and internal stakeholders to understand the testing requirements, then translated them into a modular mechanical architecture.

The platform needed to accommodate different cameras, endoscopes, test targets, lighting systems, optical components, working distances, mounting methods, and levels of automation. It also needed to support both manual and motorized configurations without forcing every customer into the same cost or complexity.

Rather than treating each test setup as a separate product, I developed a shared platform with configurable motion, mounting, and test modules. The same core system could support endoscope testing, reflective and transmissive targets, stray-light analysis, target projection, and automated positioning while integrating with Imatest’s existing hardware.

Designing for real configurations and real loads

Supporting such varied configurations created a significant load-capacity challenge. Some setups were light and compact, while others included considerably heavier equipment, such as a large magnetic plate for mounting test charts.

Side note: I introduced and developed the magnetic chart-mounting concept as a faster and more flexible way for customers to position and exchange mounted charts. After the concept proved useful within the test-stand system, we expanded it into a separately available product line.

The heavier configurations could have required a substantially more expensive motorized system. Instead, I separated structural support from actuation. The rail system carried the load, allowing the drive system to move the assembly without supporting its full weight. The same rail architecture also provided the base motion for the manual version.

The approach addressed both the load and cost constraints, but it required careful refinement. Early motion could stall or stutter when the assembly accelerated too quickly or when small tolerance and alignment issues increased resistance.

I refined component tolerances, added alignment and fit checks to the assembly process, and adjusted the Zaber motion profile to provide smoother acceleration and deceleration. Together, these changes produced reliable movement without requiring a higher-cost drive system.

Connecting the disciplines

The mechanical design could not exist in isolation. The BTS brought together precision motion, structural components, optics, motors, sensors, controls, cabling, and supplier-manufactured hardware.

I owned the mechanical architecture and SolidWorks development while working across those interfaces. That included:

• Translating market, customer, and testing needs into system requirements
• Developing complex assemblies, mechanisms, and interchangeable modules
• Balancing custom components with commercial motion hardware
• Managing load capacity, tolerances, alignment, packaging, access, and cable routing
• Creating engineering drawings, BOMs, supplier packages, assembly procedures, and support documentation
• Working with suppliers and technicians through prototyping and production release

Building, testing, and refining

Staying close to the physical system was essential. I worked through prototypes, supplier parts, assembly problems, and real test configurations instead of treating the CAD release as the finish line.

Real assembly behavior exposed tolerance and alignment problems that were not obvious in the model. Load testing and motion trials showed where the mechanical design, assembly process, and controller settings needed to work together more effectively. Supplier-quality issues also fed directly back into the design and documentation.

Each iteration improved more than the individual component. It strengthened the interfaces, production process, assembly instructions, and future configurability of the platform.

The result

What began as research into an endoscope-testing opportunity became a released platform capable of serving medical imaging and a much wider range of image-quality testing applications.

The final ecosystem included two platform lengths, manual and motorized systems, multiple motion axes, endoscope fixtures, reflective and transmissive testing, stray-light and target-projector configurations, magnetic chart mounting, and interfaces for automated control.

The project demonstrates the kind of engineering work I enjoy most: researching an unfamiliar market, understanding the need behind the initial idea, finding the larger product opportunity, connecting multiple technical disciplines, and carrying the solution far enough that it can be manufactured, supported, and expanded.

Product information and video are provided by Imatest. This case study describes my engineering contribution while employed as a Mechanical Engineer at Imatest LLC.