Industrial inbound qualification — workflow and readiness first

Stage: decides whether an industrial inquiry enters stage 1 (lab-side comparison) or goes to the page 21 log. Buyer page: for industrial QA — lab-side comparison against a reference measurement; no in-plant or line-speed promise.

We do no outbound to production lines or to anyone on the do-not-approach list (page 15: production micro-optics makers, ICP2). Industrial contacts reach us inbound — a forum reply, the general inbox, a talk. This page is how you qualify them.

The two questions that route everything

Workflow: "Where would the frames be taken and processed — in a lab or metrology room, or on the production line?"
Readiness: "Do you already have holograms or interferograms from that setup, and an independent measurement of the same parts (profilometer, interferometer, AFM, CMM, calibration artefact)?"

Then, if lab-side, the full workflow-fit block from page 24.

Routing

Their answers	Route	What you send
lab/metrology room, frames exist, reference exists	stage 1 if the fit check says `tested`/`needs_review`	fit verdict + for industrial QA + the design partnership brief
lab-side, frames exist, no reference yet	stage 1 only after they name the reference they could make; otherwise nurture	fit verdict; ask what reference instrument they have access to
lab-side, no rig and no frames, wants 3D surface or thickness measurement on the bench	Hardware Design Partnership candidate: stage 1 once they name the target and a reference they trust	for industrial QA + the design partnership brief (Hardware column)
lab-side, building their own rig, no frames yet	not qualified; log `not ready`, `next_action_date` 90 days	the workflow-fit page so they can check before buying hardware
needs it on the line, at line speed, on-prem, or with an acquisition station	page 21 log — not a sales conversation	"we are not yet set up for in-plant deployment"; ask which gate they need; log it
a production micro-optics maker or other do-not-approach org	page 21 log, reply politely, no pilot, no follow-up sequence	thanks + the public docs link

Readiness questions (lab-side only)

Which parts or features (sag, step height, roughness, flatness)?
What does the reference instrument report, with what stated uncertainty?
Who would send the frames, and in what format and bit depth?
Is there an NDA requirement before any frame leaves the site? (If yes, NDA before transfer; same rule as the pilot program.)
Who owns the budget — QA, R&D, a project? (page 31)

What you never say to an industrial contact

Line speed, throughput, cycle time, in-line, on-prem availability dates, accuracy, traceability, "production-ready". The honest line: "today this is a lab-side comparison against your own reference; the comparison is how we find out how it agrees on your parts."

Artifact: each inquiry either a stage-1 row with a saved fit response, or a page-21 log row naming the gate. Weekly report line: routed , logged .