Syntec Technologies: Pushing the Polymer Envelope HRDT™ and patent-pending High Refraction Diamond Turning are trademarks of Syntec Technologies

2 Smaller, lighter packaging Lower cost Higher quality Wider range of optical spectrums (IR and UV) Stronger environmental resistance Applications are Driving Innovation

3 Keys to “Pushing the Envelope” Tolerances and costs established relative to need (proof-of-concept, prototype, low to high volume production) Designed to integrate into an assembly that meets all environmental constraints, not just size and weight, the inherent polymer advantages Highly repeatable; easily updated Wide range of materials with suitable optics properties Sophisticated manufacturing processes Withstanding extreme temperatures and chemical exposure is often critical, as are easy clean-up and resistance to damage

4 Material Trends: Accelerating Since 1990 Higher flow rates Better component design Post processing Improved optics overall Common polymers available in optical grades Temperature ranges (below 0c to over 200c) Transmission quality (390 to nm) Stability of index of refraction generally increasing More ways to manage birefringence

5 Manufacturing Trends: Improving and Converging Extremely precise optical mold inserts –All geometries –Fully compensate for shrinkage Fast turnaround prototypes –No molds –Replicate production approach Finished optics, select polymers MoldingSingle Point Diamond Turning Shorter lead time for molds –Average 6 to 8 weeks –As little as 2 to 4 weeks –Unitized designs Shorter processing times –More capable machines –Better technician controls Finished optics, all polymers

6 HRDT™ Processing Breakthrough Consequence: Many applications not feasible (time and/or $) Virtually all low volume ones Most high volume innovations Some high volume proven ones Hypothesis: Issue is a relievable surface energy problem Relieve material by annealing before diamond turning Customize amount of annealing plus machine settings, using repeatable formulas based on component geometry Problem: Surface failures on PEI and PES make SPDT unusable

7 HRDT™ Results Typical SPDT machining; 390 Å achieved HRDT™ success; 60 Å achieved Optically unacceptable Fully repeatable and optically acceptable

8 Design phasesDevelopment phasesFull productionBeta production Volume QuantityInitial QuantityQuick PrototypeProof-of-concept More Flexibility For More Applications — Faster Requirements Distribution MoldedSPDTHRDTMoldedSPDTHRDTMoldedSPDTHRDTMoldedSPDTHRDT PMMA Cyclic Olefin Polystyrene PEI PES –––– –––– Alternative choices, sometimes desirable for unusual geometries or exceptionally tight schedules Usually lowest total cost choice (over 95% of the time) New flexibility – Currently not possible

9 HRDT: Applications That Fit High heat, high index of refraction (e.g., datacom evanescent coupling) Innovation ideas where R & D funds are tight or short lead times vital Generally proven design and packaging, but inherently low volume Newer designs and packaging, either high or unknown volumes Optics that can be mounted to a PC board before wave reflow

10 Key Questions Is overall application well under- stood or innovative? Optimizing new functionality or interfaces takes more cycles Are optical components low or high complexity? What is the value of each week of development time saved? How many proof-of-concept and prototype cycles make sense? More changes earlier increases product quality at lower risk & cost

11 Low Optics ComplexityHigh Optics Complexity Assumptions Key Assumptions Cost of first mold Savings for subsequent molds (both in time & $$) Cycle time to make mold (in weeks) HRDT weeks saved per cycle Development savings per week Beta Production Quantity Volume Production Quantity $12,000 10% 4 3 $10, ,000 $25,000 20% 8 7 $10, ,000

12 Proof-of-concept Prototyping Cycles Beta production cycle Volume production Total Hard Cost Summary Hard costs Dev. time savings Total HRDT Advantage Bottom Line Impact CyclesHRDT No HRDTCyclesHRDT No HRDT CyclesHRDT No HRDTCyclesHRDT No HRDT Innovative ApplicationKnown ApplicationInnovative ApplicationKnown Application Low Optics ComplexityHigh Optics Complexity – 14K – 3K 17K K 12.8K 3K 42.6K – 49K – 3K 52K K 44K 23K 3K 119K – 2.5K – 15K 17.5K (.5K) 30K 29.5K 2.5K 15K 22.5K 20.1K 90K 110.1K – 10K – 30K 40K 12K 120K 132K 10K 5K 30K 55K 64K 270K 334K

13 What’s Next? Materials operating in the 3–5 micron and 8–12 micron range More thermally stable materials over wider range of temperatures Higher temperature materials for the visible range Harder surface resistances for better scratch avoidance Reduce non-technical barriers of awareness and collaboration Application demands Material characteristics Manufacturing process Continue tackling soluble technical barriers Keep design front and center