The Transition Period

As a long term advocate of additive technologies I have been through the peaks and troughs associated with an emerging sector. However, I have never before been witness to the growing momentum behind these technologies that exists today.

It is not possible to point to one single factor, which is probably why there is strength behind the momentum as opposed to 'hype'. Rather, it is now possible to identify a cumulative range of events and circumstances that are contributing to this escalating energy behind both 3D printing and additive manufacturing.

As the world tentatively heads out of recession, albeit teetering on the brink with economic commentators uncertain about which way the cards will fall as of yet, the vendors of additive technology platforms have fared pretty well. Some better than others, as would be expected, but what it very telling is that none have gone into administration. All of them have managed to keep their heads above water. Stratasys recently released its end of year results for 2009, and the general pattern is probably similar across the board, in that unit sales were down on the previous year, but still healthy enough. Cost cutting and belt tightening helped to buoy up the figures some, and overall the rhetoric was positive. An industry that can demonstrate positive results after a devastating year — economically speaking — only points to further significant growth at a faster rate as global circumstances improve.

Awareness is another significant factor in this building momentum. It's been a slow process (akin to wading through treacle at times) but it is now spreading at an exciting rate. There is much more talk, debate and understanding of the additive manufacturing concept. From a personal perspective, I am finding that I rarely have to explain the concept itself anymore, as most people that I speak to have heard about it and grasp the basic idea. Rather it is a case of explaining the different processes and the range of capabilities. This is progress!

A further significant pointer that I became aware of yesterday is that a large retail outlet that has picked up on the technology. PC World posted an article on its website: http://www.pcworld.com/article/189880/affordable_3d_printers.html. It refers directly to HP's interest in 3D printers and I imagine this is what brought it to the company's attention. Also, the article talks about 3DP and AM as a technology of the future, but it is talking, and more to the point, it is taking the message wider. Just think of the number of people that would never come across a manufacturing or technology website but will visit the PC World website. There could be many more 'Eureka' moments as a result!

Many of the blogs relating to 3DP and AM are also becoming much, much more prolific with their posts. A great many of them distinguish between the industrial strength processes (Stratasys, 3D Systems, Objet, ZCorp et al) and the 'hobbyist' platforms (RepRap, Fab@Home, Makerbot and BfB RapMan etc). The hobbyist platforms being those 3D printers that come in kit form. I am not sure if the 'hobbyist' label works for me, I don't think it conveys the full potential of these machines, but I get the point and the differentiation.

As of today, I think the sector is mid transition — somewhere between niche and mainstream — and moving faster than it ever has before!

When Wohlers met Cameron

James Cameron that is, not David!

Terry Wohlers recently witnessed James Cameron being interviewed at the recent SolidWorld event, talking knowledgeably about 3D software and 3D printing in particular. The interview was followed up by a 1-to-1 conversation.

The full post can be found here: http://wohlersassociates.com/blog/2010/02/james-cameron-uses-3d-printing/

The gist being the positive effect on the 3DP industry when people so much in the public eye know about AND talk about the applicability of these technologies.

What was also very interesting was how Mr Cameron is renowned for "getting his hands dirty" in order to make stuff, both early on in his career as a machinist and even now, as (one of?) the world's greatest film directors.

This may sound strange coming from someone that has only worked with words her whole life, and watches in amazement from the sidelines as the real (and often dirty) work is carried out by the true pioneers of 3DP, but this is key! The desire to make things and to practice and learn. Innovation is born of an inherent creativity together with hands-on practical knowledge. It's not exactly a fast process, but one that fosters enthusiasm, passion and determination over a life-time.

I was talking to Dan Johns of Airbus recently (who, incidentally, was the ALM evangelist behind the Telegraph article I posted about last week) and this was central to his thinking too. I am sure he will not mind me saying that he does not profess to be especially academic, but as a child he spent hours and hours in his Grandad's shed, playing with a host of different tools and making things — all sorts of things. From this his passion for engineering and manufacturing was born. His imagination was totally captured by the emergence of rapid prototyping in the early 1990's and the potential that he saw then prompted him to take the time to fully embrace the capabilities and the limitations of the processes. His understanding through practical, hands-on experimentation, has driven these technologies to unprecedented depths within one of the largest Aerospace companies in the world. He freely admits there is still much work to be done, but his fascination and zeal for all things additive is only increasing as time passes.

Drive, passion and dirty hands — the roots of success. Without them, the rest of it cannot grow.

The Press is Starting to Pick up on 3DP/AM

The chatter about whether or not 3D printing and/or AM is or will become mainstream has been centre stage again of late. Is it mainstream now? No, of course it isn't! That said, the mainstream press here in the UK are starting to pick up on just what these technologies can do. Indeed, just today, two articles on the subject have gone live.

Stateside there has been more mainstream press visibility with articles in some of the major daily titles, and the Jay Leno effect has had positive repercussions with increasing profile.

Today, the Daily Telegraph ran an article in its print edition outlining the impressive ALM capability at Airbus / EADS in Filton and how these companies are driving innovation and research with additive manufacturing applications that are currently undergoing the lengthy testing necessary for flight.

The Times Live also ran an online opinion piece of journalism, with a slightly tonge in cheek tone, but one that easily captures the imagination of people not familiar with 3D printing. They might need some ST knowledge though!!

http://www.timeslive.co.za/opinion/columnists/article293024.ece

The Solido Announcement

Solido, true to its word, unveiled its new pricing structure for the Solido SD300 Pro 3D printer at SolidWorks World 2010 yesterday. It is not quite the watershed price that some would have liked to have seen, but it is certainly well below the $5000 benchmark that Desktop Factory was aiming for this time last year. At $2950 Solido seems to be making the right noises to draw a crowd and has, on the face of it, laid down the gauntlet to the rest of the market.

There is a sting in the tail though, unfortunately. That price is for the machine only! The full Value Pack, which includes the printer, 8 (XY) cuttings knives, 4 magnetic pads, 24 modelling kits (modeling material, glue cartridge and anti-glue cassette), SDView software, a 12 month warranty and 12 months free software upgrade and hotline support, costs $14,950.

Not quite the leap forward that is needed to prompt new users to give this a go.

There is not a huge amount of 'chat' going on about this either, which is generally a good indicator of impact for an announcement like this. There was more said pre-announcement than post. Compare the couple of mumblings (including my own) about the actual Solido news with the tirade of commentary that followed the Stratasys/HP announcement a couple of weeks ago.

I do think that Solido has a sound product that produces good models, however, regrettably, I think the company has missed an opportunity here at a key time in the history of 3D Printing, and that this is more PR stunt than a real effort to broaden the 3D printing user community.

I understand how a product has to be commercially viable, it needs to make money. That's a given, that's business. That said, I don't know how much of a margin is involved here, although I could probably make an educated guess. But while Solido is effectively an SME, it has some powerful backers and I believe it would have been in the company's long term interests to take a bolder stand.

[NB: I have absolutely no commercial / financial interests in Solido or associated companies.]

Advocating Additive Technology and Change is on the Horizon

As the Editor of the TCT Magazine I was a 100% advocate of additive layer technology. Partly because it was my remit and partly because I caught the bug. Now, it is wholly through choice, although often more tempered by cynicism. I have been wondering of late where this cynicism has come from.

By nature I am an optimist, so can I be optimistic and cynical at the same time? The answer is yes I can. I am cynical about some of the predictions and claims about 3D Printing (3DP) and Additive Manufacturing (AM), these days. I now have a tendency to reserve judgement until I see proof, or establish a strong belief system, before I start waxing lyrical. That said, I am very optimistic about the future of additive technology.

A couple of posts back I positioned myself on middle ground, with a good view. That has brought with it an accusation of sitting on the proverbial fence and acquiring splinters in uncomfortable places. In view of this coming close on the heels of a very exciting meeting I had recently, I am going to vocalise some of my optimism and go on the record with a couple of predictions of my own.

I am not at liberty to disclose any of the contents of my meeting — yet — suffice to say, it prompted this post.

IMHO:

The current additive technology field will diversify, it's already started and it will become much more defined. It will go in two directions with two clearly identified markets — prototyping (3DP) and production (AM). I am not quite so bold as to put a precise date on this, but within the next 5 years. Sooner if Stratasys/HP make good on their promises and the price of concept modellers goes into freefall with the other 3DP vendors scrabbling to compete with RapMan, Solido and Makerbot and regain some of the market share that they will surely lose in the short term.

Things are going to change, and they are going to change in a big way, for AM; and the changes are going to come from left of field. Currently AM activities are viewed as a fringe activity, a process for OEM's with deep pockets or artistic types to 'play' with. As of today, this is a misguided perception, with a host of real applications that one can point to and say, "No, the capabilities of AM technologies are real and they make a real difference." The one that stands out for me is the use of titanium human implants built using the DMLS process from EOS, but there are many more. The problem is, there is no one application that makes enough people sit up and take notice. The applications do not make a 'big enough' difference. Volumes and infrastructure are key limitations.

However, this WILL be turned on its head in the mid-term. I am absolutely, positively convinced of it. Around the year 2013 I fully expect to point people back to this post and say I believed!

All optimistic and cynical comments welcome ....

Solido Heading Under the $5000 Benchmark

The thing with this 3D printing industry (and probably many others) is that developments take place incrementally, and therefore movement seems slow! Then all of a sudden, lots of things happen close together, and everything seems to start moving much faster.

Following on from the Stratasys / HP announcement last week, the airwaves are buzzing with the news that Solido will be announcing a new price structure for its professional 3D printer, the SD300 Pro, which allegedly will be "significantly under $5000," and according to the rumour mill, could even go sub-$1000. The formal announcement is to be made next Monday at a press conference at SolidWorks World 2010, in Anaheim, CA, USA. Unfortunately, I had to send a negative RSVP (would have loved to have been there) but time and funding would not allow it.

Solido had hinted at this move at the end of last year at Euromold in Frankfurt, so it is not a complete shock, and the pricing of the consumables is not likely to change much, and will be where the company will be able to make some money. Particularly if the volume of sales on the machine increases following this announcement on Monday.

The Solido process is a pretty nifty one, based on the laminated object manufacturing (LOM) process, and frequently overlooked as a result. But the company has done a good job of increasing its profile in the last two years and with this well-timed event (whether by design or coincidence) will surely gain maximum exposure.

The Dust Settles on the Stratasys/HP Announcement

It's been a couple of days since Stratasys announced its definitive partnership with HP — enough time for dust to start to settle. The markets, the commentators and users of 3D printing technology went into overdrive in the 24 hours following the announcement, which was to be expected, and was probably a primary aim of Stratasys in making the announcement.

There are, of course, polar opposite and rather extreme schools of thought depending on who you talk/listen to. On the one hand you have the enthusiastic "sea change" posse, who categorically see this as the moment that the 3D printing market will change forever. They are battling the more reserved and cynical crew that view this announcement as a publicity stunt that has seen Stratasys stock soar by an unprecedented 44% following a dismal financial year in 2009.

I have to say it, I love being a part of this industry. I really do. It excites me and it frustrates me in equal measure. The thing I have learned though is not to jump too far either way when something big happens, and make no mistake, however this Stratasys deal plays out, it is big!

There is something to be said for the middle ground, okay I possibly sound like the Clover ad, but it is the place where one can see most clearly — in all directions. At this point in time I can see that the announcement has brought Stratasys (in particular) and 3D printing (in general) centre stage. That is a great thing in itself. However, as I mentioned in my previous post, we have to wait for some months for the machines to hit the market when the real impact can start to be measured.

Also, while it is the lower end range of Stratasys machines that HP will be selling (Dimension/uprint), there is still no real visibility on the spec of the machines that HP will be selling. Personally, I don't think this is too much of an issue. The FDM process is an established and reliable one that will turn the heads of people that are being introduced to 3DP for the first time. The key to unlocking greater awareness is HP's ability to take sales & distribution much deeper than Stratasys, or any of the other 3DP vendors for that matter, into untapped markets. This is what excites me about this announcement.

Taking stock, I am of the opinion that the announcement is one amongst many factors that are driving the 3DP sector forward. Another vital element of this, as I have expounded for a while, are low cost 3D printers. An analogy that works here is by considering how the 3DP market could operate in much the same way as the housing market. Few first time buyers will (or can afford) to buy a £1,000,000 house with everything that they think they want or need. They get onto the property ladder by starting small (and less expensive). Once they have made the initial investment, they then upgrade at a later date. Recent history shows that without first time buyers, the housing market stalls. This is how I see 3DP. It needs lots and lots of first time buyers, starting small to get a full understanding of the capabilities and potential of the technology. Once that understanding is in place they can take stock and upgrade in line with their requirements — the whole industry benefits! The higher general awareness will also mean that new applications will invariably follow, and I'm going to say it again, and that killer app could emerge!

The desire by many commentators for 3D printing / Additive Manufacturing to be THE dominant force in the way we make things sometimes works against their good intentions. I hope that by raising awareness and uptake of 3DP it will become ONE of the dominant forces and fulfill its great potential that largely remains untapped.

Stratasys is Playing with the Big Boys

News has just reached me, via press release, that Stratasys has fully engaged with HP, with the two companies signing a definitive agreement whereby Stratasys is going to develop and manufacture an HP-branded line of 3D printers based on Stratasys’ patented Fused Deposition Modeling (FDM) technology. The plan is for HP to begin a phased rollout of the 3D printers in the mechanical design (MCAD) market in selected countries later this year, with the right to extend distribution globally.

During the recent past (probably going back to mid-2008) I have had numerous conversations that have been geared around how and when 2D printing and 3D printing companies would find some synergy. While some more cynical individuals have intimated that there were no real grounds to draw parallels and assume that 3D printing could ever follow the growth curve of 2D printing, I have believed for a while that it was only a matter of time before the two hooked up in one form or another. I have to be honest though, I didn't think it would be these two!

Scott Crump, Stratasys CEO and Chairman, now "believe[s that] the time is right for 3D printing to become mainstream.”

Ok, well, many people have been saying that for years, and beaten down with cries of "hype - it will never happen." The thing here is that he is backing this comment up with support from a huge, globally recognised brand. It could be a real turning point.

My only reservation about this announcement is the application area. MCAD is a good place to start, and could bring 3D printing centre stage in industrial circles (which is, I think, the aim) but it won't necessarily take 3D printing mainstream.

Another key enabler, as Crump mentions, is HP's "sales and distribution capabilities", something that the 3D printer vendors have struggled with.

All in all, an extremely interesting development, but as ever, we have to wait and watch to see if it fulfills its potential. And, realistically, it is going to be at least a year before there will be any real signs of how it's going.

Could THIS be the Killer App for 3DP?

A fascinating post on the REPLICATOR blog [//replicatorinc.com/blog/] by Joseph Flaherty [3D Printing and beyond] highlights how Disney is 3D Printing (3DP) some of its most beloved characters using the Zcorp colour technology. The availability of printing single models in multi-colour is key to this application, and it is taking longer for the other vendors to catch up with this concept than I originally anticipated when I first saw ZCorp's colour offerings.

Flaherty also suggests the possibility that Disney could be key a player in "broadening the awareness of 3D printing tech via the coming revamp of their stores and theme parks." After all — who doesn't recognize the Disney brand? Love it or otherwise, most of us have been captivated by at least one of the Disney blockbusters, personally or via our children/grandchildren and Disney has a massive market share in its field, not to mention hundreds of potential outlets.

Debate about how to bring 3DP into the mainstream consciousness — both in terms of engineering/manufacturing and the consumer at large — has recently focused on finding a 'killer app', one that captures people's imagination and becomes a 'must have' item. Of course, many consumers are generally not necessarily concerned, or even interested, in 'how' something is made, but as Flaherty implies, if 3D printers were on site at the Disney theme parks and/or in the flagship stores then children and parents would be able to watch as their own, personalised models were created.

As with so many 3DP concepts over the years, this is speculation, but I intend to watch this one closely, I would love to see this happen!

What's in a Name?

I mentioned the RP-ML last week, and it really is seeing a huge volume of posts over recent days. If this continues one might even be able to label it a full-on revival of the forum that had been seriously waning.

Talking of labels, that is just what the latest debate on the forum is covering. Once again the topic is what terminology is universally acceptable for additive processes. The thread has been met with the inevitable howls of anguish from individuals on the list that have seen/heard this discussion hundreds of times before. I did respond to the initial post posing the question as I am strongly of the opinion that this is an important issue, regardless of how many times it comes around and how long it takes to get a unanimous verdict. However, my post seems to have got lost in the ether — it may turn up, it may not — but having my own 'ether' space I have therefore decided not to waste the time spent writing it and post it here.

Under the thread title: Re: [rp-ml] milling=am?, it went as follows:

It's interesting, and inevitable, that this subject raises its head again. It will rumble on for some time yet — probably years rather than weeks or months. It's the nature of an emerging industry, and that is what we are all a part of.

Lino was absolutely right, a thread ran on the RP-ML at approximately the same time last year, titled: [rp-ml] International Terminology Standards. The thread was started by Terry Wohlers, in preparation for an upcoming ASTM meeting to try to start to establish universally accepted standards.

There are so very many variables here that it is hard to condense it all into a concise overview, but I'll give it a go.

The term Rapid Prototyping is the one that is most recognised as a result of its longevity. The problem with it is that "prototyping" does not cover all of the applications of additive technology today, for casting (Rapid Casting), tooling (Rapid Tooling) and final production products (Rapid Manufacturing). Originally, it was used to differentiate additive prototyping from traditional forms of creating prototypes, but now it seems to incorporate any method of making prototypes very quickly. This is another reason why many of the 'additive die-hards' have back away from the term!

Furthermore, there is a school of thought that "Rapid" is not correct terminology — for any additive application — because the processes themselves are relatively slow compared with other traditional and established manufacturing processes such as milling/machining etc. The "Rapid" was originally used to convey faster product development times and speedier time-to-market overall.

The quest last year seemed to be for a universal umbrella term for the additive technologies, of which 3D printing emerged as a clear contender, along with Additive Manufacturing on the responses from the RP_ML membership. I believe I am correct in saying that the ASTM meeting resulted in the consensus of Additive Manufacturing. Personally, I think that the additive processes themselves have gone in two different directions, the higher spec machines capable of manufacturing production parts (Additive Manufacturing), and the lower spec machines for concept and functional models (3D Printing / Rapid Prototyping).

What is interesting in the latest thread is that it has been started based on a quest for classification of additive AND subtractive processes, with both being accepted as legitimate options.

I don't think it is about hierarchy, it is just about labelling, and therefore clarity. Personally, I believe it is important to debate and ultimately establish the terminology, as it is the lack of clarity that has contributed to the slow understanding and therefore uptake of the technologies themselves (along with other factors such as entry level price points and patents - as discussed last week).

It's just my opinion of course, and subsequent posts from others involved in the ASTM and the resulting committee suggest that the industry is much further down the road to universal acceptance than I had anticipated (which is a good thing). However, disseminating, distributing and implementing the committees decisions still needs more work. There is still much confusion out there — hence the repetitive threads.

Additive Manufacturing is, it seems, the final decision, and is being used as the catch-all phrase for additive processes, regardless of application (prototyping, casting, tooling, manufacturing etc). I can get on board with this, I certainly don't think it is wrong, I would say, however, that as of today, I am not 100% convinced. I still think the industry is going two ways and I don't necessarily think it is vital to keep the two together. I think that the additive manufacturing and the 3D Printing markets can develop, grow and flourish with different "labels". It might even make them stronger!?

3DP: What will the future be?

Having posted on the RP-ML (rapid prototyping - mailing list) fairly late yesterday evening in response to an extremely interesting thread (that got started as the result of a benign, but slightly distasteful offer by an RP-ML member to supply an stl file of the would-be Detroit bomber's face) I found myself unable to sleep in the early hours of this morning as I debated the future of 3D printing and additive manufacturing — with myself.

And, oh yes, I am more than aware of how sad that is!!!!

In my post, I stated that I no longer believed that we would one day see a 3D printer in every home — with people ordering any stl file they may wish from the internet, of any given consumer product or replacement part. This vision has been greatly expounded during the last decade by many excited individuals prophetically revealing the future of 3D printing, myself among them at one time. I had since arrived at a more balanced view that this was unlikely, because as much as it sounds like a good idea, the concept of millions of households trying to 'print' 3D products in polymers, metals or any other material was simply unrealistic. Most lay people struggle with getting Word and A4 paper to do what they want without wanting to throw the devices through a window, much less manipulate stl files and get the desired result from a 3D printer in the desired material(s).

However, my post also applauded the enlightened approach of spreading the word about 3D printing by putting the technology into the hands of students — not just those at university — but children as young as 5, as I mentioned in yesterday's post. It's already happening here in the UK. You may have picked up on the fact that I think this is a really great way of channelling young people towards the fields of design and engineering. However, the thing that was keeping me awake last night was the thought that if we keep doing it, and in a few generations time 3D printing (and other advanced technologies such as 3D CAD, rendering, 3D Scanning and simulation/VR etc) become common place in our schools, and children are happily familiar with them, why would they not be confident about having them at home as and when they acquire their own homes?

So, have I come full circle? Am I back to thinking that the potential for this technology is as big as I once believed, in terms of the target market being anyone and everyone, rather than the more tempered opinion of it being relevant to every company that is involved with developing new products?

Well, it was 2.30 am, and despite the passing of time I am not sure which way I'm going on this yet. In reality, I'll probably traverse a few more circles, maybe engage in some heated debates as there are strong feelings on both sides of this argument, but the answer is probably not going to emerge in my life time, I do like being a part of the history though!!

Incidentally, the RP-ML is a great forum — it can go quiet for months at a time, but when it kicks off, it really kicks off. There are many knowledgeable individuals on there, many from the earliest days of RP, some that believe it will solve all the world's problems and some so cynical I laugh out loud as I read their posts. I highly recommend it for anyone involved with, or interested in, any type of additive processes.

A New Decade — A New Outlook?

2010! A new year, a new decade — a very good time to reflect and to look ahead. I can't quite believe how fast the last year, indeed the last ten years have flown by. Probably a sign of my age, but let's not dwell on that.

Happy New Year to anyone reading this in the next week or so. I really do hope that the next twelve months will be as happy and as engaging as the previous 12. As I take stock, I am quite astounded that I have spent a whole 12 months now working for myself, and it has gone so much better than I could ever have imagined this time last year. I love it. Particularly the fact that I have been fortunate enough to work with some truly inspirational people, promoting companies and products that I genuinely believe in. All but one project that I worked on throughout 2009 was focused on the additive manufacturing (AM) / 3D Printing (3DP) industry, which is probably not that surprising really, but I am truly delighted to still be so involved in this fascinating and dynamic industry sector.

Keeping abreast of all of the news and updates is a little more challenging than it was before launching RPES, as the information no longer lands in my inbox, I have to actively search for it. That said, the breadth of my knowledge is still growing and as the result of signing a couple of NDAs with my clients I am also extending the depth of my knowledge, and it is compelling, to say the least.

I am not yet convinced that 2010 is going to be as easy as some commentators predict, I think there will still be a distinct cautious approach to business. However, overall AM & 3DP has fared quite well (comparatively speaking) and I do believe that these sectors will continue to move forward and grow this year.

One company in particular that I think will have a major impact on the uptake and therefore growth of the 3DP market is A1 Technologies. As I mentioned before, I am lucky enough to be working with a number of companies that I personally believe will make a big difference, and A1 Technologies epitomises this for me. The company supplies a range of quality but low-cost hardware for product development — specifically 3D printers, a 3D scanner and 3D interactive software (http://www.rap-man.com/index.asp). And when I say low-cost, I mean very easily affordable for ANY budget. And just to clarify, when I say quality, I mean extremely competitive with comparable products that cost up to 10x as much. This is the key to unlocking the potential of these technologies, providing high calibre products at a price that virtually any company is able to consider. The hard part is convincing people that it is for real and that the products themselves are not inferior just because they do have such a low price tag. Overcoming the skepticism is a major mission for me this year!

The other angle that A1 Technologies is approaching increased uptake from is that of education and getting the technologies into the hands of students — tomorrow's engineers — and not just those at university. By increasing awareness from primary school age upwards, the availability of these technologies will infiltrate the consciousness of a whole new generation of designers and engineers, engaging minds that may not have considered engineering as a career path. The pay-off from this approach will take some time to achieve, but there is no doubt that the pay-off for the product development industry and manufacturing in general, will be huge.

2010 is going to be a really interesting year and I am very much looking forward to it.