Additive technology

became more accessible.”

Goshen compares the adoption of 3D printing to that of the early adoption of personal computers. Computing, to Goshen, is a crosstechnology product. A 3D printer, on the other hand, is a combination of chemistry and embedded computing, and all of it has to work together.

“3D printing is a much more complex process to control versus electric circuits on boards. So, I think this is what is affecting how this technology’s been spread. While it’s easy to get a part, it’s less easy to tune the printer. And that’s a challenge.

“I think there are many desktop machines, but they are not practical because they get to the point where they print the part, but it’s not repeatable. It’s not dimensionally accurate. And it’s really not easy to use and it’s not reliable. And when you have this, and this we had in the last few years, then it contributes to the confusion and also to the frustration of users.

So, we need to get the technology into the stage where it’s reliable and repeatable and it’s really engineering grade. This is the journey. It’s different between desktop and engineering grade machines. We need to make sure that we have engineering grade machines in the hand of anyone that has a practical use to it. I think that’s what is happening right now.”

The additive technology is still quite fragmented with people grouping brands and systems together. One example is what MakerBot calls engineering grade desktop versions. Desktop 3D printers and engineering grade desktop 3D printers are similar in size. Maybe the cost is double the desktop one, but it offers features such as in-process tuning that is required to get these engineering grade machines accepted.

“In computing, I think that inprocess tuning was built in because its electronics. In 3D printing, it’s a combination of... I wouldn’t get into the details, but every engineer knows that taking a solid, liquefying it, and then getting it back to solid involves a micro-level accuracy and involves a complex system to make sure that you can control it and you can maintain the same results.

Three general categories

The range of 3D printing features and functions is wide. That fact is also contributing to the reluctance of some to invest in this technology. One category is the hobbyist market, or the maker market. This market was the origin of the desktop movement. “It’s a great market. I’m a user. But it’s a market where users have the skills in trying to get something to work and the willingness to participate in the result process. It means that I’m involved in the process of making, because I’m a maker. I enjoy that process of making it successful. But it’s not a professional use case,” notes Goshen.

The second category is education, which has different needs because of the use of technology for learning purposes. They use 3D printing to make learning more immersive. It ties into STEM education in many ways.

“The third category is what I call entry level engineering, which we are operating in, which is an accessible and affordable engineering grade machine. But it is still aimed at the individual engineer. It brings to the table a well-tuned, reliable engineering grade device that can be used for professional purposes to design and engineer parts.

“A subset of this category is the shared office 3D printer, which is a larger than an individual printer, often a floor model. That is a natural expansion of that individual printer,” says Goshen.

And then, on top of this, comes various levels of scalability in terms of materials and manufacturing focused printers. And then it becomes more specific. Then you move from the prototyping and small plastic production part to manufacturing. And this is another world by itself.

“All of this is using the same technology. But they’re not the same products. All of them use the same underlying technology, but classifying them together is probably not accurate and could contribute to the confusion that we already have in this fragmented industry,” notes Goshen.

Final thoughts

Goshen sees the industry shifting since it’s early days when people expected we’ll have a 3D printer at each house without thinking about the basics of what products are.

“A product needs to serve a specific purpose. There has been confusion between the technology and the applications and the product translation of that technology. Which is something common with hype cycles. We are now in the stage where we can take this technology into different applications.

“I think that’s the cost that you’re paying today. We can reduce the cost today if we just change the way we think about manufacturing in general,” he says.