If you use 3D printing, which style of 3D printer do you use?
respectively. About one-quarter (25.35%) used polymer powder bed technology. 18% use polyjet, and 18% use laser sintering. Finally, 17% use injection molding. For the mid-level prototype, again CNC was the favored choice at 55.71%. Stereolithography and fused deposition modeling came in at 43% and 30% respectively. Injection molding came in at 22.86%. For the final prototype, CNC machining received 71% of the replies. At this stage, though, injection molding comes in at a distant second of 37.66%. Stereolithography and extrusion came in at 28.99% and 21.74% respectively. What type of 3D printer? In general, there are three classes of 3D printing machines: professional units that typically cost more than $25,000; professional desktop units priced between $25,000 and $5,000; and entry-level desktop units that are priced at $5,000 or less. The majority of the survey respondents use a professional 3D printing machine when they use a 3D printer. But the next most used printer, said 61.76%, is the entry-level type, especially for initial design and prototyping tasks. About one-fifth (20.59%) continue to use entry-level 3D printers for second and third stage prototyping. Whether an entry-level 3D printer satisfies prototyping needs, though, the answers were 52.94% saying yes, 47.06% saying no. The respondents were given a chance to write in the features they would most like to see from entry-level 3D printers. Better quality, more material options, larger build size and higher resolution were the most often requested, with materials and size leading those choices. Based on their experience with entry-level 3D printers, 43.28% would consider buying a higher priced professional 3D printer. 32.84% would not. The reasons range from no budget
20.6% 41.2%
Entry level version (less than $5000 versions) Professional desktop version (more than $5000 version but less than $25,000)
38.2%
or no need to a need for a variety of 3D printing processes and cost. Outsourcing versus in-house 3D printers were initially created out of frustration—it took weeks to get a prototype from a service bureau. Today, though, outsourcing is still a popular way to get prototypes—64.18% of respondents outsource the prototype soon after the CAD design. 38.81% outsource when they are closer to a final product design, and 37.31% outsource after they have done a few rough prototypes in house. Service bureaus have improved on prototype deliver time, which seems to satisfy engineers. Most respondents need their prototype in about 3 to 7 days (55.22%). Less than a quarter (22.39%) need a prototype in two days. 3D printing is also viewed as helping to lower the cost of prototypes, especially when compared to outsourcing. However, according to our respondents, cost is not a huge issue. 40.30% said cost somewhat affects their choice. 31.34% said it affects a lot, and 28.36% said not much at all. Materials When it comes to the material respondents want for their prototypes, www.makepartsfast.com
Lead feature for MPF 12-15_Vs3.LL.MD.indd 113
Professional 3D printing unit (more than $25,000 versions)
59.70% want a material that can handle testing and fit. Almost 20% want the exact material needed for the final design. Materials desired include carbon fiber, stainless steels of the 303/304 and 174 variety, low carbon steel, and higher resolution and high temperature materials. Based on these results, one might be tempted to question the future viability of the 3D printing/additive manufacturing industry. First, these results cover only a small segment of the 3D printing population, and the questions did not address the unique capabilties of this industry, such as cost-effectively making geometrically complex parts. While these results are interesting, they are only part of the bigger picture. n MPF *Survey was conducted by email over the Design World subscription list.
WHAT DO YOU THINK? Connect and discuss this and other engineering design issues with thousands of professionals online
December 2015
DESIGN WORLD
113
12/2/15 4:15 PM