3D Printing

2 0 2 1

Additive Manufacturing/

from Prototype to Production

ADOPTION

Funding for this report provided by

ASME helps the global engineering community develop solutions to real world challenges. Founded in 1880 as The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, ASME is a nonprofit professional organization that enables collaboration, knowledge sharing and skill development across all engineering disciplines, while promoting the vital role of the engineer in society. ASME codes and standards, publications, conferences, continuing education, and professional development programs provide a foundation for advancing technical knowledge and a safer world. ASME recently formed the International Society of Interdisciplinary Engineers (ISIE) LLC, a new for-profit subsidiary to house business ventures that will bring new and innovative products, services, and technologies to the engineering community.

Carbon® is a 3D printing technology company helping businesses to develop better products and bring them to market in less time. Carbon is a venture-backed company headquartered in Redwood City, CA. Carbon has customers in 17 countries and is continuing to expand globally.

COVER The Seeker, a NASA external free flying robotic inspector, is about the size of a loaf of bread. One 10 cm x 10 cm ‘face’ of the vehicle contains a plethora of instrumentation including an Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU), laser rangefinder (LRF), four sun sensors, two cameras, and a communication antenna along with four small rocket thrusters. The iterative nature of additive manufacturing paired with end-use level part quality, allowed NASA to undergo over 10 design iterations and produce a complex integrated component that required no post machining, and ultimately reduce their time to certification. Produced by The Technology House using the Carbon DLS™ process.

 

©2021 American Society of Manufacturing Engineers 

The last few years have seen significant growth of metal additive manufacturing for

production, particularly in the medical device and aerospace sectors. With so much focus on metal production,

polymer additive manufacturing has been growing with little attention. In 2020, an estimated 18,400 industrial polymer

machines were sold, representing 850% more systems than metal systems.i

Why is there such a gap in the number of metal and polymer systems sold? Current prices provide one clue. The

average selling price (ASP) of a metal system was $501,844 compared to a polymer system ASP of $54,350 in 2020.ii

The other point explaining the gap is the long history of polymer systems.

The first commercially installed polymer systems were at General

Motors and Baxter Healthcare in 1988. The technology, then

referred to as rapid prototyping, quickly took off for development.

Leading users included the automotive sector and those using

injection molding for production. The value of additive

manufacturing over other prototyping processes like milling and

injection molding was quickly demonstrated by cutting

development times and enabling iterative designs.

By 2000, many industry leaders claimed every injection molded part was prototyped with a polymer additive

manufacturing system, and patient-matched parts in the form of anatomic models and patterns were being used in

medical and dental sectors. To compare, the first metal additive manufacturing system was available in 1998, with a

system that produced fully dense parts not available until 2004.

Both polymer and metal additive manufacturing systems are used in nearly all general application areas including

prototyping for fit, form, and function; manufacturing tools such as jigs, fixtures, and patterns; and production at any

volume level. Polymer 3D printing is ubiquitous in prototyping, but still has tremendous growth potential in serial

 Digital Aerolus Aertos 130IR drone cover produced by Fast Radius using LOCTITE® 3D IND405 on the Carbon L1 3D printer

 

©2021 American Society of Manufacturing Engineers 2

production. While early frontier applications like

radioactivity sensors, electrical connectors,

running shoe midsoles, and more have

demonstrated the value, the perception remains

that production use is limited. What are the

challenges? Why isn’t there more polymer 3D

printing production?

To better understand the current state and test the

assumptions, ASME surveyed engineers involved

in the design or development of plastic parts or

products during the second quarter of 2021. The results showed a robust polymer 3D printing user community, with

sometimes surprising insights. Key findings include:

With so much focus on the use of metal additive manufacturing for production, it may surprise many to learn

that 40% of respondents indicate they use polymer additive manufacturing systems for production.

For development of polymer products, 3D printing/additive manufacturing is used more often than either

injection molding or milling, but not by all.

3D printing is still the most often used process for prototyping, but many are also using milling and injection

molding.

Those within the life sciences and industrial machinery sectors reported the highest levels of familiarity with

3D printing.

Both the reasons why 3D printing is used and isn’t used refer to time, cost, and accuracy which suggests the

overall challenge is understanding of additive manufacturing options and having the needed skillsets.

Nearly all agreed that their organization actively pursues new technology and processes for product

development.

Technology use is influenced by age and company size.

 The Resolution Medical Lattice Swab was developed and delivered in less than three weeks during the beginning of the COVID-19 crisis. The lattice was designed with Carbon's Design Engine software, and is printed using DLS technology on Carbon's M2 printer using KeySplint Soft Clear material.

 

©2021 American Society of Manufacturing Engineers 3

Adoption of Polymer Additive Manufacturing/3D Printing for Production

According to the Wohlers Report 2021, 31.5% of all

applications across all materials were for end-use

parts or production. While injection molding is still

the leading technology used for polymer part

production, 3D printing/additive manufacturing is

growing as a production method. For those

involved in product development and design, 40%

indicated they use additive manufacturing for

production. This number is both a little surprising

and encouraging.

Where is polymer production happening? Companies producing athletic equipment including hockey helmets, bicycle saddles, and

running shoes have used the unique lattice design capabilities of 3D printing to increase performance. Healthcare and aerospace have

also been leaders in production use of additive manufacturing.

Healthcare may have been one of the earliest examples with the first polymer

anatomical models produced in 1988. Since then, several patient-specific and

serialized applications have emerged including assistive devices. A 2021 survey of

the medical community indicated use across several categories: 66% use for

surgical planning including surgical guides, 48% for active devices often

incorporating electronics and sensors, 46% use for prosthetics and assistive

devices, 42% for patient-matched devices, and 39% for serialized devices.iii

For aerospace, many are aware of metal production examples like a fuel nozzle,

but the earliest production examples include airplane duct work. Today, polymer 3D

printing is being used for engine compartment nozzle bezels, functional knobs, seat

backs, and dashboard interfaces. Many are considering polymer additive

manufacturing for drones, satellites, and more. NASA is also looking to 3D printing

polymers to reduce spare parts and costs. For the International Space Station, they

have produced a fixture to hold an airflow monitor, sensor cover for radiation

Processes Used for Polymer Production 

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

40%

53%

84%

Injection Molding Milling 3D Printing / Additive Manufacturing

Vitamix uses additive manufacturing to produce a specialized nozzle used for rinsing commercial blenders. Compared to injection-molded nozzles, they use 30% less material and combine six separate parts into one, reducing overall cost per nozzle by 33%. Produced with the Carbon DLS process.

 

©2021 American Society of Manufacturing Engineers 4

monitors, and a tow hitch to link two satellites. A 2021 survey of the aerospace community showed that 30% are using polymer 3D

printing for production, which is not far behind the 46% using metals.iv

Additional findings from the polymer additive manufacturing/3D printing adoption survey include:

Respondents in firms with under 100 employees are more likely to use 3D printing for production (61%) than respondents in

firms with 100+ employees (45%).

Larger firms (100+ employees) are more likely to use injection molding (75%) than firms with fewer than 100 employees (49%).

Respondents under 45 years of age are more likely to use 3D printing for production (57%) than respondents 45 years of age

or older (37%). Adoption of Polymer Additive Manufacturing/3D Printing for Manufacturing Tools

Manufacturing tools include jigs, fixtures, molds, and patterns for

molding or casting. Overall, manufacturing tools represent

approximately 14.4% of applications.v Investment casting patterns

were one of the earliest applications, creating polymer patterns that

were mostly hollow, allowing the patterns to be burned out without

cracking the surrounding shell. Today, 3D printing is used for short run

injection molds, patterns for molding, assembly tools, and more.

While milling remains the most often used technology for manufacturing tools, often

for production injection molds, the survey indicated that 3D printing is now the

second most common process. The ASME 2021 aerospace additive

manufacturing/3D printing community survey showed that 47% produce jigs and

fixtures and 44% produce patterns and molds using polymer 3D printing.

Additional findings for use of polymer additive manufacturing/3D printing for

manufacturing tools were:

3D printing for manufacturing tools varies by geography, from 56% outside the

US (low base) to 76% in the Southeastern US.

Process Used for Manufacturing Tools 

0% 20% 40% 60%

51%

66%

40%

Injection Molding Milling 3D Printing / Additive Manufacturing

This production-line bottle gripper for Colgate-Palmolive uses an elastomeric lattice structure to accommodate different sized bottles. Developed and produced by Fast Radius using Carbon DLS technology and Carbon's EPU 41 material.

 

©2021 American Society of Manufacturing Engineers 5

Those with less than 5 years’ experience are half as likely to use injection molding for manufacturing tools compared to those

with 5+ years’ experience (16% vs. 33%).

Those in smaller firms (under 100 employees) are about half as likely to use injection molding than those in firms with 100+

employees (18% vs. 39%). Adoption of Polymer Additive Manufacturing/3D Printing for Development

With a technology that began with the label of rapid

prototyping, there is no surprise that polymer 3D printing

is the most often used technology for development. The

value of quick design changes enabling several

iterations in a short time frame allows engineers and

designers to quickly test ideas. Nearly 90% of survey

respondents indicated they use additive manufacturing

in the development cycle with half also using milling and

injection molding.

Prototyping falls into three major categories: fit, form,

and function. While 3D printing remains the most often

used for all three categories, injection molding and

milling use increases for final functional prototyping. This

demonstrates that additive manufacturing is often used

with other technologies. For development, a common

process is to develop all prototypes with 3D printing and

produce a final prototype with the production technology

that will be used. This is reflected with the higher

numbers for injection molding (56%) and milling (71%).

Additional findings for use of polymer additive

manufacturing/3D printing for development were:

Processes Used for Development 

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

88%

51%

51%

Injection Molding Milling 3D Printing / Additive Manufacturing

Processes Used for Development 

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

Fit prototyping

Form prototyping

Functional prototyping

77%

83%

81%

48%

46%

71%

15%

22%

56%

Injection Molding Milling 3D Printing / Additive Manufacturing

 

©2021 American Society of Manufacturing Engineers 6

Fit prototyping

Those with less than 5 years’ experience are slightly less likely to use 3D

printing for fit prototyping (85%) than those with 5+ years’ experience (94%).

Form prototyping

Respondents 45+ years old are slightly less likely to use 3D printing for form

prototyping (89%) compared to those under 45 years of age (96%).

Firms with 100+ employees are twice as likely to use milling for form

prototyping (36%) as those in firms with less than 100 employees (17%).

Functional prototyping

Geographically, use of 3D Printing for Functional Prototyping varies by region – from 78% in the Western US to 91% in the

Southeastern US, and outside the US 93%. What’s Next for Polymer Additive Manufacturing/3D Printing

As the community strives to advance and even accelerate the adoption of additive manufacturing, the survey asked open-ended

questions on why polymer 3D printing is or isn’t used to understand both drivers and challenges users face. Not surprising that time,

cost, and accuracy were mentioned. What was surprising was that these three were mentioned as both reasons for using and NOT

using 3D printing. This duplication suggests that an underlying

cause for not using the technology is a knowledge or skills gap.

This underlines the handful of responses specifically

mentioning experience and knowledge as a cause of non-use.

For those using polymer additive manufacturing, the top

reasons generally fell into three general areas: speed, flexibility

in timing and design, and cost efficiency. Top reasons for not

using the technology were material performance and inability to

3D print large pieces. All of these are consistent with recent

trends and what is expected next including:

 rapid product manufacturing GmbH (rpm), a specialty automotive supplier, has identified 3D printing as a cost-effective process for production runs of 500-2,000 parts. This hinge assembly was produced by rpm using Carbon EPX 82 material, which is IMDS listed and approved for end-use automotive parts.

 The Specialized S-Works Power Saddle with Mirror uses an elastomeric lattice structure to improve performance and rider comfort and was designed using a database of cyclist body geometry. A 3D-printed texture on the saddle surface improves grip and gives the saddle a distinctive aesthetic. Developed in collaboration with Carbon using Design Engine software and Carbon's EPU 41 material.

 

©2021 American Society of Manufacturing Engineers 7

● Materials Development: The additive manufacturing/3D printing community will see more development of materials designed for

performance to match or even extend properties of traditional manufacturing materials.

● Software: With complex design capabilities and a need to be as efficient as possible, the community has already seen

tremendous growth in the number of software applications specific to additive manufacturing to optimize design, build prep,

planning, and materials tracing. Use of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning are enabling software to make building

complex designs like lattice structures to meet specific mechanical properties easier, as well as increasing the reliability of

modeling and simulation for repeatable additive manufacturing production.

● Integration with Other Technologies: Additive manufacturing has been a

natural match with 3D scanning and medical imaging for design as well as

patterns for casting. From the survey responses, it’s also clear that 3D printing

works well with injection molding and milling in the development process. As

experience increases, more technologies will be used with additive

manufacturing as an integral piece rather than a standalone technology.

● Larger Build Envelopes: Large scale prints have already been demonstrated

through research efforts like those at Oak Ridge National Laboratory with

limited materials and one additive manufacturing process. The community will

see the build envelopes of other processes with a wider range of materials

options increase.

● Speed: Not only will machines become more efficient, but the combination of software, monitoring tools, and AI will make the

overall process faster and more repeatable, opening the door to more production applications.

● Smart Supply Chains: Combining all of these with improvements in digital engineering, security, and remote monitoring, entire

supply chains will become smarter. Complex distributed

manufacturing networks will reach nearly all locations on earth and

even a few off planet.

The good news is that the additive manufacturing/3D printing

community is diverse and forward looking. The adoption environment is

strong in nearly every industry sector. When asked if their company

actively pursues new technology and processes, more than 90%

agreed, with just over half agreeing strongly. The big question is….

which new 3D printing technology, material, software, or more will be adopted next?

My company actively pursues new technology & processes.

Agree strongly51%Agree somewhat

41%

Disagree somewhat7%

Disagree strongly2%

 Production-grade 3D printing made it possible to rapidly develop and produce these radioactivity sensor components used in the development of radiopharmaceuticals. Produced by Técnicas Radio Fisicas in collaboration with Dynamical 3D using Carbon DLS technology and Carbon EPX 82 material. 

©2021 American Society of Manufacturing Engineers

_____________________________ i Wohlers Report 2021 ii Wohlers report 2021 iii ASME Medical AM/3DP Survey 2021 iv ASME Aerospace AM/3DP Survey 2021 v Wohlers Report 2021

APPENDIX

Featured Case Studies • NASA Seeker Robot (cover) • Digital Aerolus Aertos 130IR drone cover • Resolution Medical Swabs • Vitamix Nozzle • Colgate Bottle Gripper • Automotive Film Hinge • Specialized S-Works Power Saddle • Radioactivity Sensor Components

Survey Respondent Profile

• 377 respondents • Practicing engineer • Involvement in product design or development of

fabricated plastic parts/products

Additional Resources

• ASME • Carbon • Upcoming & On-Demand AM Webinars • AM Events • AM Video Gallery • ASME AM YouTube Playlist • Medical Additive Manufacturing/3D Printing Year in Review 2019-20 • Process Verification & Validation for Medical Devices Using Additive Manufacturing • 3D Printing of Medical Devices at the Point of Care: Regulatory Concept Framework Series • Medical 3D Printing Applications Infographic • 3D Bioprinting • Wearables, Embedded, Bioprinted Sensors • Video: Designing Medical Devices with Additive Manufacturing • Medical Additive Manufacturing/3D Printing Publications • Journal of Medical Devices Special Issue: Three-Dimensional Printing of Medical Device

Sectors

Industrial22%

Life Sciences21%

Consulting, Education & Other

20%Aerospace/Military

9%

Consumer Goods7%

AM/3DP Suppliers6%

Automotive/Transportatio5%

Building/Construction5%

Energy/Environment3% Other Government

2%

asme.org