Posted on

3DPOD Episode 29: Phil Reeves, 3D Printing Consultant

Phil Reeves is a very knowledgeable 3D printing consultant with strong opinions. He’s spent over 25 years working in additive manufacturing and, in that time, has conducted many significant, groundbreaking projects in the space. Reeves has done work on data, characterizing new 3D printing materials, industrializing new technologies, and bringing new tech to market. He helps companies understand the cost of additive and implement it in a coherent way. Previously, Reeves has worked for customers like BP, Caterpillar, IBM, Airbus, Boeing, Bombardier, GE Aviation, Bentley, BMW, Jaguar Landrover, Redbull Technology, Nike and LVMH.

We enjoyed talking to Reeves and he gave us well thought through crisp answers to our questions. Max and I discussed COVID, 3D printing implementation, the limitations of the technology, comparing photopolymers with thermoplastics, and a new exciting drop-on-demand/mix-on-demand 3D printing technology. We’ve been really lucky to have such really good guests so far and this one was another one that we hope you can enjoy as well!

Previously we spoke to HP’s Ramon Pastor & Terry Wohlers, had a discussion about decentralized manufacturing, got to talk to Materialise CEO Fried Vancraen, EOS CEO Marie Langer, Ty Pollak from Open Additive, and have had conversations about the ethics of 3D printing, 3D printing for COVID, and about handheld scanning.

Other episodes included the following:

The post 3DPOD Episode 29: Phil Reeves, 3D Printing Consultant appeared first on 3DPrint.com | The Voice of 3D Printing / Additive Manufacturing.

Posted on

The Real Cost of 3D Printing

After reading the now famous article about a ventilator valve that can be 3D printed for $1, compared to the traditionally-manufactured valve costing $11,000, I realized that the way 3D printing costs are calculated is still vastly oversimplified, which leads to reliance on two incomplete cost models. The most common says that unlike traditional manufacturing there are never economies of scale and that the cost per part stays constant, whether a single part or 100s of parts are printed. Another model is that 3D printing costs slightly decrease with the number of units as more parts are added to the build bed, and the average build time per part decreases.

Figure 1: Common models of 3D printing costs

Both of the above models provide a cost approximation and are often used by service bureaus, but they both have the same flaw: They don’t take the machine utilization into account.

For 3D printing, there are five main cost contributors:

  • Material cost: Material usage for the part, support material, and other material waste
  • Machine depreciation: Portion of the machine price attributed to a part due to the time the machine is being used to build the part
  • Consumable costs: The cost of consumables used for the build (build trays, argon gas, filters, printhead, etc.)
  • Labor costs: Personnel cost involved in the build (build file preparation, machine preparation, build monitoring, machine clean-up, and support removal)
  • Risk: Risk of failure involved in building this part. Usually comes in two different types, time risk – the longer the print, the higher the risk of failure, and geometry risk – certain geometries might have higher risk of failure for certain technology.

In this article we will take a deeper look at the machine depreciation cost and how machine utilization influences it.

Let’s start with a basic equation that is often forgotten or ignored but is essential to understanding the cost of 3D printed parts.

Figure 2: Machine Depreciation Calculations

The machine utilization is the percentage of the time during the year where the machine is producing parts. Because the utilization is in the denominator of the equation above, there is an inverse relationship between part cost and machine utilization. In other words, the part cost goes down as the machine utilization goes up.

Real machine utilization is very difficult to guess without having robust data available, so a lot of companies will use a fixed number for utilization. They often choose a number between 60% and 70%… a number that is often overly-optimistic.

Other companies with access to historical data will estimate machine utilization based on past figures. Many factors can influence the utilization figure, such as maintenance, down time, and build cleaning, but based on our experience the main contributors are staff availability to change builds and having enough parts to produce.

Staff availability is often forgotten because additive manufacturing is seen as an unmanned manufacturing process. While this is mostly true, staffing is still required for preparing and cleaning the machine between builds as well as monitoring if the build has failed. If a build finishes in the middle of the night with no staff available, a machine will sit idle, lowering utilization until the morning when a technician can prepare the machine for a new build.

To solve this, companies tend to schedule longer builds to complete outside of working hours. Scheduling builds in this way reduces the time a machine sits idle between builds.

Figure 3: Unoptimized build planning 62% utilization

Figure 4: Optimized build planning 79% utilization

We have seen companies updating to a faster machine expecting cost savings due to better part throughput, only for the machine sit idle because there are not enough parts to keep it busy. If the machine can produce parts twice as fast but the number of parts produced per year is the same, then the machine depreciation cost per part stays the same.

Taking this into account, it is important to match the machine throughput to the part demand as closely as possible:

Figure 5: Production equipment matched with part demand

These two points show that 3D printing is similar to traditional production methods, where it is necessary to get throughput, part demand, and production planning right in order to minimize part manufacturing cost.

When taking into account machine utilization and how most users of additive manufacturing adopt the technology, we come up with the model below, which takes into account everything we discussed in this article and shows how the per part cost of 3D printing changes based on the number of parts manufactured and the number of machines needed to produce them:

Figure 6: Realistic utilization-based cost per part

Based on the graph above we see that costs can be cut to a minimum if we can match the parts demand with the machine capacity. At Blueprint, when we create a ROI model for our clients, we often group many parts together to improve the machine utilization. Sometimes we will change the material of some parts or redesign a part so it can fit in a smaller build chamber. Knowing this, what should you do?

If you are looking into acquiring some production equipment, ask for real build time figures based on your parts, then plan what a typical week of builds will look like. This will help you to create a utilization-based ROI tailored to your specific conditions.

Once the machine is up and running, monitor its utilization. If it is low (below 60%,) identify the cause. Can you schedule builds better? If you don’t have enough demands for parts, invest into identifying and transitioning parts to additive; that investment will end up saving you money in the long run.

Also look at changing the design of your parts to lower build times. Getting training on design for additive manufacturing will lead to less material utilization and shorter build time which will improve your overall parts economics.

Regardless of the design changes needed, don’t be scared by the initial cost per part based on cost calculations on a limited number of parts. Keep in mind that any extra part you manage to identify and transition to additive manufacturing will lead to a part cost reduction on all your 3D printed parts. Keep monitoring your use of additive manufacturing and observe the costs are shrinking the more you use it and you are getting more expertise. Actively managing your machine utilization and investing in upskilling your workforce will be the keys to achieving the favorable economics of additive manufacturing.

Loïc LeMerlus

Loic leads the development of Blueprint’s algorithms that drive our proprietary analysis tools. He also works closely with many of our clients to analyze complex data and understand the economic impact that 3D printing and additive manufacturing could have on their businesses. In other words, he puts the numbers behind the hype. Loic has over 9 years leading projects to quantify the impact of the technology, working with users and vendors across the additive manufacturing industry.

Blueprint is an additive manufacturing consultancy, bringing together more than 16 years of knowledge and experience across the industry. As the world’s leading additive manufacturing consultancy, Blueprint regularly assists future-ready companies achieve additive success. Based in Eden Prairie, Minn., and Milford, U.K, the firm offers a unique, technology-agnostic perspective on all things additive, from strategic advice to design optimization services. More information is available online at www.additiveblueprint.com.

If you want to discuss this article or your additive manufacturing strategy, the team at Blueprint is here to help. Let’s talk.

The post The Real Cost of 3D Printing appeared first on 3DPrint.com | The Voice of 3D Printing / Additive Manufacturing.

Posted on

3D Printing is Additive to Supply Chain Agility

The world’s manufacturers have been stretching supply chains out, becoming ever-more complex, for years now. While in eras of relatively free flow of trade, this has let countries and regions specialize in specific manufacturing types that play into their competitive advantages, the consequence is increased risk and decreased agility. This is being brutally borne out today in light of the global COVID-19 pandemic, but the problem was becoming apparent even before that, particularly with the rise of Brexit and nationalistic manufacturing policies.

Additive manufacturing, commonly known as 3D printing, approaches can help reduce risk and restore agility when supported by AI-driven insights. By digitizing traditional manufacturing, introducing dual manufacturing approaches, and building out additive as a platform, manufacturing leaders can deliver the scale and efficiency benefits of global supply chains without being one black swan event away from disaster.

Framing the problem

The global COVID-19 pandemic has dramatically altered customer demand, created workforce challenges, and disrupted global supply chains in ways that few expected. For many business leaders, this pandemic has exposed risks in their global supply chains that they had not contemplated, and indeed, that supply chain organizations were never built to handle. It is time for business leaders to start looking at the global-level risks to their supply chains and manufacturing operations.

Disruptions happen in supply chains all the time. Unfortunately, they’re most often solved at the tactical level rather than the strategic level: Sudden imposition of tariffs? Profits are slightly down next quarter. Air travel cut in Europe because of a volcanic eruption? A solvable logistics problem. Escalating conflicts in a region? A few supply chain analysts must work a few late nights to find a second source.

The risks to global supply chains have been getting more obvious for years, and companies have had to react to events like Brexit and the sudden imposition of tariffs in trade wars, but this global pandemic has removed all doubt of the need to address these risks at the strategic level.

Lots of talk, but nothing new or actionable

In the last month, there has been growing interest in global supply chain risk, with articles in Harvard Business Review and the MIT Sloan Management Review publishing notable examples. The global problem is recognized.

Many have focused on how artificial intelligence, analytics, and even blockchain technologies can help mitigate these urgent risks. Indeed, AI and analytics solutions can help you understand volumes, production variability, escalating costs, or how much of your bill of materials is dependent on a commodity price. You can and should use these tools to optimize your supply chain, but they are just that: optimization tools; they break down when you uncover problems that require a new framing or need new and novel solutions.

Indeed, we’re uncovering a new problem: Over the last three decades, the relative free flow of trade has meant that manufacturing has concentrated in countries with comparative advantage in manufacturing that type of commodity. (One might expect that manufacturing in the west has declined in absolute terms with the rise of China; it hasn’t.) This means that structurally, how the world manufactures are highly-coupled to geography and is built on a model that targets efficiency at very specific production volumes. Manufacturers are unprepared to respond to global-scale threats (and opportunities) because of this strong coupling to geography and volume.

The need for a solution to macro-level risks

Supply chain analysts have historically been very good at understanding and addressing the micro-level risks associated with supply chains: Stock-outs, risk of a single supplier dropping out, commodity price increases… Consequently, the supply chain management industry has developed a suite of tools to address this: safety stock, dual sourcing, price guarantees, commodity hedges, competitive bidding, etc.

What the global disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic show us is that supply chain professionals have not been very great at understanding and assessing the macro-level risks associated with their manufacturing supply chains. What happens when disruption happens at country-, regional-, or global-scale? Clearly business leaders need to start contemplating these questions.

A better way to frame the problem

Start by acknowledging that most manufacturing is difficult to move once set up, so planners must predict the future and contemplate this risk over the life of a production line. Unfortunately, almost every macro-level risk to production is related to geography: Tariffs, labor disruptions, commodity unavailability, logistics breakdown. How do you tell if risk is geographic? Ask the question: If we could instantly move our production to somewhere else in the world, would this problem be solved? If the answer is yes, then the risk relates to geography.

Second, an often-overlooked element of risk is global demand. We’ve seen in the past several months that demand can be highly variable and spike (in the case of toilet paper) or drop (in the case of airplanes) dramatically in response to a crisis. It is not just in times of crisis that demand is variable; most product companies will experience a spike of demand upon release, and a tapering-off as a product matures, with consequences for production economies.

Finally, we define companies’ ability to respond to changes in geographic or demand risk as “agility.” In a supply chain context, this is the speed with which manufacturers can shift production between geographies and the ability to quickly adjust production within a wide range of volumes. The tools that enable manufacturing agility often help address both demand and geographic risk, so we’ll conceptualize those in a single bucket.

Conceptually, you can think of this framework as being summarized in a simple equation:

Thinking of risk in this way, we can start to understand what the risks are, what flexibility is needed to address this risk, and what questions we should be asking within our businesses and to our suppliers:

Risk

Flexibility needed

Questions to ask?

Geographic risk – Risks of disruptions to supply chain based on national, regional, or global factors.

Risks could include disruptions caused by labor market dynamics, tariffs, war, pandemics, natural disasters, factory input shortages, political factors.

Geographic flexibility – The ability to move or shift production from one geography to another.

Where are my suppliers?

Where are my second- and third-tier suppliers?

What borders do my supply chains cross?

Do I manufacture in more than one geography?

What are the economic factors that cause us to produce where we do?

Demand risk – Risks of radical increases or decreases in demand, either regionally or globally.

Demand shifts could be localized or global and be caused by fiscal and economic policy, market competitive forces, economic pressures, pandemics, natural disasters, conflicts

Volume flexibility – The ability to economically produce goods across a wide range of volumes.

What is the event that could happen that will reduce demand the most?

How quickly can we scale-down production?

What fixed costs are we incurring, regardless of demand?

What event could cause the greatest spike in demand? Could that demand spike be regional?

How quickly can we scale up production?

Given our production capacity, what is the ceiling of production before more investment is needed?

The conclusion from this framework is simple: If business leaders in manufacturing reduce their dependence on geography, create manufacturing infrastructure that is less dependent on specific levels of production, and increase their ability to respond quickly, they will reduce their manufacturing risk, be ready to respond to the next crisis, and be more prepared to take advantage of future opportunities.

Enter 3D Printing

Additive manufacturing is not simply about purchasing some 3D printers. It is, in fact, a manufacturing process that can be applied strategically to address manufacturing risk particularly by optimizing the denominator in our equation – agility.

Some of the well-known advantages of 3D printing involve the ability to have similar economics at any scale, or to produce line-side at the point of need, but 3D printing is neither a blanket solution, nor the only way that you can reduce risk from geography and demand and increase agility. But it is a very good tool in some cases. Here are three cases you should consider as part of your manufacturing strategy.

Digitization of traditional manufacturing toolsets

Rather than replace traditional manufacturing with 3D printing, look to 3D printing to digitize the process. Many manufacturers use 3D printing for manufacturing jigs and fixtures, but applications can go beyond that: Specialized tooling, job aids, molds for direct production, and machine service parts are some of the applications we have seen at our clients.

The advantages to digitization of your manufacturing toolset are twofold: In an event where you need to switch production to another geography, the number of things that you need to pack up and ship somewhere is reduced. Further, if you have the need to scale, printing additional molds and toolsets can enable your operation to do that rapidly.

The more components of your traditional manufacturing process can be digitized, the more agile your manufacturing operation is and the less coupled to geography your business becomes.

Dual Manufacturing

Dual manufacturing can be summarized as follows: Designing and qualifying functionally equivalent parts for two manufacturing processes, one process that is efficient at volume, and one process that is efficient at unit-scale. The advantages of this come from the fact that many traditional manufacturing methods require capacity to be deployed in blocks and are most efficient when these blocks of capacity are fully utilized. An injection molding setup that can produce 20,000 pieces a day is most cost-efficient when running at full capacity. Producing 20,001 pieces a day requires an additional fixed investment and wasted capacity of an additional setup. Under a dual manufacturing concept, additive manufacturing is used to augment traditional production until traditional manufacturing can be deployed at scale.

This concept isn’t only applicable in a crisis and we see it as relevant at several points in the normal production cycle:

  • Early production – Low volume production of the first units for review, trade shows, product launches
  • Peak production – Augment traditional production to meet peak demand where excess traditional manufacturing capacity would otherwise need to be built
  • Aftermarket – Production at low volumes for servicing aftermarket needs.

An additional advantage is that, once you have contemplated dual manufacturing, you can make strategic decisions about how closely you want to couple your manufacturing to a given production scale. Shifting more production to additive, or similar technologies, can reduce your risk to fluctuations in demand.

Employing a dual manufacturing concept simultaneously reduces risk to both geography and demand. By designing for a platform that can be deployed anywhere in the world, you decrease your geographic exposure. Likewise, by adding a manufacturing method that is similarly efficient across any volume to your manufacturing toolset, you increase your ability to produce to fluctuating demand.

Additive as a platform

Businesses that think of additive manufacturing as a platform can decouple themselves from fixed investment in geography and volume commitments. Once a machine and material are selected, a lot of the complexity in manufacturing is abstracted by that machine; rather than requiring tooling and separate processes for every part, the tooling and processes become largely standardized. As the number of parts that are designed for your “additive platform” increases, your manufacturing capacity becomes exponentially more flexible; any platform-compliant additive machine can produce any part designed for the platform. Additionally, an additive platform can be deployed incrementally, or augmented by any one of hundreds of global service bureaus.

Summary

During times of uncertainty, the default playbook for many business leaders is to cut budgets and weather the storm; eventually the economy will turn around, demand will bounce back, trade disputes will be resolved, and we can get back to business.

In contrast, we recommend using this as an opportunity to reassess manufacturing supply chains. We think that forward-looking business leaders will make this choice.

By contemplating tools that reduce exposure to geographic and demand risk, as well as increase the ability of manufacturing to respond, business leaders can both be ready for the next macro-level disruption in their supply chain and be able to act on opportunities once we emerge from the global Covid-19 pandemic.

While we have shared some ways in which 3D printing can help you alter your supply chain risk equation by decreasing exposure to geographic and demand risk, and increasing your agility, the examples above are only some of the ways that one tool can assist a much larger initiative. Pivoting manufacturing away from risk and toward agility will require support at all levels, from the C-suite to the manufacturing floor: Executives must look at and evaluate risks they never considered before, designers must contemplate the design freedoms (and constraints) of new tools, product managers must consider the economics of production across a range of volumes and geographies, engineers must learn how to design for additive, and supply chain must learn to “source” parts in ways they never contemplated before.

For organizations willing to change how they think about manufacturing, this will be a multi-year journey, but the rewards are obvious: Lowered exposure to country, regional, and global macro-level supply chain risk and the ability to be more responsive to your customers and markets. And if you don’t do it, one of your competitors almost certainly will.

Aaron Hurd (Senior Manager, Blueprint)

Aaron is a Senior Manager with Blueprint, where he helps clients understand how additive manufacturing impacts their strategy, supply chain, engineering, and manufacturing processes. He holds an MBA from the University of Michigan and an engineering degree from Iowa State University.

Kunal Mehta (Managing Director of Blueprint)

Kunal is responsible for leading the global business of Blueprint and focuses on driving adoption of 3D printing across start-ups, Fortune 500s and governments. With his extensive experience deploying numerous emerging technologies, Kunal possesses a unique perspective in helping organizations achieve high performance by designing and executing additive strategies to reshape their manufacturing processes – consistently providing customers with a differentiated, more profitable, and more satisfying experience.

Blueprint is an additive manufacturing consultancy, bringing together more than 16 years of knowledge and experience across the industry. As the world’s leading additive manufacturing consultancy, Blueprint regularly assists future-ready companies achieve additive success. Based in Eden Prairie, Minn., and Milford, U.K, the firm offers a unique, technology-agnostic perspective on all things additive, from strategic advice to design optimization services. More information is available online at www.additiveblueprint.com.

If you want to discuss this article or your additive manufacturing strategy, the team at Blueprint is here to help. Let’s talk.

References:

https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NV.IND.MANF.CD?end=2018&locations=CN-US-EU-8S-IN-VN-MX-KR&start=1990

https://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/is-it-time-to-rethink-globalized-supply-chains/

https://hbr.org/2020/03/coronavirus-is-proving-that-we-need-more-resilient-supply-chains

The post 3D Printing is Additive to Supply Chain Agility appeared first on 3DPrint.com | The Voice of 3D Printing / Additive Manufacturing.

Posted on

Interview with Malika Khodja on Women in 3D Printing

Malika Khodja

Malika Khodja talks about the importance of women in 3D printing and what has to be done to promote women in 3D printing in Africa. Malika is a founder of Tiziri Advanced Manufacturing Technologies and a former CSIR researcher and PhD. Through Tiziri, Malika gives 3D printing training and offers consultancy in South Africa.

Can you tell us about your involvement in 3D printing and additive manufacturing?

I obtained my undergraduate and Master’s degrees in Mechanical Engineering at the University of Djillali Liabes, Faculty of Technology of Sidi Bel Abbes in Algeria. My background is aerostructures engineering and mechanics of materials, where my Ph.D. project involved numerical simulation and modeling of aircraft crack repair with composite patches. To validate the numerical simulations experimentally, I went to the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) in South Africa in 2015. I was introduced to 3D metal printing at the National Laser Centre (NLC) at the CSIR.

My 1st experience was to witness 3D printing of Ti-6Al-4V at the NLC while I was completing my research projects.

Additive Manufacturing is still new to some, and while you may have a few champions who push to incorporate it, the benefits may be somewhat unknown by your entire team. We naturally tend to reject or push away that which is unknown. Our goal with AM training is to help customers get through that early adoption phase efficiently. We are also here to help teach AM best practices and processes and improve employee engagement.

 What can you consider to be your greatest achievement or contribution in the 3D Printing sector so far?

Malika Khodja with 3D printed models

This is tough to choose just one. It’s a close race between launching a successful business in advanced manufacturing with a focus on 3D printing and receiving a special recognition award at the “African Advanced Manufacturing and Composites Show” in Port Elizabeth. I was recognized in the Category for “Scholarly Impact in Advanced Manufacturing”.

I believe I am contributing to the 3D printing sector with my involvement in R&D with universities and TiziriTech’s mandate as an engineering services firm offering to consult and training for additive manufacturing. Our training program was designed to assist organizations with the integration of AM into facilities, products, and design thinking. It was built to effectively reach both small and large groups, across multiple locations, and with varying experience levels.

My main mission is to create awareness of additive manufacturing in Africa. Also, it is important to show the local manufacturing industry the advantages of various 3D printing processes and applications where it can be used to give them a competitive advantage.

As a member of the Women In 3D Printing organization, tell us about the significance of the organization in promoting 3D Printing and Additive manufacturing?

The manufacturing industry is traditionally male-dominated and as a young woman in this industry, some people tend to challenge your knowledge and practical experience.  The best bit about being a woman in 3D printing is participating in our global Wi3DP community and hosting our Happy Hours in South Africa! It’s been such a joy getting to know others in the field.

With a mission of ‘Promoting, supporting, and inspiring women using Additive Manufacturing technologies,’ Women in 3D Printing seeks to foster a more diverse industry. By featuring women shaping our industry, we hope to encourage more women to join the industry. Each week, we are highlighting a woman who contributes to our industry.

While working on shattering the gender glass ceiling, we realize that to be truly successful in our mission, we need to address diversity in its broader sense. Our web-magazine also features a semi-annual report, the #DfAM, standing for Diversity for Additive Manufacturing. This report is provided as a resource for understanding the shape and scope of diversity in the 3D printing industry. In addition to our web activities, the WI3DP organization is building a strong network of global events, thanks to the support of local ambassadors across the globe.

From personal experience, I feel I’ve faced more challenges being a woman in business versus being a woman in 3D printing in particular. There have been instances where I’ve been ignored or rebuffed in a meeting. As the local Ambassador, I am proud to play a role to fulfill the Women In 3D Printing mandate within South Africa, to engage and encourage women in Industry 4.0.

The Tiziri Tech team presenting the Barnes Group Advisors TGBA training at TWIMS in Durban

 How do you see women benefiting from 3D Printing especially in Africa?

3D printing is an essential part of Industry 4.0. The growth from being initially used mostly for rapid prototyping to now producing functional components has been an important development, especially in various metals. I would like to see this technology evolve to be used more in developing countries, especially in Africa which is my home continent. For metal 3D printing to be adopted more widely, better education and exposure towards the technology is needed.  Accessibility to post-processing technologies such as hot isostatic pressing (HIP) is needed in developing countries as well.

Women must be made aware that 3D printing offers an exciting career within Industry 4.0. They need to be exposed to technology before arriving at University, preferably during high school already.  More specifically in Africa, some female students are registered at South African universities who are doing post-graduate studies in additive manufacturing, so the future looks bright. Getting more women involved in my country of birth (Algeria) and the surrounding countries in North Africa is something close to my heart. This can be achieved through knowledge transfer and mentoring and awareness. I want to set up a training center with relevant technology in my home university in Sidi Bel Abbes and try to secure funding for a 3D metal printer to be available for academia and industry. Female students will be encouraged to utilize the equipment.

The post Interview with Malika Khodja on Women in 3D Printing appeared first on 3DPrint.com | The Voice of 3D Printing / Additive Manufacturing.

Posted on

Blueprint Webinar: The Business Case for 3D Printing Spare Parts

In the next decade, 3D printing will massively reduce costs and create new revenue opportunities in spare parts businesses. This growth will be driven by 3D printing’s unique ability to eliminate fixed costs in manufacturing and radically reduce lead times.

The first step in unlocking the potential of 3D printing in your spare parts business is to understand the business case.

In this webinar Aaron Hurd, Consulting Manager at Blueprint, gives an overview of the business case for 3D printing spare parts. He explores both the high-level business case and gives tactical examples of how 3D printing is uniquely positioned to solve cost and lead time issues that often plague spare parts businesses.

In this webinar, you will:

    • Learn how and why 3D printing solves the problems of cost and lead times in spare parts.
    • See real examples of applications where 3D printing provided savings in both cost and lead times.
    • Hear stories of how leading companies are innovating using 3D printing in their spare parts businesses.
    • Gain an understanding of what it takes to deploy a 3D printing capability.
    • See actionable steps to take for jumpstarting 3D printing in your spare parts business.

Blueprint is the world’s leading 3D printing consultancy. We’re engineers, innovators, analysts, and strategists with 15 years of experience helping clients across virtually every industry, at startups and Fortune 500 companies alike. We are laser-focused on helping our clients make sense of 3D printing, from high-level strategy and innovation, to deeply technical design optimization.

If you want to discuss this article or your additive manufacturing strategy, the team at Blueprint is here to help. Let’s say hello.

hello@additiveblueprint.com

The post Blueprint Webinar: The Business Case for 3D Printing Spare Parts appeared first on 3DPrint.com | The Voice of 3D Printing / Additive Manufacturing.

Posted on

One Thing That We Can Still Not 3D Print is the Balance Sheet

Build your future today.

With all the progress in 3D printing, we must remind ourselves to stay humble. We are in a very capable industry with accelerating growth and adoption rates. In the eyes of many, we’ve gone from spielerei to potential manufacturing tool in only a few short years. With new materials, applications, research, and processes being released every day being in 3D printing now can be a bit heady. We must be mindful of the fact that a lot of the research that we’re seeing will not peter out. We have already left many a disappointed project and implementation in our wake. Not all of the centers for excellence will be excellent, and many cut ribbons will fray. Once the cameras have stopped flashing and the ink of the headlines bleeds into landfill, what will remain of our momentum? This is something that we can not know. At the same time boosters, liars and fantasists will continue to spin their untruths, and we will continue to be assaulted by headlines that lie and incompetent journalists who fabricate articles to placate PR reps. These actions can harm us especially today as we move from prototype makers to making mission-critical parts. As a side note, we alone in this industry fact check and try to write for readers in an unbiased and truthful way. If you should at any point have an issue with any of our words, please do let me know at joris@3Dprint.com. We are aiming to be your consistent source of useful information, so please keep us to a high standard.

Sure the stairs are rickety but you’ll get used to them.

At the moment 3D printing is an archipelago of good news islands. Amidst our joy and expansion, our future looks bright. One thing that we have not yet managed to 3D print, however, is the balance sheet. Yes, people are enthusiastic about 3D printing. C-Level people are promoting our technology internally while firms and countries see us as strategic. As we know, there are real advantages to in some cases using 3D printing. We can accelerate the time to market of parts and make geometries that others can not. We can iterate, test and improve parts more. We can shorten development times, development costs and dependencies in engineering projects. We can integrate new functionality into parts and reduce part count. We can create parts that save weight or through better surface texture increase part performance. We have not yet proven where exactly we can do this for many end-use parts. Apart from orthopedics, dental and hearing aids there is currently scant evidence that we can make a difference when we scale to millions of parts. We’re all, of course, confident that we will get there in the end but optimism is not what keeps airliners up ten kilometers above us. Now is the time when the rubber meets the road and when we will have to prove our mettle in the boardroom and on concrete floors.

Look at how much fun they’re having.

The next few years will determine if we will inhabit a few perfectly suited niches or become a much larger manufacturing technology. Will we only do fit technologies such as hearing aids, glasses, personalized implants, insoles, and some sports equipment along with space and aviation? To be fair, this would be a nicely profitable chunk of barriers to entry stuff to have. On the other hand, we could become huge in the automotive and other industries. There’s an issue however with this holding us back. Apart from the aforementioned optimism of our potential and the whirl of a knotted yarn around “complexity is free” there is little actual financial information on 3D printing business cases. What is out there is based on single parts or choice examples (with a lot of it being utter codswallop). We know that the business case is indeed there in acetabular cups which could be around six to eight times cheaper than conventionally made parts but where is the data for us to look at? Locked in ivory towers with a wisp of blonde hair enticing us to climb upward, Rapunzel keeps her secrets.

Feel free to practice. Visualization is everything.

Where is the definitive business case with all of the relevant numbers for acetabular cups? How about our other great live success, hearing aids? We know that these individualized parts are cost-effective but where are the complete cost estimates and where is the data? We’re not, as an industry providing our champions with enough ammo to convince boardrooms that we are worth investing in. They’re doing all of this stuff on a hope and a prayer delivered through a powerpoint slide. We could calculate the total cost saved per replacement part for specific technologies or share numbers on what weight and other savings actually mean. I still believe that by realistically looking at how much capital is tied up in inventory and spare parts companies could become significantly more profitable through adopting 3D printing. But, belief will not power an aero engine. Finance professionals, consultants, and accountants are taking an interest in our industry. But, they do nothing publicly to make the business case for 3D printing. Some half-truths, recycled ideas, and a buzzword or two blended together is what powers their engagements. They call them engagements by the way because it means they’re screwing you consistently. Where are the best and the brightest minds in all of Excel-world? And why are they not crunching the numbers to 3D print the balance sheet so that corporate leaders can pull the trigger in a meaningful way on transformative 3D printing projects? The one thing we’ve consistently not been able to 3D print is the balance sheet. Who will be the team that actually looks at 3D printing in depth and secures themselves a future in being the lighthouse that safely guides corporates through their 3D printing journey? There is enough money to be had for those who can deliver on conjecture.

Images CC Attribution: Marcus Eigenheer, Shine 2010, Roderick Eime, Tom.

Posted on

Wipro 3D and its plans in the 3D Printing Market Interview with VP Ajay Parikh

Wipro is an $8 billion 164,000 employee Indian technology company. The company runs large outsourcing and technology implementation projects, and is one of the world’s largest IT firms. May may be surprised that Wirpro has a 3D printing arm. Moreover, Wipro 3D was set up in 2012. Wipro 3D has grown to be a metal 3D printing service provider that also offers 3D printing consulting, 3D printing engineering services, research services. The company is aiming to be a full spectrum player for 3D printing offering everything from sketch to the setting up of complete 3D printing service centers. We were very curious to see what Wipro 3D was up to and spoke to Ajay Parikh the VP and Business Head, Wipro 3D to find out more about the company’s plans.

Why is Wipro active in 3D Printing?

“Additive Manufacturing and related know-how is going to play a dominant role in how we conceive, design, produce and use objects. AM is going to push the limits of material science, and allow us to explore frontiers, never before imagined and disrupt manufacturing and supply chain processes globally. Wipro3D is Wipro’s initiative to be part of the future of manufacturing.

If we go by numbers, leading analysts had assessed the size of the additive manufacturing Market at USD 6 Bn in 2016, and expect it to grow to USD 16 -20 Bn in 2020 at a growth rate of 27%. They attribute this growth to the Metal AM market owing to an increase in its industrial applications. The growth of Metal AM is expected to be 42% with Aerospace, Automotive and Medical segments driving the growth.”

Is adoption on the rise?

“We assess adaption maturity of new tech essentially based on type and extent of end-use adaption, the ecosystem maturity and how rate at which the technology is evolving. If we look at the rate of enterprise adaption across the globe, it’s been pretty rapid in the last few years, metal 3D printing being the highlight. The entry and investments of large players like GE, HP in addition to entrenched incumbents such as EOS, Stratasys etc, further reinforces confidence. Besides a select set of full suite solution providers with global aspirations offer services ranging from Additive Consulting, Engineering, Manufacturing and R&D to turnkey solutions are driving up adaption.”

How do your consultants work with customers to help them get into 3D printing?

“Our Consultants study the client context, analyse opportunities and identify use cases that deliver the maximum benefit of Additive Manufacturing. We work with clients to design, redesign and adapt new and existing designs and geometries to 3D printing, work on material solutions, as well as end use prove outs, as well as process capability to reach regular and predictable use of additive manufacturing in their business operations. The central consideration in our engagement will customers is the business value that we can generate for the customer with 3d printing.”

Are you primarily focused on metal printing?

“Yes. Our focus is metal 3D printing and we see merit in offering complete suite of services such as Additive Consulting, Additive Product Engineering, Reverse Engineering, Series production of parts using Additive Manufacturing, R&D solutions as well as design, set up and operations of captive centres. We also offer process capability improvement programs. Given Wipro’s strength in business solutions, we can offer an integrated digital manufacturing solution including automation and iot use cases working closely with other businesses of Wipro.”

How do you work with customers in a design and engineering capacity?

“3D printing allows designers and engineers to completely rethink the way they approach product engineering. Given our strong background in product as well as additive engineering, we work with customers to analyse existing geometries, conceptualize products to take advantage of the freedom of design and manufacturing that 3d printing brings, and design the entire manufacturing process to assure repeatability and reliable , functional performance of the product in service conditions. These services are based on our deep understanding of various aspects of the technology. We thoroughly understand the deep interconnect between Additive Engineering, product engineering, materials science, pre-build, build and post-build strategies, to finally prove-out components that meet customers’ production and service condition needs. Design offerings are offered either as a standalone service, or as a part of the complete component realization solution.”

You also have 3D printing capacity in-house? In which technologies?

“We have a fully integrated Additive Manufacturing Centre in Bangalore, India catering to domestic and international customers, adhering to best practices and standards in Additive Manufacturing. We have a full-fledged design studio, best in class industrial grade metal 3D printers, a comprehensive post-processing shop as well as full-fledged materials characterization lab. While we currently use powder bed fusion as the default additive manufacturing technology, we are in the process of including various other technologies to suit specific industry applications. We are also in the process of manufacturing a purpose built machine to meet the demanding needs of customers.”

Do you focus on a particular market, vertical or application at all?

“Aerospace, Space, Defence, Energy, Automotive and specific applications in Healthcare are some of the sectors that we currently serve with a domain led focus.”

What are some examples of 3D printed parts that really add value?

“An appropriate selection of components and AM technology to address specific business case is important for a sustainable AM program within an enterprise. Wipro3D has a structured and systematic consulting framework that helps customers design an entire roadmap.

For a “successful” use case, the AM intervention needs either improve functional performance, improve manufacturing efficacy, reduce time to market or address supply chain issues.”

Wipro3D assists the space, aerospace and Défense with mission critical service ready components, that are proven out including components that are in space. We also offer industry For Healthcare too we offer optimized components that result in improve system design as well as performance. The Automotive industry is under constant pressure to release new products and Wipro 3D is helping compress their time to market with high fidelity prototypes for automobile and two-wheeler manufacturers in various subsystems. The Injection Moulding industry has benefitted from the freedom of design and manufacture afforded by AM with the freedom of design that AM offers.”

In which industries do you see 3D printing becoming strong in the immediate future?

“As you know, Aerospace, Space, Defence and Healthcare are at the forefront of AM adoption We feel major growth in usage of AM will also come from Automotive, Oil & Gas, and Industrial sectors employing different variants of metal AM technologies.”

Do you think that clusters of desktop systems will compete with industrial systems in manufacturing?

“Both systems have unique and mutually exclusive use cases and as such we see them coexisting.”

Do you think that one particular technology will win out over others?

All 3D printing technologies will co-exist with each other given the variety of applications, engineering needs and service conditions across industries.

What is Wipro’s ambition in 3D printing?

“We aim to be among the leading global full suite players in metal and advanced materials additive manufacturing solutions.”

What would be your top tips to a large company wanting to explore 3D printing? What are some of the roadblocks for manufacturers when switching to 3D printing?

“It is critical to find the right applications within the enterprise and identify the right type of additive manufacturing technology to create proper use and business cases. Enterprises need to work with the right Additive Manufacturing solution provider, which whom the enterprise can co-create and execute a long term adaption roadmap A systematic adaption roadmap is key. A good AM solution provider can make a big difference. Another aspect is executive sponsorship. If this is not on the board’s agenda, there is pretty good chance it’s going to be limited to prototyping. Moreover, you need high resilience. When it comes to enterprise adaption, certainly Return on Capital Employed, Utilization, Service life, comparison to conventionally manufactured components in terms of mechanical properties are top of the mind considerations. As in any case, early adopters face a steep learning curve, but one which is to come in handy, as the technology matures and use cases grow. Start now, with a strong business outcome objective, ideally working with a strategic solutions partner.

Posted on

Interview with Vinod Devan of Deloitte on Their 3D Printing Approach

With 3D printing moving towards broader adoption many companies are now entering our market. One of these is Deloitte. The professional services firm that does everything from accounting to tax and M&A also wants to guide firms into the 3D printing world. We interviewed Vinod Devan, Product Strategy and Operations Lead at Deloitte Consulting to see what the firm’s plans are in 3D printing and how it hopes to help customers.

Why is Deloitte entering the 3D printing market? 

Additive manufacturing (AM) is a critical component of the Industry 4.0 digital transformation.AM technology is finally at the point where companies are starting to realize significant, tangible, new value for themselves and their customers. Deloitte is making significant investments in 3D printing knowledge and capabilities so that we can advise and join with our clients as they revolutionize supply chains, product portfolios, and business models.

What competencies does the team have? 

At Deloitte, we have incredible depth in supply chain and manufacturing and have been helping companies digitize their operations.This includes product design and development, manufacturing, production design, and in-market management – all of which are impacted by AM. Through our growing ecosystem of collaborators and global alliances with leading hardware and software players in this space, we bring a holistic view of the benefits and impacts of AM and complementary digital technologies.

What kind of projects have you done with customers?

Our projects generally fall into three buckets: Helping clients who are new to additive manufacturing enter the space in a strategic manner, helping clients operationalize and scale their existing – but relatively foundational – AM efforts, and helping clients that are already mature in AM transform and optimize end to end product and supply chain operations. Regardless of the project type, we strive to strike a balance between technical feasibility, business viability, and customer desirability. This approach is necessary for a ‘play to win’ strategy in AM.

What advice could you give me if I was a large manufacturing company and I’d want to get started with 3D printing?

Start small and focus on high value areas – this could be rapid prototyping, production of spare parts, or tooling components.Use this exercise to get comfortable with the technology, economics, and value of 3D printing. Build a roadmap to demonstrate success, and keep expanding the AM applications portfolio within your enterprise. Don’t treat AM as a fad; it will change manufacturing in unprecedented ways.

What application areas do you see opening up?

Over the next three to five years, we expect growth and scale in applications that are gaining significant traction today – long tail spare parts, tooling, bridge production, product personalization, and mass customization.

What are the next products that will be industrialized with 3D printing?

Automotive and large manufacturing companies are leading the industrialization of AM, due to the significant cost savings associated with digitizing their inventory. Consumer products and med tech companies benefit from the high degree of cost-effective personalization that AM offers. The range of products that will be additively manufactured will depend on the rate of development of specialized materials, adoption of the digital thread, integration of digital security to protect IP, certification of AM products by regulatory agencies, and perhaps most importantly, the willingness of innovative executives who choose to be bullish on digitizing their businesses.

What are some of the technologies that you’re most interested in?

The ability to 3D print has been around for a long time. While recent developments in AM are certainly encouraging and exciting, the development of complementary technologies that accelerate and expand the value of AM are very interesting. These include IoT, data analytics, and AR/VR.  Together with AM, these technologies unlock the true potential of Industry 4.0.

What are some key developments in 3D printing materials?

Materials are definitely on the critical path for large-scale adoption of additive manufacturing. Getting AM products to be the same or better than those produced by legacy manufacturing processes often comes down to material science and engineering. Given the unique requirements for each application, we are seeing material producers develop new strategies and even new business ventures to not just develop specialty materials, but also to provide supplemental services that accelerate the adoption of their materials.

What are the key stumbling blocks in 3D printing implementations?

There are two primary stumbling blocks – the first is companies that don’t believe that AM is finally here, not just hype. Current manufacturing processes have been around for a lot longer than AM and have reached a high degree of efficiency and optimization. AM has been touted as disrupting those legacy models for almost three decades, but has fallen short until very recently. There is an entrenched mindset that will require a cultural shift to facilitate adoption.  The second stumbling block is the lack of a holistic approach to AM. There is a tendency by executives and engineers to focus on either cost or quality or some other standalone benefit. That results in a narrow adoption strategy, which often does not yield sufficient value to justify additional investment.

A lot of people can never tell me how much a 3D printed part costs. How much would a 3D Printed pen cost? How many could I make a day?

Cost and volume questions are valid, but the answers vary greatly by technology, material, and process. And in our opinion, they do not provide sufficient information when evaluating 3D printing. Along with the cost elements (once to determine how you intend to print a part), other important questions should be considered. For example, could a 3D printed pen function BETTER than a traditional pen? Could it be lighter weight? Could it be personalized to the user? Could you sell more of a 3D printed pen relative to a regular pen because of its added value? Would the lifecycle cost – not just a production cost – of the pen be lower?

What products would make sense for 3D printing, which would not?

Despite the advancements in recent years, some limitations remain. For example, products or parts that exceed the optimal build size of current machines can’t be printed. Products in sectors with heavy regulatory oversight and lengthy certification processes make the scaled adoption of 3D printing a cumbersome exercise.  Products that cannot be accommodated by today’s material set require additional design cycles to determine feasibility. Like with any disruptive technology, the number of products that can be “onboarded” to AM will increase exponentially as demand increases.