Additive Manufacturing Strategies Super Early Bird Registration Ends August 26

As detailed in a previous post, the Additive Manufacturing Strategies (AMS) event, hosted by 3DPrint.com and SmarTech Analysis, has moved online for 2021. The February 2021 AMS is several months away, but those considering attending the online four-day event should consider the super early bird registration price of $59 that ends at midnight on 26 August.  AMS 2021 offers subject specific days: bioprinting, medical/dental, software/automation and metals/new materials.  One can register for a specific day or, of course, the entire conference. To register or to learn more, click here.

The post Additive Manufacturing Strategies Super Early Bird Registration Ends August 26 appeared first on 3DPrint.com | The Voice of 3D Printing / Additive Manufacturing.

AMS 2020: Panels on 3D Printing Materials and Applications for Dental Industry

At our recent Additive Manufacturing Strategies 2020 in Boston, co-hosted by SmarTech Analysis, many different topics were discussed in keynotes and panels, such as binder jetting, medical 3D printing, and different materials. Dental 3D printing was also a major topic of discussion at the event, and I attended three panels that focused on additive manufacturing for dental applications.

The first, “Into the dental and oral surgery office,” had three panelists: Dr.-Ing. Roland Mayerhofer, the Product Line Manager for Coherent/OR Laser; CEO Manager of Oral 3D Martina Ferracane; and Mayra Vasques, PhD, a dental prosthesis fellow at the University of São Paulo in Brazil.

Dr. Mayerhofer went first, and provided a quick overview of Coherent’s laser powder bed fusion (L-PBF) systems, and the dental applications for which they can be used.

The versatile CREATOR is the company’s open system, and can print with multiple materials, such as brass, cobalt chromium, steel, and Inconel.

“As long as it works, you can put any powder in you want,” Dr. Mayerhofer said about the 3D printer.

He explained said that the CREATOR setup is “typical but can be as big as a stand-up fridge, not the American double-size.”

You can take a look at the rest of the printer specs above, along with a few features that will be added to the new system that’s coming in 2021, such as two powder hoppers and a build platform.

“Then you can take them out, put fresh hoppers in, and keep going,” Dr. Mayerhofer said.

He stated that the dental field is likely one of the first major adopters of metal additive manufacturing, as the technology offers 100% personalization and can fabricate small, complex parts out of existing materials, like titanium alloys…all perfect features for the dental industry.

Dr. Mayerhofer then discussed Coherent’s digital dental workflow, which can get from scanning to a completed 3D printed part in 12 steps. Some of these steps include designing the CAD file and preparing it for 3D printing in the company’s APP software suite.

Later process steps are annealing, and then sandblasting, support removal, polishing, ceramic coating – added manually – and voila, you have a finished product.

The Dental Cockpit is Coherent’s latest addition. The CAM software makes it easy to load and print parts, which means that the digital dental workflow as a whole is much less complex. There’s one click to select the file, another to choose the materials and properties, and then a final click to generate the G-code.

Dr. Mayerhofer said that Coherent’s whole dental workflow, 3D printing on the CREATOR include, takes just one work day to fabricate a completed bridge in the dental lab.

After the cast skeleton is scanned, the dental lab begins preparing the CAD data at 8 am. Then the print job has to be prepared in Dental Cockpit, and 3D printing typically begins in the morning.

Once the parts are removed from the print bed, post processing is completed, and then a porcelain coating is added before the product is subjected to heat treatment and polishing. The completed bridge is then ready to go by 4 pm.

Dr. Mayerhofer noted that a dental lab’s ROI on the CREATOR 3D printing system is less than a year…typically about six months, in fact.

Then it was Ferracane’s turn to explain how her company, Oral 3D, makes 3D printing simple for dentists, even as it’s occurring at the industrial level.

“Our solution makes it extremely simple for dentists to bring 3D printing to their practice,” she said.

She presented a brief overview of the US dental market, noting that some of the major applications for 3D printing in the field include aligners, crowns, surgical guides, and soft tissue models, which dentists use to test procedures ahead of time.

“Usually today, the way most of these models are done is through intraoral scanning,” she explained.

Ferracane said that SLA technology makes it much easier to make these soft tissue models. But, even so, they can still only be used for testing purposes most of the time.

3D printed models of hard tissue – bone – are also fabricated, but she said that they’re not used often, as it’s difficult for dentists to come up with STL files of just the hard tissue.

She pulled up a slide that had the world “PROBLEM” across the top. The image appears to be scan data of bone, which looks pretty hard to read.

“It’s not easy for dentists to make this into something printable by cleaning up the images,” Ferracane explained. “So they can pay to outsource it to labs to clean it up. But our 3D printing software automatically does this. Just drag the CT scan, and we’ll take care of changing it from DICOM to STL. With one click, we can then convert STL to G-code.”

She said that while it’s obviously good to fabricate dental applications this way using Oral 3D’s printer, it will work with whatever system you’re already using.

These 3D printed models serve a variety of purposes – they can improve communication with patients, help in treatment planning, and even “broaden learning.” Ferracane mentioned that the company has partnerships with NYU and Harvard for this last.

Other applications include bone blocks, made-to-measure titanium membranes, and maxillofacial surgery. Additionally, she stated that Oral 3D recently began collaborating with dental surgeons, who use the company’s 3D printed dental models for planning and patient communication.

She finished by stating that the company believes FDM printing can “be a good value add for dentists.”

Vasques finished things by sharing her research into how things look, dental 3D printing-wise, from the point of view of clinicians.

“It’s common for most to be scared of using 3D printing,” she explained. “They think it’s plug and play, and it’s not.”

For her research, she divided users into two separate groups – high level experience (seniors), and innovation (early adopters and students).

“We are trying to figure out how these people understand the technology,” she said.

High level users expect accuracy, efficiency, high quality technology, and high-performance materials for the purposes of chairside 3D printing. Vasques said that these users “don’t want to wait 2-3 hours to make products by hand.”

“In university, we’re trying to establish protocols and research to help these people have the results they are expecting.

“We’re trying to solve problems, like mouthguards for sports.”

Vasques said that last year, she and her team published three articles about dental 3D printing topics, such as 3D printed occlusal devices and post-processing. She launched INNOV3D the same year, in order to help train professors in using dental 3D printing.

“We have an online training platform, educational materials, and 3D lab,” she stated.

Once she finished and sat back down, Davide Sher, the panel’s moderator, asked the other two panelists how they would address the challenges that Vasques listed, and how they would make dentists understand more about dental 3D printing.

Ferracane answered that most dentists aren’t buying 3D printers today, because they’re initially taught that the systems are really easy to use when they’re not. Once they run into issues with SLA technology, they get frustrated and just start outsourcing the work instead.

“Then they’re really dissatisfied, because they’re complicated and not just plug and play. We need to help them understand that they can bring the technology back to their office.”

Sher noted that dentists don’t really have the time to learn about the more advanced types, and so asked if the companies directed their technology to users in dental labs; Dr. Mayerhofer said yes.

After a short break, the next session, “Dental lab experiences with 3D printing,” began. While Les Kalman, an Assistant Professor for Restorative Dentistry at Western University’s Schulich School of Medicine, was unable to make AMS 2020, Arfona founder and CEO Justin Marks and Sam Wainwright, Dental Product Manager for Formlabs, were both ready to go.

Marks went first, explaining that Arfona, founded in 2017 by dental technicians and 3D printing enthusiasts on “the core belief that thermoplastic dental materials should not be substituted for inferior photopolymers,” has been working to “bring 3D printing into the world of dentistry.” The company’s flagship product is its 3D printed flexible nylon dentures.

He pulled up a slide that cited research stating that 36 million Americans are completely edentulous, meaning without teeth, and that 178 million are partially edentulous. But even so, Marks said that there’s an “astronomical” number of people who are still not wearing dentures.

“Most people don’t think about this until it happens to you or someone you know,” he said about missing a tooth. “It’s not always that easy or cheap to fix this with implants.”

According to a survey, only 8% of dentures are digitally fabricated, which means most are still made by hand using analog methods.

Marks said that even though 3D printing is “becoming more of a buzzword” in the dental industry, most of the materials “have largely stayed the same,” and based on the same technologies and principles. Extrusion-based AM is not used often in dentistry, and powder bed fusion (PBF) is mostly limited to metals, not polymers.

Marks went through a brief history of 3D printing in dentistry. Ubiquitous applications include impression trays, digital models, and resin patterns for casting, while digital dentures are currently happening and things like clear aligners, temporary and long-term crowns and bridges, and multimaterial printing are in development for use in the future.

He said that the ubiquitous ones have one thing in common – they’re used once and then thrown away.

“We’re still not doing much with crowns and bridges,” Marks said. “Clear aligners are the holy grail, and direct printing of the aligner is still a ways off, though all companies are probably working on it.”

Aronfa’s dental 3D printer is the r.Pod, which is a modified version of a Makerbot clone. The dual extrusion filament system is optimized for all of the company’s thermoplastic materials.

Then it was Wainwright’s turn to talk about dental 3D printing at Formlabs. He agreed with Marks that “FDM and thermoplastics have an incredible place” in the dental industry.

When the company was founded in 2012, its goal was to make professional-scale 3D printing accessible and affordable for everyone. Now Formlabs employs over 500 people at its multiple locations around the world, and has sold more than 50,000 3D printers.

Wainwright explained that the Form 3B desktop printer, optimized for biocompatible materials, has many dental-specific features, materials, and software, in addition to automated washing and post-curing systems “to help tie in end-to-end dental workflows.”

In addition, Formlabs offers dental materials, and launched its dental service plan (DSP) along with the Form 3B in 2019. Because there are high demands, the 3D printing process is complex, and the DSP offers support.

“We are committed to 3D printing for dental,” Wainwright stated. “We have over 20 people in the dental business unit. But we have the resources of a 500 person-plus company.”

While most are made overseas, Formlabs Dental is now developing photopolymers in my home state, since the company acquired its main material supplier, Ohio-based Spectra Photopolymers, last year. Formlabs’ biocompatible Surgical Guide Resin is the company’s first material made in an ISO-certified facility.

“It’s exciting to have intimate control over design aspects,” Wainwright said.

The image above is an example of the Surgical Guide material. Wainright explained that the light touch supports are very easy to remove, which means that there isn’t a lot of time wasted in post-processing.

He said that 36% of dental labs in the US use 3D printing technology, which makes them very “cutting edge.”

“There’s a ton of market opportunity for dental to go digital,” he said. “We have 30% of this market – we’re the biggest player in dental laboratories and will continue to grow, but compared to Invisalign, it’s not really that much.”

So far, Formlabs has 3D printed more than 10,000,000 parts for the dental industry. Wainwright predicts that in ten years or less, “everything in dental will be 3D printed.”

He reiterated to the room that Formlabs has “a whole host of materials” for dental applications, four of which are solely for fabricating models, which are “really critical to dentists.” As dental offices adopt intraoral scanning technology, it’s helpful to take the scan data and turn it into something physical. Wainwright mentioned that Formlabs’ Grey Resin can achieve fast, accurate prints, and that it’s good for thermoforming as well.

The company’s Draft material is “accurate enough to create models in less than 20 minutes,” which makes it perfect for creating retainers on the same day as a patient’s appointment. Model Resin is good for accurately restoring dental models, while the biocompatible Dental LT Clear Resin can be used to print occlusal splints in addition to models.

Formlabs’ Digital Dentures solution comes in multiple shades to match a patient’s teeth, and a full set can be 3D printed for less than $10, which Wainwright says is “really a game-changer.”

“We want to make treatments easier, better, and faster,” he said in conclusion.

“3D printing is still very early in dental, this is just the beginning. The materials will just keep getting better, it’s an exciting place to be.”

Then it was time to eat lunch and chat with other attendees…or, as I did, inhale food and then find a spot in the hallway near an outlet and get a little work done.

After the lunch break, I sat in on my last panel at AMS 2020, “3D materials for dental applications.” It was a panel of one – Gabi Janssen, Business Development Manager and Global Leader, Healthcare Segment Additive Manufacturing, for DSM Additive Manufacturing. She presented on digitalization in healthcare and dentistry.

She tried to play a short movie about what the company does, but due to technical difficulties there was no sound, so she narrated instead, explaining that DSM is “a material company” that also does a lot with nutrition – a brand behind the brands.

The company also has a biomedical department, which helps deliver advanced healing solutions for AM applications, including bioceramics, collagen, polyethylenes, polyurethanes, and hydrophilic coating.

“What we have on the market is filaments,” Janssen said, pulling up a list of the dental materials DSM offers.

Several of the company’s products are geared toward the healthcare market, such as Somos BioClear for dental guides and anatomical models.

“So how do we develop a new material?” Janssen asked. “We’ve discussed 510(k) clearance materials, and you have to work all together. We look at the application, and determine what we need – printer, software, material – to fit what the end user needs.”

She pulled up a slide of the major market drivers in 3D dental printing – performance, mass customization, and time-saving.

“What kind of applications do we have in dentistry?” she asked.

To answer her own question, she showed a brief history of digital dentistry, starting with the first 3D printed part in 1983, moving on to DSM’s 3D printing resin in 1988, the beginning of aligner manufacturing in 1997 and medical modeling in 2000, and DSM’s dental materials passing USP VI in 2008. For 2020 and beyond, hopefully we’ll see the availability of direct aligner materials.

“I think there’s still a lot of data needed to show it’s good,” Janssen said about where the industry currently stands. “Reimbursement is difficult, we need this data to back it up.”

The topic of FDA clearance obviously came up a lot at AMS 2020. Janssen said that DSM has a resin that’s certified for use in dental bite guards, and a general purpose resin that isn’t certified but can be used to make FDA-cleared aligners.

“The end device needs the clearance,” she reminded the room.

She brought up how Materialise was the first company to receive FDA clearance for software about 3D printing anatomical models for diagnostic use. Materialise Mimics inPrint translates the data for the model to the 3D printer. Then, combined with a specific printer and material, it’s possible to fabricate “the model they actually want within a certain safety margin.”

“But, if you want to print medical models, just for patient communication, it does not need to be cleared, because it’s not a medical device,” she explained.

The slide above explains what makes a medical device controlled, i.e. needs clearance, while the below slide lists some very useful definitions, including biocompatibility and risk.

Janssen then brought up the “sometimes confusing standards,” such as ISO standards.

“Depending on what we do with the material, and how long it goes in the mouth, there are different risk associations,” she explained.

In terms of product classification, Class I is the least risky. But, the higher you go up in class, the more research is required to show that the 3D printable material won’t harm patients.

She said that the regulatory industry is changing to have more focus on software, with higher regulations for that software, because it “needs to be validated in combination with the material and equipment.” Additionally, there is more of a focus these days on understanding and managing risks, as well as reducing animal testing…always good news!

When choosing the proper filaments for your workflow, you should start by working with the dentist on treatment planning. Then, once the patient’s mouth has been scanned, you can create the design in the software. Then the build has to be prepared, which takes some patience and precision – you need to enter the optimal print parameters, and add supports if they’re needed. Then, after the print is complete, it needs to be removed from the bed, supports (if there are any) need to be taken off, and there may even be grinding and painting involved before the final quality check.

“Many process variables can impact the safety of the final end product,” Janssen noted. “So you need to understand the effect the material can have on patients.”

Finally, there are also plenty of steps to follow to ensure material safety in development, so it’s important to follow the instructions your supplier gives you.

Then it was time for some questions. One attendee asked why dentists aren’t all adopting AM, since some products, like mouthguards, look pretty easy to make in the back office.

“This may look easy, but it’s actually not,” Janssen explained.

She went on to say that the product or device may not always “come out right the first time.” There are a lot of parameters to look at, and potentially tweak, in order to achieve the desired result. A lot of people can get frustrated if it doesn’t work right the first time.

“What we’re doing now – if you bring your design to us, we’ll do the tweaking for you, as our software has all of the maximum and minimum numbers needed for parameters,” she said.

3D printing thought leader and author John Hornick offered his take on the question, as he has some experience with the matter. He explained that most dental offices are private, though many dentists are consolidating their practices into larger ones, “and their appetite for spending money on these machines may go up.” But, SmarTech doesn’t think the average dentist will spend that much for larger, more expensive 3D printers. That’s why some companies, like Arfona, are working on simpler material extrusion systems.

Another attendee said that it seems like 3D printing companies are just throwing technology at various markets and praying that it sticks. Dentists want to be dentists, and not spend their time dealing with issues like print parameters and melted filament.

“We, as technology providers, need to raise our game and make this work for these people,” Janssen stated.

I think that’s a great note on which to end my AMS 2020 coverage – we, the AM technology providers, need to show the rest of the world how 3D printing can work for their industries.

We hope to see you next winter for Additive Manufacturing Strategies 2021!

Discuss this and other 3D printing topics at 3DPrintBoard.com or share your thoughts below.

The post AMS 2020: Panels on 3D Printing Materials and Applications for Dental Industry appeared first on 3DPrint.com | The Voice of 3D Printing / Additive Manufacturing.

AMS 2020: 3D Printing Metals II Keynote by Craig Sungail, Global Advanced Metals

The final keynote presentation at our recent Additive Manufacturing Strategies, held in Boston and co-hosted by SmarTech Analysis, was given by Craig Sungail, the Vice President of Global Research and Development for Global Advanced Metals, which just so happened to be one of the event sponsors. Sungail was part of our new 3D printing metals track, and presented a very interesting talk about tantalum, “the other gray metal.”

“We’ve used other metals for years, like cobalt chrome and stainless steel, to make implants,” Sungail said. “In 80% of the cases, for most people, it’s successful. But 20% of the time, patients aren’t happy with the results.”

He went on to say that there is a 10% revision rate each year for surgical implants 3D printed out of these other materials, for reasons such as infection, fracture, and becoming dislodged. That’s why he said that we should all “consider tantalum as an alternative.”

“This metal has a long history. We’ve been reviewing the literature for the past 25 years. The authors vary – physicians, universities, etc. But there is a broad, diverse group of people investigating this metal for medical devices.”

Sungail explained that these journals have determined that tantalum (Ta) is not toxic, which “can’t be said for some of the other metals out there today.” Additionally, the research shows that when using tantalum for implants, the osseointegration (bone ingrowth) of the implant into existing bone is pretty good, and perhaps even better than implants made with straight titanium or the Ti-64 alloy.

He pulled up a slide listing some of the other benefits of using tantalum to fabricate medical implants, including the fact that it could enhance local host defense mechanisms, and that it may even have some antibacterial properties.

Sungail offered a brief history about tantalum, which is a transition metal/element. He explained how the material got its name, bringing up a slide about Greek mythology, which I had not been expecting and was very interesting. Tantalus, the son of Zeus and a nymph, stole ambrosia and nectar from his father, and the punishment definitely fit the crime in this case – he was forced to stand in a pool of water that was tantalizingly close to a fruit tree.

“The water would fade away, and the fruit was just out of reach,” Sungail went on.

Then, in 1802, Swedish analytical chemist Anders Gustaf Ekeberg became the first person to discover tantalum when he successfully separated it from nyobium. Ekeberg was tantalized for a long time attempting to achieve what many others had not, and once he’d succeeded, he was given the honor of naming both of the new elements.

“I’m confident that every one of you has been touched by tantalum in some way,” Sungail said. “It’s highly conductive, with a high melting point, chemical and corrosion-resistant, dense, hard, ductile, and biocompatible. We have to use biocompatible carefully, but I’m using it with the FDA definition – it’s been implanted in some way into the body, and studies concluded that the implant was biocompatible.”

Sungail said that the most common application for tantalum is in the capacitor sector, such as when it’s used for cell phones. It does have a 40-year history in medical devices, and it can be mixed with materials in order to make super elements, which can be used in turbines for jet engines and energy generation.

He explained that the company is “truly global,” with locations in the US and Japan. GAM also has a controlling interest in the largest reserve of tantalum in the world, which is in Australia. I’m skipping ahead a little, but I thought this was a good question – at the end of the presentation, an attendee asked Sungail about the potential environmental impact of mining tantalum. He explained that GAM does what he referred to as a “bag and tag” when they receive ore from a conflict country.

“We ensure the money isn’t going to terrorists, we do it ethically. If it wasn’t mined ethically, we wouldn’t have sales,” he stated.

Back to where we were, Sungail said that two years ago, the company was taking a look at the various AM markets, wondering which would be the best to participate in with its tantalum. Just like the above graph shows, GAM determined that its “value proposition was best in medical, and not automotive.”

“We realized we’d have to bridge the chasm between early adopters and later innovators. We’d have to teach the industry about tantalum and that it can be printed,” he said.

So the company got to work, using 200W and 300W lasers to 3D print medical devices like spinal implants and baseplates out of its tantalum; these fully dense parts are now in testing.

Sungail listed several reasons why tantalum is a good material to use in 3D printed medical devices – it resists blood clotting, so it can be used to fabricate stents, and its high surface friction, proven through several research studies done on animals, is good for implant stabilization.

Tantalum also has no problem with corrosion, which has been reported as being an issue with other implant materials. Sungail had a slide that showed a picture of a non-tantalum 3D printed hip implant, which required revision post-surgery due to corrosion; researchers determined that it was caused due to crevice (the oxygen effect) and galvanic (dissimilar metals). He explained that debris due to friction can lead to even more issues with implants, such as inflammation in the tissue around the joint, which can cause severe pain, and that cobalt chrome and Ti-64 implants can even lead to toxic effects, like bone degradation, if absorbed into the body.

“Tantalum doesn’t corrode in a normal body,” Sungail said. “Its only attacker is hydrofloric acid, and threading should also not occur with tantalum.”

Looking at the graph above, you can see that the material’s printability comes down to several factors, of which bioinertness combines several; Sungail explained that “these are generic combinations of various features for easy reading.”

“It’s significantly more printable than some other metals we use for medical devices,” he continued. “Tensile and elongation properties unfortunately aren’t well reported, so we turned to engineering handbooks for this informnation, and modulus can be tuned with this material. There are four to five papers out now from researchers who printed tantalum and made it 70-80% porous, because this is the sweet spot for osseointegration. They noticed that the elastic modulus exactly matched bone in this range.”

Sungail said that he’s been at many conferences where people have concurred that tantalum is a great material, but don’t know how to justify using it since it’s more expensive than Ti-64.

“That’s the wrong question,” he said. “Ask the cost to the patient.”

While looking for a well-documented surgical study, GAM found an example with a 3D printed transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) implant, which is shown in the slide below with the cost benefit example analysis.

“We looked at the whole process, buying the raw material and printing and cleaning it and sterilizing it, packaging, surgery, to the point where the patient walks out,” Sungail explained. “Tantalum’s contribution to this implant on the slide is .02%. I think that’s nearly negligible. Tantalum will allow the patient to walk out much quicker and recover much quicker.”

3D printing isn’t even the most expensive part of the whole process – it’s the surgery itself. If annual implant surgery revisions can be prevented by even 5% from switching to tantalum, the medical industry will save $300-500 million a year.

Another example Sungail shared was a 3D printed knee implant made out of tantalum. The surgery took place in China back in 2017, and the patient was actually able to stand up two hours post-op…that’s a pretty impressive feat.

Wrapping things up, he pulled up a slide showing GAM’s “current” tantalum products for 3D printing. In its angular powder form, the material works for cold spray technology and DED printing, while spherical powder can be used with laser AM technologies. He said that the company is also working on tantalum tungsten, and is “always looking for partners,” especially since GAM doesn’t have its own 3D printing system yet and relies on its partnerships to print tantalum for them. However, Sungail said they are considering a 3D printer purchase…perhaps this is an announcement we’ll see in the near future?

Stay tuned to 3DPrint.com as we continue to bring you the news from AMS 2020.

Discuss this and other 3D printing topics at 3DPrintBoard.com or share your thoughts below.

[Photos: Sarah Saunders]

The post AMS 2020: 3D Printing Metals II Keynote by Craig Sungail, Global Advanced Metals appeared first on 3DPrint.com | The Voice of 3D Printing / Additive Manufacturing.

Scott Dunham: SmarTech Industry Forecasts for Metal and Medical/Dental 3D Printing

The 2020 Additive Manufacturing Strategies (AMS) event ended earlier this week in Boston. The summit was focused on the business of 3D printing in medical, dental, and metals, so it makes sense that Scott Dunham, the Vice President of Research at SmarTech Analysis, was on hand to give everyone a sense of where we are in these industries, just like at last year’s AMS. SmarTech provides the additive manufacturing industry with industry analysis reports and consulting services, and Dunham began with the company’s metal additive quarterly advisory services. These reports are compiled using data from 10-12 consecutive quarters.

Dunham noted that the messaging and adoption rates have changed for metal AM, and that while we’re all still “working towards the same goals,” we are “drilling down to specific solutions and challenges.”

“Metal additive manufacturing is in a strange place right now,” he said. “From 2016 to 2018, there was lots of hype, lots of investments and growth and attention paid, and the growth was aggressive and accelerated. But now, the past couple of years, we’re in this period where people are saying, ‘What’s happening? We though this technology was supposed to revolutionize things.’ Growth rates don’t always line up with perceptions.”

He got into some of the specific factors that are going into the challenges the metal AM market is facing. There’s a large disparity between metal AM hardware and metal powder sales, which Dunham said tells us that metal 3D printers are viewed much differently than the machine tool systems to which people compare them.

“Right now, the machines are not viewed or utilized in the same way that other popular manufacturing tools are, so people are still looking at this as a longer-term opportunity that still needs development work and may not necessarily always be the right tool for high-volume serial production,” he explained. ” Users now understand they can’t just drop it on the shop floor like a CNC machine. This in some ways is a barrier to growth. There are still plenty of investments being made, though, but maybe we don’t expect those days to last forever now. We may be ending the phase of early adopters and innovators who want to make these investments.”

In the years 2014-2016, the sale of metal machines was averaging just below 30%, then climbed up closer to even, but are now dropping again a bit. According to SmarTech, non-metal 3D printers are still generating most of the hardware sales, but Dunham said we should see more of a 50/50 split into the mid 2020s.

SmarTech has a theory that this leapfrog effect is due to the current two-tiered market scenario. The advanced market focuses on serial applications and high-volume production, while the legacy market consists of applications that have around for a long time, maybe resembling a factory floor, such as injection molding and tool inserts, jigs and fixtures, prototyping or limited series, medical and dental models, and one-off high volume components. Dunham said these markets are both important, but that they each have a “different set of considerations.”

He pointed out that this advanced market will soon grow to over $4 billion worth of AM hardware sold.

“We consider this side of things a little bit further ahead of polymer machine sales,” Dunham explained. “That’s why there’s so much focus on metals.”

So, where is all this growth in the metal AM market coming from? Dunham said that hardware sales is a “good indicator of the pulse of the industry,” and that SmarTech is seeing a lot of growth on what Dunham called “the fringes,” like some of the new companies coming up over the last few years, as well as the legacy manufacturing companies adopting the technology for the first time. He referred to the newer companies, such as Desktop Metal, HP, Markforged, Trumpf, and VELO3D, as “challengers,” while the legacy companies were called “incumbents.”

Next, he talked about metal 3D printing service bureaus, which see a global market of a little over $2 million.

“It’s a pretty big opportunity on the metals side, but not as big as we think it should be, or as big as polymer service bureaus,” Dunham said. “But the footprint of metal additive manufacturing in the healthcare industry is very important, and will continue to be so.”

Dunham pulled up a slide about powder bed fusion technology, noting that because the dental industry was so mature in terms of AM adoption, it actually skews the production data in the top two graphs

Bound metal processes, like binder jetting, are currently used often for tooling, and SmarTech forecasts that applications for this technology in prototyping and end-use components will rise. Dunham said that powder-based DED 3D printing is currently “heavily skewed” towards end-use components, in addition to prototyping, and that the “vision of this will likely not change much in the future.

Moving on to the market value of metal parts produced with 3D printing, Dunham said that this number is “hard to assign,” but that investments by end users are likely just south of $5 billion. However, there are lots of high-value parts to consider, which contributes to that number.

“By 2025, we expect that all metal 3D printed parts will exceed 20 billion,” he stated.

In terms of project applications for metal AM, healthcare leads the pack, with crown and bridge substructures and hip implant components at the top of the list. If you remove medical applications from the equation, we’re looking at using the technology to repair high-value turbine blades and aircraft parts, valves and pumps in the oil & gas & energy sector, and more medium-sized industrial components.

“If you’re a supplier in the industry, these are what will succeed,” Dunham said. “The incentive here is to invest in different approaches to metal additive manufacturing.”

Dunham summed everything up by saying that while metal AM is still demonstrating value, entry barriers, such as financial reasons, are also high, which does deter growth somewhat, and that a multidisciplinary approach to it is necessary for growth to continue.

Then I followed Dunham out and into the next room for the SmarTech medical 3D printing forecast, which was wisely titled “Healthcare – the Backbone of Additive Manufacturing.”

“Within the healthcare segment, there are many ways that AM has been and will continue to be leveraged,” he stated. “There are some very industrialized serial, serious manufacturing applications in healthcare, so emphasis is put on the customization of these devices.”

He noted AMS 2020 has a theme of looking at business cases, which is why it’s so heavily focused on dental and orthopedic 3D printing applications.

“We don’t think these are more impactful or important, but these are areas that we’re seeing more challenges and work here,” Dunham explained.

Excluding software numbers, the healthcare portion of the AM market – combining medical and dental applications – is a little over $3 billion dollars; truly, “the backbone of the industry.” These revenue numbers have gone down a bit, because there’s a lot of attention being paid to industrial markets, but Dunham said that SmarTech forecasts a stabilization, stating that healthcare will “continue to be important to overall industry structure for at least the next several years, and into decades.”

As has been previously mentioned, in comparison to other industries, dental is “fairly mature overall in its adoption of additive manufacturing.” If you’re looking at metal AM used in healthcare, you get into the orthopedic sector, which means you’re looking at implants.

“The longer that we can gather clinical evidence for these implants the better,” Dunham said, noting that this will help ‘build confidence’ with metal 3D printing in the medical field.

Some OEMs are bringing AM in-house, so that they can better control the process to try and ensure a good outcome. A lot of factors go into making medical implants, and if something goes wrong, “clinical efficacy is damaged.”

As of yet, there isn’t a huge push by OEMs for non-metal 3D printed implants, but SmarTech believes this is coming later, for materials like ceramics, and especially for craniomaxillofacial (CMF) implants.

There are plenty of business use cases for metal orthopedic 3D printed implants, and while the hip is still in the lead, about a third of 3D printed implants made now are are spinal. But Dunham said that hip implants won’t dominate the production numbers forever, as the 2025 forecast shows more diversification coming.

Moving to the dental side of things, companies are seeing a lot of success with high speed vat photopolymerization technologies, which Dunham said was expected. But what they didn’t count on was the aligner segment looking to get into powder bed fusion.

“No one process has everything locked down, and we can all benefit from more competition to push the technology forward,” he said.

Dunham said we should expect that 3D printing will ultimately follow the “trend of machines in dentist offices.”

“We expect a pretty healthy growth in investment by dental offices and clinics, though dental labs are still where it’s at from a hardware perspective.”

Dunham pulled up a slide that showed numbers from 2018, and forecast out to 2027, that show specifically what’s going to keep driving the sale of materials and hardware for dental applications. Looking at things like direct aligners and aligner tools, models, surgical guides, and denture bases and trays, it’s clear that he’s correct when he said that there is a lot of “diversification going on out there.”

Stay tuned to 3DPrint.com as we continue to bring you the news from our third annual AMS Summit.

Discuss this and other 3D printing topics at 3DPrintBoard.com or share your thoughts below.

[Photos: Sarah Saunders]

The post Scott Dunham: SmarTech Industry Forecasts for Metal and Medical/Dental 3D Printing appeared first on 3DPrint.com | The Voice of 3D Printing / Additive Manufacturing.

AMS 2020: Keynote Presentations on 3D Printing in Metal and Medical Industries

For the second year running, and its third year total, 3DPrint.com and SmarTech Analysis have brought the Additive Manufacturing Strategies summit to Boston. With a theme of “The Business of 3D Printing,” the event continues its established coverage of 3D printing in the medical and dental industries, but adds a new metals track this year.

Lawrence Gasman, the President of SmarTech, welcomed everyone to the event, and then we jumped right into the thick of things, as Dr. Banu Gemici-Ozkan, Senior Market Intelligence Leader for GE Additive, presented her keynote, entitled “Metal Additive Strategies Enabling Next Generation of Adopters.”

Dr. Banu Gemici-Ozkan

Dr. Gemici-Ozkan explained that she’s been working with additive manufacturing for about four years, and her role is to oversee global operations, as well as support business in the metal AM space with the right applications.

“I’m in marketing, so I have to start with numbers,” she said, pulling up a slide of the “world of opportunities” for metal AM.

She explained that conventional manufacturing happens in many stages – you have to extract the metal, process it in chemical plants, assemble it into the final products, and several others that I’m definitely leaving out. Additive manufacturing can accomplish all of this in less steps, which is why it’s so attractive.

An example of an engine turbine came up, and at the bottom was a statement about how metal AM is competing with $570 billion worth of core conventional metal manufacturing processes. But, system redesign is what makes it competitive to this traditional methods – AM offers a simpler supply chain and leaner operations.

“It’s really exciting to see the potential of additive manufacturing,” Dr. Gemici-Ozkan said. “But where are we in this vision today?”

A timeline showed that the number of metal AM system installations in the first stage of the “diffusion of innovation,” in the 1990s, was less than 50…only the true innovators will put in the work of debugging these first systems and working out the kinks. The early adoption visionaries come in later, excited to invest in the technology.

“The customers are who drive the change,” she said. “So far, we’ve only seen innovators and visionaries.”

She explained that the next generation of the market will consist of the bigger players, or pragmatists, jumping on board. These adopters are cost-conscious, and will be looking for full solutions.

Then, she walked us through what she called the four “critical industries” in metal additive manufacturing. I’m sure you can guess them: medical, dental, aerospace, and automotive. When asked if they were there with the medical field, nearly half the hands in the room were raised, making Dr. Gemici-Ozkan’s point that this sector is a “great space to be in from a metal AM perspective.” The adoption drivers in this industry are cost and performance, with major applications in porous, biocompatible structures with fine features. Here, accuracy, repeatability, and traceability become really important.

Dental is the most mature industry for metal AM, a point that I heard multiple times throughout the day in different presentations. She explained that adoption drivers are lead time and customization; in this and the medical industry, the turnover time with metal 3D printed parts is roughly 24 hours, which you just can’t beat. Additionally, technology providers are focused on meeting customer needs.

In the aerospace industry, industrial production is the main focus. The materials are more versatile, and applications are in large parts and complex geometries with fine features.

“I could talk for hours about this industry,” she said.

“The potential is huge…this space offers a great potential from the industrial production perspective.”

She brought up the GE9X jet engine, which has 304 3D printed components and offers GE Aviation fuel savings of 10% when compared to its predecessor, the GE90, which only featured one 3D printed part.

The automotive industry is already automated, so its needs are focused on cost-conscious systems. Dr. Gemici-Ozkan said that AM technology providers “need to consider integrating their systems to the factory solutions.” The technology will have greater potential in this sector as material costs continue to come down, and she noted that binder jetting will be important in this space.

“Additive manufacturing is not a one-size-fits-all solution – it offers different solutions for different industries and applications,” Dr. Gemici-Ozkan said in summary. “It sounds like it’s all versatile, but these are the building blocks of mainstream technology.”

Then it was time for the next keynote presentation, “Medical 3D Printing: Building the Infrastructure for Innovation,” by Lauralyn McDaniel, Industry Manager, Analysis, for the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME). Part of ASME’s mission is to improve people’s lives through engineering, which is definitely what 3D printing is working towards in the medical field.

McDaniel also started with numbers, with a slide stating that over one million patients had been directly impacted by AM, and that number increases to over two million when you take into account indirect impacts.

“Understanding the history of additive manufacturing in the medical industry can give us clues as to where we go from here,” McDaniel said, before launching into a brief timeline that began with the first 3D printed model from a medical image in 1988.

She explained that some of the factors leading to growth of the technology in the medical field include improved software, more material choices, precision medicine, faster and more precise processes, and the fact that more people share their resources and experience.

“You need published studies to generate the evidence that doctors need,” McDaniel explained.

Challenges include process bottlenecks, verification and validation processes, standards and regulations, and the workforce development.

Then, she cleared up something that many don’t always understand – most materials that people say are FDA-cleared are not, they have just been used in FDA-cleared devices. For example, titanium is often used in orthopedic implants, but the material itself is not cleared by the FDA, it’s just been cleared for use in the implant.

Continuing on to the regulatory process, McDaniel explained that there’s a “big difference” between a new product, and a new way to make the same product.

“The dental industry has a whole infrastructure set up to match patients with devices and implants, 3D printing just gives them a new, more efficient way to do it,” she said. “But anatomical models is a whole new product category.”

McDaniel said that ASME is supporting a series of discussions about the FDA’s concept framework for 3D printing at the point-of-care, and has worked with the agency to create validation and verification standards, including those for 3D printed medical devices. Just over half of the medical devices that have been cleared by the FDA are metal, so never fear, polymers are still significant in this space.

On the clinical side of things, standards aren’t quite as common, but she mentioned that the RSNA Special Interest Group is working to develop guidelines to help others with their own processes.

Some of the development highlights that McDaniel touched on include 3D printing-enabled tissue fabrication, clear dental aligners, which “exploded a bit because some of the patents expired,” tissue fabrication in outer space, and the fact that nearly 150 3D printed medical devices have been cleared by the FDA overall; at least three of these were patient-specific.

Moving forward with medical 3D printing, McDaniel said we need more collaboration and sharing of our experiences and resources, along with continuing materials development, improved software and AI, increased standards development, and more regulatory clarification, especially in hospitals.

Stay tuned to 3DPrint.com as we continue to bring you the news from our third annual AMS Summit.

Discuss this and other 3D printing topics at 3DPrintBoard.com or share your thoughts below.

[Photos: Sarah Saunders]

The post AMS 2020: Keynote Presentations on 3D Printing in Metal and Medical Industries appeared first on 3DPrint.com | The Voice of 3D Printing / Additive Manufacturing.

Early Bird Discount for AMS 2020, “The Business of 3D Printing,” Ends Tomorrow, February 5th

3DPrint.com and SmarTech Analysis will be holding the third annual Additive Manufacturing Strategies event next week, February 11th-12th,  at the Seaport World Trade Center in Boston, Massachusetts. This year, AMS 2020 is titled “The Business of 3D Printing: Medicine, Dentistry and Metals,” and will be centered around 3D printing business practices and applications in both the medical and dental fields, as well as industries, such as automotive, which use metal often.

AMS 2019

Tomorrow, February 5th, is the last day for attendees to take advantage of the final Early Bird registration discount for this event. Full access to the entire Additive Manufacturing Strategies summit, which will include an exhibit hall, multiple keynote presentations, the annual Startup Competition, a networking reception, fireside chats, SmarTech’s forecasts on 3D printing for the medical and dental industries, and more, requires paid registration. You can attend the competition and stop in to visit the exhibit hall for free, but you’ll still need to register.

Members of the 3DPrint.Com and SmarTech Analysis teams will be present during the event to meet with other attendees, and more than 60 expert speakers will be on hand to share their expertise with us at AMS 2020 in panels, presentations, and fireside chats. About 30 exhibitors and sponsors, including Platinum Sponsor Global Advanced Metals and Gold Sponsor EOS, will be there as well.

While AMS traditionally covers 3D printing in the medical and dental fields, the metals track is new this year. In fact, SmarTech just released a new report on metal additive manufacturing service bureaus, which will be one of many topics addressed at AMS 2020 next week.

“This is SmarTech’s latest business assessment and market forecast of metal additive manufacturing services,” SmarTech writes about its report. “It updates our analysis and market projections and also extends the coverage to include a broader range of services and profiles of leading AM service firms.  It also assesses the impact on the business of service bureaus on the changes that have occurred in end user industries and on the dramatic shift of AM to become a fully-fledged manufacturing process.”

Image: SmarTech Analysis

To gain full access to our AMS 2020 event, and receive the final Early Bird discount, you need to register by tomorrow, February 5th.

Discuss this news and other 3D printing topics at 3DPrintBoard.com or share your thoughts in the Facebook comments below.

The post Early Bird Discount for AMS 2020, “The Business of 3D Printing,” Ends Tomorrow, February 5th appeared first on 3DPrint.com | The Voice of 3D Printing / Additive Manufacturing.

AMS 2020 Focusing on Business of 3D Printing in Medical, Dental, and Metals

In just a little over one week, 3DPrint.com and SmarTech Analysis will be holding our third annual Additive Manufacturing Strategies event. For the second year running, the summit will be taking place in Boston; the first AMS summit was held in Washington, DC in 2018. Titled “The Business of 3D Printing: Medicine, Dentistry and Metals,” AMS 2020 focuses on – you guessed it – 3D printing applications and business practices in the medical and dental fields, as well as industries that frequently use metal, such as aerospace. While the first two AMS events were also centered around medical and dental 3D printing, the metals track is a new one for the conference this year.

Over 60 expert speakers will be sharing their expertise with us at AMS 2020, focusing specifically on end-user experiences, regulatory perspectives, and the vendor and materials companies. Specific topics will include multilaser 3D printers, emerging trends for 3D printing in healthcare, 3D printed implants, hybrid metal and large-format 3D printers, 3D printing and modeling in surgical planning, the future of metals binder jetting, software and design for metal 3D printing, 3D printing in the aerospace and automotive sectors, materials for 3D printed dental applications, 3D bioprinting, and much more.

Members of both the 3DPrint.Com and SmarTech Analysis teams will be present over the two day event to meet with other attendees. In addition, Scott Dunham, the Vice President of Research for SmarTech Analysis, will offer forecasts on 3D printing in the medical and dental industries.

Scott Dunham at AMS 2019. Photograph taken by Sarah Saunders

AMS 2020 will also feature a networking reception, fireside chats, and the Startup Competition. OsseoPrint 3D was the winner of last year’s competition, for its platform technology for implantable, 3D printed, patient-specific bone scaffolds, and received a $15,000 cash investment from early stage venture fund Asimov Ventures. At this year’s competition, seven different contestants will compete against each other at 6:05 pm on February 11th.

Attendees can also visit the exhibit hall at the summit and speak with representatives from many different companies, including:

  • Additive Orthopaedics
  • Arburg
  • ASME
  • FibreTuff
  • nTopology
  • R&D Technologies
  • Tethon 3D

AMS 2019 exhibit hall. Photograph taken by Sarah Saunders

Coffee sponsors for this year’s event are 3D printing consultancy Blueprint and VELO3D, while EOS is a Gold Sponsor and Global Advanced Metals is a Platinum Sponsor. Media sponsors include Women in 3D Printing, 3DMedNet, 3DHeals, Inside 3D Printing, and more.

For free entrance to the exhibit hall and the startup competition, you will need to register ahead of time. To gain full access to the entire event, and receive the final Early Bird discount, register by February 5th. AMS 2020 will be held at the Seaport World Trade Center from February 11-12. We hope to see you there!

Discuss this news and other 3D printing topics at 3DPrintBoard.com or share your thoughts in the Facebook comments below.

The post AMS 2020 Focusing on Business of 3D Printing in Medical, Dental, and Metals appeared first on 3DPrint.com | The Voice of 3D Printing / Additive Manufacturing.

Additive Manufacturing Strategies Boston February 11-12 Early Bird Savings

With over 50 speakers focusing on medical/dental/metals and new materials topics the upcoming AMS will be a stimulating learning and networking experience for attendees. In addition, the exhibit hall recently has added EOS as a gold sponsor. We’re proud to have EOS, an industry stalwart and key firm in industrial 3D printing as a sponsor. EOS joins Global Advanced Metals the world’s leading tantalum supplier and a key supplier of Tantalum and Niobium powder and wire for Additive as a sponsor.

Additive Orthopaedics, a leader in patient-specific 3D printed implants, Arfona a specialized dental OEM and Tethon3D DLP printing for ceramics and iron, Arburg a leading injection molding firm that has a line of 3D printers that can print granulate, testing and inspection company Element, simulation software firm MSC Software, bone-like material supplier FiberTuff, Women in 3D Printing, Additive Manufacturing design software firm nTopology, and ASME the American Society of Mechanical Engineers are all exhibiting. Members of the 3DPrint.Com and SmarTech Analysis teams will be present over the two days to meet with the industry. We hope that many people will take this time to engage in peer to peer learning and learn directly from materials and medical leaders in polymer and metal 3D printing. This highly specific and highly directed event is valuable because it is only interesting for and directed at a small segment of people interested in applying 3D printing to medicine and dental. Entrance to the exhibit hall and the start-up competition on 11 February are free but registration is necessary. You can register here.

For full access, the early bird discount of 30% ends on January the 16th.

The post Additive Manufacturing Strategies Boston February 11-12 Early Bird Savings appeared first on 3DPrint.com | The Voice of 3D Printing / Additive Manufacturing.

Additive Manufacturing Strategies February 2020 Metals Keynote By Dr. Banu Gemici-Ozkan of GE Additive Announced

Dr. Banu Gemici-Ozkan, Senior Market Intelligence Leader at GE Additive will be the keynoter for the Metals/New Materials track at Additive Manufacturing Strategies February 11-12, 2020 at the Seaport Hotel, Boston, Massachusetts.  In addition over 28 other speakers are part of a focused conference that covers medicine, dentistry, metals, and new materials. The exhibit hall features many organizations also focused on these vertical aspects of 3D Printing. Early Bird savings end on 5 December

Dr. Banu Gemici-Ozkan manages all global market research and intelligence activities for all of GE Additive’s businesses. We’re very proud to have a keynote speaker who brings so much 3D printing market knowledge to our forum. She will be joined by other speakers such as: 

  • Les Kalman, Assistant Professor, Restorative Dentistry, Schulich School of Medicine, Western University who is an expert on using metal 3D printing technologies in clinical dentistry.
  • Dr. Gregory Brown who is the Vice President, Process Engineering at Velo3D
  • Rich Kaplow Chief Product Officer of PostProcess
  • Bryan Crutchfield Vice President of Materialise America.
  • Mike Grau, Technical Manager Advanced Consulting
  • Brett Harris Product Manager Materials HP MetalJet
  • Gabi Janssen DSM’s Global Leader Healthcare Segment, Additive Manufacturing
  • Oleksandra Korotchuk BASF 3D Printing Solutions’ Business Development Manager

Find out more here.

The post Additive Manufacturing Strategies February 2020 Metals Keynote By Dr. Banu Gemici-Ozkan of GE Additive Announced appeared first on 3DPrint.com | The Voice of 3D Printing / Additive Manufacturing.

Enter the 2020 Additive Manufacturing Strategies Startup Competition

February 11th through 12th 2020 will see another Additive Manufacturing Strategies Event in Boston. A small scale summit-like event for industry leaders specific to the metal printing and medical 3D printing market these events bring together and educate a select number of highly interested professionals. Additive Manufacturing Strategies events are focused on professionals implementing 3D printing in manufacturing and production for metals, dental and medical.

As a part of this event, VC Fund Asimov Ventures will once again be hosting a startup competition. This competition will see you:

  • Apply to compete for a $15,000 investment from VC fund Asimov Ventures.
  • The winning company will be profiled on 3DPrint.com.

The timeline of the Competition is:

  • Deadline: December 1, 2019
  • Interviews: December 2-9, 2019
  • Selections Announced: December 15, 2019
  • Competition Date: February 11, 2020

The rules are:

  1. Applications must be submitted by December 1, 2019
  2. In order to compete you must be available to pitch in-person February 11, 2019, in Boston, MA (travel not provided)
  3. If selected to compete you will receive a free conference pass to Additive Manufacturing Strategies.
  4. Please note that due to the overwhelming number of submissions we receive only companies which are selected will be contacted
  5. Revenue cannot be greater than $500,000
  6. Software, Hardware, Materials and Bioprinting focus is welcome

Apply Here.

Home Page

The post Enter the 2020 Additive Manufacturing Strategies Startup Competition appeared first on 3DPrint.com | The Voice of 3D Printing / Additive Manufacturing.