MFj Archives - Perfect 3D Printing Filament

Additive Manufacturing and 3D Printing in 2019

Additive manufacturing is changing the world. Another term for 3D printing, additive manufacturing differs from other forms of manufacturing in that, rather than removing material like machining, it adds material to create a product. This offers many unique advantages, from unprecedented customization and precision to a whole new world of shapes that are not possible with other techniques.

3D printing works by providing a carefully planned CAD file to a computer that runs a 3D printer. This machine prints the material layer by layer. There are a variety of materials and methods for 3D printing. You can 3D print plastic, nylon, metal, and more. Products can be printed through traditional 3D printing or through more specialized processes like selective laser sintering (SLS) or multi jet fusion (MJF), where there is no need for support structures to print complex designs. Between the design, material, and the process, no additive manufacturing job is quite alike.

These factors allow for some incredible customization of designs. You don’t have to modify an existing template or object. Additive manufacturing allows for strangely shaped spaces and corners. Weight can be more easily managed thanks to this kind of customization and the wide range of available materials. Some designs are incredibly delicate yet smooth. There is no need for support structures for these designs, allowing a lot of creative freedom that wasn’t previously available once you got off the drawing board.

Additive manufacturing already sees a lot of use. There are plenty of hobbyists out there, certainly, but it’s also being used by businesses to do things like produce prototypes or even their main product from custom parts for almost anything to modeling kits. Companies such as HP and Honeywell are developing 3D printing technology as we speak. They’re looking to improve quality and efficiency as well as allow for a new range of materials to be printed. These are not pie-in-the-sky ideas, but real developments that are already making a mark.

This is because a company has a lot to gain from switching from traditional manufacturing techniques to additive manufacturing. 3D printing is a great way to save money. The ability to reduce weight can be a major factor, especially if you are looking to make parts. It’s possible to create hollow or honeycomb-structured parts that are just as strong and capable as solid ones, but much lighter.

You can also order to demand. other manufacturing techniques may require you to order a minimum number of products that is much larger than what you actually need. This is because there is a much larger start-up cost to these techniques for a product line and the company needs to make a profit, not a loss, on your order. Additive manufacturing does not work this way. You can order three or three-hundred products, whatever you need. The cost of an order largely comes from the material that needs to be used to make it.

This makes 3D printing an excellent choice if you do not need a massive, expensive order. The quality will still be high, but the price will be much lower and you won’t be stuck with stock you can’t sell, taking up room that can be better used for other things.

Additive manufacturing is less wasteful, too. Traditional manufacturing techniques are messy and leave a lot of scraps behind. Not so with additive manufacturing. It’s far more efficient with material. What scraps are produced are often recycled, melted back down to be used for more 3D printing. You are only charged for the material that is actually used to create the product(s), not what’s used plus the scraps that end up on the shop floor.

This incredible and increasing cost efficiency of 3D printing means additive manufacturing making waves in manufacturing. It’s not just for custom phone cases and graduate student research projects anymore. More and more businesses are choosing to use 3D printing to make their products. This has prompted new technological developments as the possibilities of 3D printing have been explored.

Check out these major developments in 3D printing for 2019 (which is only half over!):

HP just opened its 3D Printing and Digital Manufacturing Center of Excellence in Barcelona, Spain. HP has been on the leading edge of 3D printer development. HP has just released new materials like Nylon 11 and TPU (a material that is highly flexible like rubber). This facility is a center for testing and collaboration between industry experts and customers alike. Expect to see a lot of additive manufacturing news to come out of here.

Photocentric introduced its Liquid Crystal (LC) Magna system. This is their second largest LCD printer.This new 3D printer is 10 times faster than its predecessor. It has 23.8 inch 4K Ultra HD screen with a custom backlight. These allow for an average print accuracy of within 50 µm and model tolerances of less than 100µm. It takes only a few hours to produce batches of custom products.

Autodesk, one of the major players in the additive manufacturing software world, released new add-ons for its 3D modeling software Fusion 360. This entry-level platform now provides cost-estimation and generative design. It’s a popular choice for those looking to start getting into 3D printing design and it is now an even better choice.

EOS and ALM have just released HT-23, a new PEKK carbon fiber material that is a high-performance polymer that is extremely chemically resistant, has a high melt point, and is inherently flame retardant.

At Jawstec, we are ready to help your business take advantage of 3D printing. We keep track of the latest developments in the industry and our experts can leverage them to help you create the product you want. Whether you’re looking to produce a prototype or a whole product line, our 3D printing services offer an efficient, budget-friendly option. Contact us today to get a free 3D printing design quote so we can help you move your business forward with additive manufacturing.

The post Additive Manufacturing and 3D Printing in 2019 appeared first on 3DPrint.com | The Voice of 3D Printing / Additive Manufacturing.

Interview with Scott Schiller Global Head of Market Development at HP 3D Printing About Manufacturing Using 3D Printing

Scott Schiller is the Global Head of Market Development at HP. He’s also brilliant and has a long history of building HP businesses in Inkjet and digital press. HP is, of course, a huge company with an incredible degree of technical prowess which they’re bringing to bear on 3D printing. But, in our industry, in terms of installed base, they’re a startup. They have to be agile and bring new strategies to win in our market. If they stick it out and keep pouring on their research capacity then I think we can all agree that HP will stay a major player in our market. But, large corporations can be capricious and visions like dreams can change. So for HP, were always looking to see how permanent HP’s commitment to 3D printing is. A good sign of this is HP eating its own dogfood. If the company truly internally uses 3D printing widely then the technology will permeate the entire organization and hopefully make them more competitive and cost-efficient in many fields. The 3D printing idea is that it will speed up time to market and make organizations more agile. So every time a large company engages with the technology we would expect for them to use it internally as well to consolidate parts, make more niche products, save weight and do all the things the technology is supposed to do. That’s, why it is extremely good news that HP is using over 140 3D printed parts on its 300 and 500 series 3D Printers. The company truly is eating its own dog food and using 3D printing to save money and be more competitive. We interviewed Scott about this and also learned that they have 80% powder reusability and are speeding up time to market in various products. Scott is also the first person to go on the record to claim that “The question isn’t if 3D printing will be the new platform for global mass-production, it’s when.”

A PA 12 Part

What material are you using?

“Our Multi Jet Fusion printers use thermoplastic materials — PA12 and PA11 — which can also be recycled, both as a powder and as a printed part. HP’s 3D High Reusability PA12, which is developed to allow reuse of surplus powder batch after batch, delivers consistent performance while achieving 80 percent surplus powder reusability. In addition, our PA11 material is a 100 percent bio-based content polymer derived from the oil of the castor bean.”

What kinds of parts do you print?

“One of my favourite examples is the 140-plus parts in our 300/500 series which we printed on our very own Multi Jet Fusion.

“Some other examples include spare parts we’ve produced for our Large Format Printing business, HP inkjet printheads, and a part for the HP Z 3D Camera in which we were able to reduce the design cycle by six weeks.

“Another great example is how our team based in Israel used Multi Jet Fusion to come up with unthinkable new design possibilities for our large format printers with cost savings of up to 90 percent per part.”

An HP PA 11 part

Why do you do this?

“HP is one of the world’s largest and most advanced technology companies: a $50 billion global business that produces over 100 million products per year in 170 countries via one of the biggest and most sophisticated design, engineering, and supply chains ever created. HP’s use of Multi Jet Fusion illustrates how 3D printing technology is digitally transforming large enterprises and reinventing the global manufacturing industry. We believe strongly in our innovations and could think of no better way to reinvent our own company than by digitally transforming our design, manufacturing, and supply chain operations across all business units using our own Multi Jet Fusion 3D printing technology.

“Most importantly, we’re using our 3D printing technology to reinvent our own models because it makes economic sense. Since using our 3D printing technology, we’ve already seen efficiencies in the time it takes to get products to market, we’ve seen performance increase and economic advantages, and 3D printing allows us to do more in the way of personalization.

“Finally, all of these benefits are underscored by something that is near and dear to us at HP, which is sustainability. By weaving 3D printing into our supply chain operations, we can lower our impact on the environment by producing components locally (which reduces the carbon footprint), reducing production time (which means less energy is spent creating products and parts), and sleep easy knowing the recyclability and reusability of the materials we use is industry-leading.”

What would you advise a company that wants to explore manufacturing with 3D printing?

“3D printing technology can have a major impact on industries from automotive to healthcare to heavy industry, and huge global brands are beginning to reinvent their businesses for the digital manufacturing future. The question isn’t if 3D printing will be the new platform for global mass-production, it’s when. And production is just one piece of it. A huge component of 3D printing adoption is mastering digital workflows. On a base level, the similarities between industrial 2D printing and 3D printing are really striking – digital production all comes down to providing unique value as a function of better supply and demand management. With respect to capital, the basic cost structures between industrial 2D and 3D look similar, but the physics of 3D printing are obviously much different and should not be underestimated when considering long-term value. In terms of timing, it’s still early enough in the broad adoption of 3D printing that there’s plenty of time for learning, and plenty of competitive advantages for organizations that want to transform their business with digital manufacturing.”

Is this also a useful technology for tens of thousands of identical parts?

“3D printing is absolutely a solution for mass production. We recently announced HP Metal Jet, a ground breaking, voxel-level binder jetting 3D printing technology designed to withstand high volume printing.

“One of the key benefits of HP Metal Jet is the increase in productivity, providing up to 50 times more productivity than other 3D printing methods.”

Does it make your development more agile?

“Absolutely, one of my favorite examples of this program helping our engineering teams respond more quickly to required redesign during manufacturing was a physical subsystem for the Jet Fusion 3D printer. Minimized tooling reduced the development time of a new subsystem by half and allowed the team to stay on the production cycle.”

Do you have any parts where you reduced part count as well?

“One example is a recreated tool used in the HP printheads manufacturing line – called a ‘drill extraction shoe’ – using Multi Jet Fusion. We were able to consolidate the original tool from 7 parts to just 1. Additionally, we saw a 95 percent cost reduction, 90 percent weight reduction, and can now produce the part in 1-2 days versus 3-5 days.”

What were some of the stumbling blocks to adopting 3D printing internally?

“When it comes to rethinking the way you approach design and manufacturing, there’s a massive cultural shift that needs to happen at an organizational level. For example, historically design engineering and manufacturing engineering teams worked separately. However, when it comes to rethinking parts, these two groups need to work together from start to finish. There’s a lot to be said about the organizational behavior changes that need to occur for companies to be successful in truly reinventing their manufacturing.”

Interview with Kai Witter Looking at the Business Case for DyeMansion Depowdering and Dyeing Powder Bed Fusion Parts

From file to software to machine to finished part takes a design along a path through many different vendors, formats, processes, and interactions. We as an industry are trying to manufacture, reliably with a disparate set of tools and technologies. In between ones and zeroes and finished product we have many crucial steps that get an idea closer towards becoming a thing. Depowdering in powder bed fusion (SLS, selective laser sintering) and other powder technologies such as Multijet Fusion was once seen as a cost center. An annoying laborious task that had to be done. A block of powder with 3D printed parts in it had to be sieved, hand cleaned for the parts to be sorted, matched and shipped. As much as a third of 3D printed part cost is manual labor. You can appreciate this is you see how this depowdering process works and just how labor intensive it is. Companies have traditionally offered tumblers and other surface treatment solutions to ameliorate this and improve surface finish. A few years ago a company wanted to change this. Rather that seeing depowdering as a cost center they saw it as a part of a series of process steps that elevated a mere polymer shape into a consumer-friendly part. Rather than just selling a machine that performed an operation this team, the DyeMansion team developed three different machines that while working together could depowder, surface treat and dye a part. A process chain with a high degree of automation and tooling meant to work together in a highly optimized way. We covered the company before when they raised a series A of five million, when they launched in the US, when they won an award, when they went to AMUG, when they showed at Formnext in 2016 and when they got investment previously.

The Powershot C parts cleaning machine, step 1.

When I got started dyeing SLS parts was done in those electric soup kettles that you see at catered events. We used Dylon meant for coloring t-shirts and had a person stirring by hand. Parts would dye unevenly becoming dark blue on one side and lighter on the other. It was a mess always and cauldrons full of red and blue dye were everywhere. It didn’t exactly feel like the future of manufacturing rather more the future of witchcraft. And that is precisely where we are now. We’re going from spells, hope, exotic ingredients and promises to ISO, GMP and repeatable production. What do we see? Everyone wants to make or sell 3D printers, lots of people are developing software and many sell materials but only one firm is developing a line of post-processing solutions that in an integrated way depowders, cleans and surfaces parts. The three machines work in tandem and are rather confusingly named the Dyemansion Powershot C, Powershot S and Dimension DM 60. The Powershot C is not a camera but then again there are precedents in the 3D printing industry in having names similar to camera names. The C cleans parts and depowders them using movement and ionization and damaging parts less than alternatives, while the S is a blasting cabinet with a high degree of automation that gives parts a more closed and more uniform surface texture and structure; and the DM 60 is the dyeing unit.

The S, the second step for surfacing.

All in all I’m a huge believer that in a Gold Rush sell picks and shovels and have heard great things about the labor-saving capabilities of these units from friends. We spoke to Kai Witter who after a long 3D printing career became the sales manager at DyeMansion and is helping bring the technology to manufacturers worldwide.

The DM60 Dyeing unit

Kai said that Dyemansion is, “A company that’s evolving from a startup to a global market leader who offers value-adding post-processing solutions for AM plastic parts manufacturing. We are the challenger of the status quo, together with AM printer manufacturers we challenge injection molding industry.”

How much labor does your depowdering station save? If I did 5 full builds a week, how much money or how many hours would I save?

As usual, all this is application dependent. Let’s look at saved hours as cost of conventional manual blasting units and staff costs vary a lot:

The average cleaning time of one batch with PowerShot C is 10 mins

Let’s assume 100 mid-sized mid complex geometry parts (loading volume is a full HP4200 job or 75% of a EOS P3x Job). So we assume 5 Runs/week

Loading and unloading each 2 mins, in total 4 Mins

Powershot C:

4 mins (loading & unloading)

5 runs a week

50 weeks

4 m(ins) x 5 (runs) x 50 (weeks) = 1000 mins or 16,5 hrs

Conventional manual blasting:

3 mins average. cleaning time/part

4 mins (loading & unloading)

5 runs a week

50 weeks

Cleaning: 100 (parts) x 3 (mins) x 5 (runs) x 50 (weeks) = 75.000 mins/1.250hrs

Loading & unloading: 4 (mins) x 5 (runs) x 50 (weeks) = 1.000 mins

76.000 mins or 1267 hrs

16 vs 1267 hrs
Powershot C saves 1251 working hours.

So it is three units that work together? How do they work and how much do they cost?

The three unity combined build an integrated workflow, so called ‘print-2-Product’ workflow to turn 3D printed raw parts into high value products in 3 hours only. Automated, efficient and reproducible.

Powershot C: Cleans parts in 10 mins only, without damaging the surface. Compared to manual cleaning we assure the sensitive surface of 3D printed raw parts is not damaged from too much blasting pressure and broken or worn blasting media.

Powershot S: Refines the surface of the raw parts with a smooth touch, matte-glossy finish and improves scratch and water resistance of the parts in 10 mins only. The PolyShot process prepares the part for homogeneous dye absorption that leads to an even color image over the complete surface of each part and all the parts.

DyeMansion DM60: Is the fully automated Dyeing system to fit out the parts with any color required. The DM60 adds the final value to parts. Launched at tct 2018 we have added 170 standard RAL colors to our out of the box portfolio. Any other color, suiting the material and required finish of the part can be developed at DyeMansion in only 3-4 weeks

So how does it work as an investment?

“If we assume industry standard of 5 years depreciation and the calculation above (saving 1250 hrs pa) customers have a positive impact on their bottom line after the 1^st month of using the Powershot C.”

Why is damage prevention so important?

“Our infiltration Dyeing process does not add a layer to the raw part as we know it from spry painting. They dye connects with the material and avoids another process step to create a nice surface. Further it enables to finish printed textures, eg leather structure alike textures as used for automotive or aerospace interior parts.”

What does the ionization do?

“It removes the static charge of the parts and thus avoids that parts attract loose powder residue in the cabin atmosphere back to the parts. It ensures that parts are really clean.”

Why is a homogenous surface quality important?

“A homogeneous dye absorption is the prerequisite for an even color image of the end use part. We finish the printed part including printed textures without any impact on the geometry. Neither the Powershot C (Step 1), nor Powershot S (Step 2) are abrasive and (Step 3) the dyeing, does not add a layer to the part like spray painting does. Thus, an additional process ta accomplish high quality end-use part surface is not required.”

How does the second step work?

“The PolyShot surfacing is a proprietary surface compression process with plastic media to even out the heterogeneous surface roughness and porosity of 3D Printed plastic parts.”

Why is the feel of the product important?

People are used to comparing parts with what they know, such as Injection molded parts. Rough surfaces don’t create an image of quality, they are scratch and dirt sensitive.

It is all about perception and mind change. The high-quality perception of 3D printed parts on a manufacturing level, even if the visual appearance may not be relevant for the functionality (functional end-use parts or functional protoytypes) is a prerequisite to open up more and more applications that are injection molded today, maybe only because of the feel.

Does it make it feel more luxurious?

I would not call it luxurious. I think it meets injection molded standards, at least. Nevertheless, some of our customers from the life style industry describe our matte-glossy look as more valuable than the typical shiny look & feel known from Injection molded parts.

How long do these steps take?

Step 1 – Powershot Cleaning => 10 mins
Step 2 – Polyshot Surfacing => 10 Mins before the dyeing and optionally a few minutes after the dyeing to increase the matte-glossy look & feel.
Step 3 – Dyeing => 90 to 150 mins

How does the coloring process work?

“We have developed an automated, flexible, geometry independent infiltration process where the parts are constantly moving in a water bath. The cartridge is filled with the recipe (reflecting color, material and finish) to accomplish the required color. Further a RFID chip on the cartridge defines the required process parameters such as temperature curve, holding time and pressure that is required. The dye connects with the part as a chemical reaction.

The recipe and DM60 process together make reproducible, high quality end-use parts. The operator just scans the RFID information, adds parts and Cartridge to the part basket of the DM60 and presses start. After 90 – 150 mins the DM60 process is finished including a cleaning and fixation step. When the DM 60 door opens, parts a free of dye.”

How much are the cartridges and how do they work?

“The cartridge price varies between €40 and €105 depending on the required volume of the dyebath.

The cartridge contains the recipe for the required color and the RFID Chip for the required DM60 process parameters. The cartridge is inserted into a shaft at the bottom of the part basket. The cartridge is opened and the dye mixed with the water when the DM60 has reached the process conditions. After 90-150 minutes the parts are ready just a little moisture (Dye free) from the cleaning a fixation phase remains.”

How many colors can I do?

“We have around 200 Colors of the shelf and have developed more than 400 individual colors for customers, such as corporate colors, creative colors and for special finishes. We can develop almost any color within 3-4 weeks development time.The price is €250 for a defined color from a color system such as Pantone and €750 form a reference part.”

What are some of the interesting things customers are doing with your products?

This is always the toughest questions. There are so many interesting and mind-blowing applications with DyeMansion. But the competitive advantage our customers accomplish prevents them from making it public. Famous parts are automotive and Aerospace interior parts, prothesis and orthoses, medical devices and instruments, Eyewear frames and top-notch sports shoes with 3D Printed and DM finished midsoles.

Kupol 3D Printed Cycling Helmets Ready for Prime Time

Years ago a colleague of mine made a presentation discussing 3D Printed helmets. His point was that a helmet was an example of something that would be difficult to commercialize as a 3D printed product because of regulatory issues. You could get a better fit or even a safer helmet with 3D printing, but how would you be able to crash test all of the helmets? If each helmet has to be crushed 180 times for regulatory approval, then how would you test an individual helmet? Today a Canadian firm think that they’ve found an answer to this problem by designing and making a 3D printed helmet. This project was started back in 2017 and the team has been refining it ever since. We’ve seen a number of 3D printed bike helmet designs on our site, some are whimsical others very serious, will Kupol be the one that we wear? Designed to take advantage of 3D printing the Kupol bicycle helmets can be customized and make use of novel 3D printed structures to absorb impacts and engender comfort. We interviewed Gabriel Boutin, the CEO of Kupol to find out more.

The Kupol 3D Printed Bike Helmet

What material is the helmet made of?

Our helmets are currently made of PA12, which is the most common material in terms of plastic powder. It’s a great choice for its mechanical properties. We plan to test using polypropylene as soon as it is available on the market for MFJ, and are committed to making sure we use the safest and most efficient technology available.

Why did you pick this material?

Density and thickness are the main factors we test to reach a specific energy-absorption score. Our test results show that there are no real limitations in terms of materials. In fact, our 3D printed structures can be adapted to use with a wide range of plastic powders.

The Kinetic Bumpers inside the Kupol helmet.

Why a 3D printed helmet?

As a consultant in the field of helmet design for over a decade, I’ve come to the conclusion that the main road block in the evolution of helmets is the manufacturing process.

The cycling helmet was always meant to evolve into a sophisticated 3D printed object. The foam helmet as we know it has not significantly advanced in more than twenty years. It’s high time for a revolution.

Molding the insulating material—called expanded polystyrene—was a major obstacle to fulfilling our promise of comfort. That’s why we came up with our patent-pending KOLLIDE safety system, composed of three parts. The 3D KORE is a matrix that collapses on impact to take the brunt of the force while acting as a foundation for our two additional layers of technology. The outer KINETIC BUMPERS cushion your head and act as a density absorption layer to slow the speed of impact before it reaches you. Finally, the inner helmet is lined with OKTOPUS technology, made from over 100 flexible, independent sucker-like pods that offer an adjusted, aerated fit as well as allow the helmet to move in rotation to absorb any kind of impact.

Is it customized? How?

Thanks to 3D printing, we can offer a product that’s available in twice the number sizes of traditional helmets. A better fit means better protection. Also, the 100+ OKTOPUS pods inside the 3D KORE enable us to provide a helmet with a semi-soft interior that adapts seamlessly to any head shape.In future, we plan to offer a wider range of colors and graphics to suit everyone’s tastes. Can customizable, full-color 3D printing be in the cards? I’m thinking that’s a yes.

How long does it take to make?

The printing time is actually quite fast. In about 12 hours, you can print 8 or so complete 3D KOREs. We print the main portion of the helmet in 4 sections to make the most of the space available in the build unit. Then we assemble the pieces, taking advantage of complete design freedom thanks to additive manufacturing. We work in collaboration with HP on their multi-jet fusion platform to achieve the best productivity and quality available on the market today.

What advantages does 3D printing bring to the user?

3D printing is the only manufacturing process that lets the designer focus solely on their goal: head safety. Other manufacturing techniques such as injection molding force the designer to compromise on so many aspects, from size to draft angles, fewer SKUs, and more. On the other hand, the user wants a helmet that’s as light as possible while offering superior protection as well as breathability. They want a perfect fit without uncomfortable pressure points, and expect the cutting edge of safety for the price they are willing to pay. The cyclist isn’t looking for compromise—they want it all. And that’s just what kupol gives them.

How do you ensure quality control?

Each print contains several test specimens that are controlled using precise engineering methods. We also perform impact tests to ensure the deceleration is constant. We are living in a time when 3D printing technology can deliver a constant and reliable output—which is key for what’s considered the 4th industrial revolution.

How can you ensure that all helmets are safe?

Our helmets will be put through the standard certification process—CPSC for North America, CE for Europe—as well as undergo any other qualifications required. Our mission at kupol is to contribute significantly to the advancement of head safety, and everything we do is a reflection of that commitment.

Who’s on your team?

Although our team is relatively small, we have adequate funding that allows us to work in collaboration with several renowned partners. My own unique experience in helmet design includes over a dozen helmet projects for other brands. Our 3D printing approach also allows for something I like to call asymmetric warfare—especially when it comes to current industry leaders. In the past, if someone like me wanted to develop their own helmet, there was only one possible path: fly to China, work with a major player, pay for expensive tooling, order minimum quantities, limit the number of SKUs, wait several months to receive your first helmet, find distributors, and hope for the best. Now? A small company can completely reinvent the industry thanks to additive manufacturing.

What are your future plans?

At kupol, we want to reinvent more than the cycling helmet. We believe we’ve found the right recipe to redesign other types of helmets, which is our goal for the long term. In the short term, we’re preparing to launch our first kupol cycling helmet—a versatile product for riders who commute, cycle for speed, or head off road.

Helmets have long been a target for people in 3D printing. Kupol seems to be bringing considerable industry experience to bear and combining this with 3D printing. Leveraging experience through new technology is always going to be a novel approach that leads to some results. How good are those results? We’ll have to see about that in the future. For now, the approach seems solid and kupol seems peppered by 3D printing wisdom such as optimizing parts for nesting, splitting up assemblies for different functions and increasing the number of variations. What I think is the smartest thing that they’ve done is to not be seduced by the dream of everyone’s unique head a unique helmet but rather to increase comfort through design and using 3D printing’s ability to create absorbing and flexible structures. They then did increase the number of sizes to aid in comfort but did not make an infinite number of helmets available. Infinite helmet variations is perhaps the dream but the team is sticking to an easier to produce but still advantageous design initially. This seems like a smart move.

These kinds of startups could represent a big win for HP as well. For many goods, it makes sense to stick to the tried and true and with those that have track records (eg EOS). With a new thing, however, why not learn on a new platform? Also, even though HP is a giant firm comparatively the company is the challenger in the market, the 800-pound startup if you will. A recipe for disaster perhaps or possibilities of le leveraging synergies and advantages that other manufacturers don’t have. If HP is hungry and flexible enough then they have the ability to nurture, incubate and grow startups in their ecosystem. HP can spend the time and candlepower to help startups get up to speed. If HP would fail at this for a decade and produce one Invisalign or similar it would be well worth it. Meanwhile, at EOS it is “bitte warten sie” (please hold) while the company scales to meet demand while hiring hundreds of people to serve customers. At this point, it may just be enough for two firms to be at very different growth phases to make a significant difference as to how this market plays out. The powder bed technologies have in my mind always been a perfect match with medical, safety and other personalized regulated gear and partners. Kupol is in and of itself a great opportunity but the bigger picture to see who commercializes anything from PPE to sports equipment and medical assistive devices is being played out as we speak through Kupol and the choices they and their competitors make.