3D printing is said to be taking off this year. We asked industry experts to explore the pros and cons of this remarkable expanding technology as well as issues such as intellectual property and material challenges.
Dr. Anton du Plessis, manager, CT Scanner Facility, Stellenbosch University; Natalee Robertson, MakerBot product manager, Rectron; Brian Andrew, GM, RS Components South Africa; David Bullock, MD, Rapid 3D and Anle Els, XYZ printing product manager, Mustek.
3D printing is being hailed as the most exciting technological development of the current decade. Is the hype overtaking the reality?
Dr. Anton du Plessis, Stellenbosch University said that the hype can be overwhelming at times, especially from people trying to sell 3D printers. “There are some very exciting developments though, especially in the top-end industrial metal additive manufacturing. On the consumer 3D printer side, the systems are all becoming cheaper and simpler to run ‘out of the box’, and therefore becoming accessible with more and more walk-in 3D print shops, 3D print labs and it is now possible for under R10 000 to get started in your own garage. For example, at Stellenbosch University we have an open access 3D print lab called the Idea2Product Lab, where you can make your own prints or learn about 3D printing.”
Natalee Robertson, MakerBot Product Manager, Rectron: “In my personal opinion, I think that 3D printing has been misrepresented to the public, creating some unrealistic expectations associated with this technology. However, I believe that a lot of the hype associated with 3D printing holds merit due to what it offers, within both the consumer and professional arenas. I don’t believe that the hype is exceeding reality, but it is important to note that within a South African context, we must educate the market to ensure thorough understanding of this technology and its abilities.”
David Bullock, MD, Rapid 3D also believes that there is a lot of hype and in many cases misinformation around the application of the various 3D printing technologies. “It is also important to note that there are several sectors such as jewellery and hearing aid manufacture where the use of 3d printing is well established and has been in use as a production tool for more than a decade.”
Brian Andrew, GM, RS Components South Africa has a different opinion: “Not at all, the reality is that 3D printing is a game changer for the twenty-first century. It is printing on a whole new level from body parts to clothing and jewellery. The strides made in the medical industry are phenomenal with being able to create customised prosthetics, crowns for teeth and various medical apparatus. The exciting thing about this industry is that it is still evolving and there are new applications and techniques being developed every day. “
Anle Els, XYZ printing product manager, Mustek says that 3D printing isn’t overtaking reality; however, it is one of the technologies that will change the way we perceive everyday life.”It will create new and exciting opportunities for individuals while teaching the children of today concepts older generations could not even dream of.”
Various research reports indicate that 3D printers consume 50 to 100 times more energy than injection moulding, cause unhealthy emissions and generally are not environmentally-friendly. Is this an overreaction or do you believe that there is merit in the statement and if so why?
Natalee Robertson: “First of all it is really difficult to compare 3D printing to injection moulding or other types of production models as its core value is not in producing thousands of units. Its strength lies in offering in-house management for development and conceptual designing rather than a production machine. I don’t believe that emissions from extruding are any more harmful than the normal carbon fumes we breathe in daily on our roads. That being said, as this technology is still fairly ‘new’, we will only be able to truly know whether this statement is accurate in years to come.”
Dr. Anton du Plessis agrees that 3D printing is not a competitor for injection moulding. “Its advantages are customisation, complexity and small scale manufacture. It will never be cheaper or more efficient than conventional means but will make more things possible than before.”
David Bullock: “3d printing is not a technology that competes with injection moulding but there is a lot more to the argument when you start considering the logistical benefits of printing the required components where they are needed.”
Brian Andrew: “Most subtraction processes have some sort of environmental impact which have been resolved or improved over time. Traditionally 3D printing has been used for small runs, so waste and energy consumption are low when compared to mass production runs that involve injection moulding. 3D printing does consume a fair amount of energy, so as it moves into full scale industrialisation we will need to look at how to improve energy consumption, waste and emissions. Already there is work in progress to deal with wastage and there are prototypes for solar-powered 3D printers. So in a nutshell I believe this is an overreaction to something that is still in its formative phase. In terms of being environmentally-friendly, 3D printing is part of a handful of manufacturing processes that can use bio-degradable materials.”
3D printers are often indicated as a device for rapid prototyping. Is the technology world still at that stage or has 3D printing entered the production arena?
Dr. Anton du Plessis “It has not moved to production yet, but it is moving in that direction. Technologically production is possible but there is no market need for large scale production using 3D printing at this stage.”
Natalee Robertson: “Certainly from my experience, 3D printing has entered the manufacturing and production world. There are so many different verticals where 3D printing has brought great value as an operational tool, increasing business’ bottom line and options that were previously not considered prior to this technology. The term rapid is perhaps not entirely accurate as the process itself does take some time. It is, however, much faster than outsourcing the task to a third party, where you wait on occasions up to weeks for the prototype, and then additional changes still need to be effected afterwards. Therefore it is safe to say that it certainly reduces the timeframe for businesses to go to mass production once concepts have been approved.”
There are currently three major known technologies, stereolithography, fused deposition modelling (FDM) and selective laser sintering (SLS). FDM appears to be the most commonly used. In your opinion where will the market go? Will one “super” technology emerge?
Dave Bullock disagrees with the notion that one super technology will emerge. “I do not believe that there will be one super technology, there are in fact more than seven different technologies and they all have their areas of application. Almost without exception they have all been successfully employed in various business sectors.”
Anie Els agrees: “The current technologies used for 3D printing each have a unique place in the 3D printing sphere, which will evolve rather than become a ‘super’ technology.”
Dr. Anton du Plessis: “There are many innovations and methods of building parts in 3D. For consumer level, FDM leads the way and is by far the simplest method. For metals, SLS works well and competes with electron beam melting, amongst others. No one technology will take over, as there will always be a market for Ferraris, BMWs, Volkswagens and everything in between”.
It is already said that intellectual property is at risk. With the advancement of 3D scanning that risk increases. Should intellectual property (IP) be protected? If so, how? Or should the 3D printing world go totally open source?
Brian Andrew: “This debate relates to a number of areas, not just 3D printing. Personally I think open source is the way to go, as it tends to use collaboration and communities to drive further innovation. Any objects could possibly be copied so companies and individuals need to find other ways of generating income streams which add more value than relying solely on the IP for a particular 3D object. This kind of thinking is used with open source software where users get the initial software for free but have to purchase add-ons or other services to receive the maximum benefit from the software. There are remedies available to 3D creators like copyright and patents, however these can only be enforced after something has already been copied and if it has legal jurisdiction in the market where the copying has taken place.”
Natalee Robertson: “Patenting concepts takes time and are costly which makes it very difficult to protect new ideas and products in any market. I believe that it will be very difficult to protect intellectual property. However, non-disclosure agreements are put in place should privacy or security be of importance. There is so much accessible information and designs available on the internet, it makes it easy for individuals to gain product information, specifications, designs, and much more; unfortunately making it virtually impossible to stop pirating. Whilst this doesn’t negate the need for privacy or to protect designers when embarking on any development, it is an aspect that does and should be factored into the process.”
David Bullock: “I believe that there are limitations in the technologies that effectively limit the risk to intellectual property. The perception is that 3D scanning is like 3D photocopying. This is incorrect – manipulating 3D scan data to become useful CAD data requires sophisticated software and takes time. Currently the skillset required to effectively reverse-engineer complex components goes some way to protecting intellectual property.”
Dr. Anton du Plessis: “Your IP should be protected in such a way that 3D scanning does not affect it. As a full time scientist operating the most advanced 3D X-ray scanners in Africa for the last four years, I can report that we have not had any such issues as yet, so we can safely assume it is not a major problem, at least not yet.”
Anie Els: “In terms of intellectual property, artistic objects and those created for a specific function should be protected. Although governing this will be extremely challenging, a model should be put in place. Functional, everyday items can most certainly be open source. There should be a balance – protect the creative designer, but don’t limit the average consumer.”
Additional comments from panellists
Anie Els: “Although 3D printing is in its early stages, it has the potential to change the way we go about daily life. As soon as the potential is truly recognised and valuable applications are recognised in our average lifestyles, it is likely to become like a mobile phone – something you couldn’t imagine you once lived without.”
Natalee Robertson: “When I look at advancements within the medical sector as an example, I believe it would be futile to stifle 3D printing and what it can offer. The positive aspects, in my opinion, far outweigh any negatives that may be out there. Like any new technology, it takes time for the market to absorb and understand the benefits it provides and 3D printing is no different. I’m excited to see how the market evolves over the next few years.”
Dr. Anton du Plessis: “South Africa is leading the way in some aspects in the world of 3D printing, with the world’s largest metal 3D printer built and in the process of manufacturing its first aerospace parts at the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research; a strong group at the Central University of Technology in Bloemfontein where medical implants are manufactured on a commercial scale and significant efforts in various other leading research groups across the country. Proudly South African!”
David Bullock: “It would be great to see more coverage of real South African success stories where 3D printing/additive manufacturing has been used effectively.”
Thank you to our panellists. As David Bullock says above – we would like to receive your case studies about successful projects and your feedback on 3D printing. It is a concept with huge potential that is developing into a disruptive technology of great significance. Send your comments and case study stories to hans.vandegroenendaal@ee.co.za
