Slashdot Mirror
Startups Push 3D Printers As Industry Leaders Falter
gthuang88 writes: Given the hype around 3D printing, you'd never guess that established leaders like 3D Systems and Stratasys have seen their stock fall by 75 percent in the last year. Big companies like HP, Amazon, and Boeing are getting into the field, too, but startups are still where a lot of the action is. Now Formlabs, a Boston-area startup, has released a new 3D printer that is supposed to be more reliable and higher quality than its predecessors. The device uses stereolithography and is aimed at professional designers and engineers. The question is whether Formlabs---and other startups like MarkForged, Voxel8, and Desktop Metal---can find enough of a market to survive until 3D printing becomes a more mainstream form of manufacturing.
Given the hype around 3D printing, you'd never guess that established leaders like 3D Systems and Stratasys have seen their stock fall by 75 percent in the last year
Hype is the reason the stocks were overinflated to begin with. It was easy to predict. These companies business model was rapid expansion via buyouts, but the problem is that the technology is evolving and improving, which de-values the technology they acquired.
To me, 3D printing is very similar to photo printing. Most people don't print enough that it makes sense to have their own printer at home. Just like there are some people who are really into photography, and own their own photo printers, or even their own dark room, there are enthusiasts who really want to build their own stuff that would really get a use out of a 3D printer. But the majority of people who just want to print off a new battery cover for their remote control, or knob for the clothes dryer would be much better off just going down to the local Walmart or Costco and getting them to print out the object, just like they currently do with photos.
I'm not going to spend $200+ on a photo printer when I could easily get better prints by going down to Walmart and getting pictures for 10 cents a piece. Similarly, I'm not going to spend $500 on a 3D printer when I could go down to Staples, Home Depot, Walmart, Costco, or whoever is providing the service and get access to a much higher quality 3D printer. Even my local library has a 3D printer I can use for the cost of the consumables.
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
3D printers remind me of the beige box PC industry in the 1990s, bicycle parts makers in the 1990s (with everything CNC machined and anodized), and the inexpensive MP3 player market.
What I see is that a bunch of little guys are going to fight amongst themselves, and as soon as there are a few big players, some big company will swoop in, buy them out, and own the playing field, either a single company, or 2-3 firms (just like how paper printing is now, with just a relatively few companies offering models.)
One can be creative with 3D parts, but there is a limit that the plastic from the current generation can handle. At best, it is something to make to hone an injection mold from so "real" parts can be manufactured. Plus, the parts are rough, so they need sanded and coated with something like Smooth-On's epoxy if using them directly for a task.
There is no way that 3d printing will hold a candle to "mainstream manufacturing". Many manufactured parts are made very quickly, and at scale. If you take common plastic molded part, they are likely to be running cycle times of under a minute and have multiple parts coming out of the mold simultaneously. Sure, the mold and the injection molding machine aren't cheap, but they can pound out a lot of copies of your plastic part for a long time and get the unit cost down really low. You will also get better surface finish and appearance than a 3d printed part, as well as having little or no waste (depending on mold design/part geometry) and very consistent material properties in your part.
This doesn't even get into manufacturing things made out of metal. I know there are various cool 3d printers that are using lasers and other stuff to make metal parts, but that's not going to hold a candle to the manufacturing processes that give you many of the common metal things you use every day, or that you rely on every day (think of all the manufactured metal things in a car, bus, or even a bicycle).
3d printing has a number of applications for one-off parts, prototyping and low volume work. It's definitely a great thing, the first company I worked for in the 90's paid out the nose for a Stratasys machine because they recognized the value of the tool for prototyping and getting to market faster -- but the 3d printer in no way would have ever made production parts. I'm sure people will dream up new and novel ways of using the technology, but it's going to be a long time before 3d printing ever supplants traditional volume manufacturing methods and techniques, if ever.
Really? Creating discrete sand form negatives, then gluing those sand form negatives together, then filling the finished form with molten metal, letting it cool and harden, then removing the sand is a very niche market?
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
3d printing will _never_ be a mainstream form of manufacturing.
First of all, mainstream manufacturing uses multiple manufacturing methods, such as milling, casting, forging, deep drawing, injection moulding, stamping, bending, etc. You use the best method for the application and desired quality and quantity. At best 3D printing could supplement traditional manufacturing methods, such as for making custom parts in very low quantities. But the idea that 3D printing could be a viable alternative for several or most traditional methods is ludicrous and a sign that a lot of 3D fans don't really understand manufacturing and have spent too much time in design studios and too little on the factory floor.