Based on discussions I had with various vendors at the 2011 RAPID show, I would not be surprised to see the Additive Manufacturing (AM) industry head down two paths. One path focuses on the needs of the engineer, such as getting product to market faster. The other path involves the potentially new market of “makers” and those interested in personal manufacturing, a recent term that coincides with the goals of makers.

Could this new market be the key to developing new customers for AM machines? Opinions are strongly divided, so much so, that I think the AM market will split, at least for a time.

The viability of the maker market was discussed at the CEO meeting of the Additive Manufacturing Branding Initiative (AMBI). AMBI was set up to investigate whether its membership, which includes the major developers of AM equipment, would continue discussions about the possible formation of a collaborative, nonprofit association that would lead a worldwide branding effort for the industry. (Additive Manufacturing CEOs move industry branding effort to next stage)  And this issue was discussed one-on-one in conversations I had with executives throughout the show.

While it was pretty clear that some companies will choose a different path, it is not clear whether this will be a good strategy. Some estimate that there are 9 million+ engineers who have a CAD package but far fewer who also have some type of additive manufacturing machine. Terry Wohlers recently reported that this industry had its best growth to date, with a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of revenues produced by all AM products and services in 2010 of 24.1%. Wohlers Associates conservatively forecasts industry-wide growth to be $3.1 billion by 2016. Compared to motors, controllers, and sensors, this is not a huge market.

There does seem to be a consensus about why the growth hasn’t been bigger—a lack of awareness (or understanding) about AM technology, which is surprising to me. I remember 25 years ago when this industry emerged. Granted, there were rough spots, but the information about AM is readily available to anyone with access to Google. Is the industry still suffering from the missteps of the first go around with it, where the systems did not exactly meet expectations? (And could this happen again, but this time with the makers.)

One good development of the maker market is that it is spreading information about 3D printing and other AM technologies to a wider audience. So executives at one company in particular, 3D Systems, are thinking that if you get makers to purchase even a rudimentary 3D printer, it will encourage others, including engineers, to buy even the higher end systems.

But just how large is the potential maker market? (I think this is the sticking point for many executives in the AM industry.) Just how many people out there will spend between $1000 to $4000 to have their own “personal manufacturing” system? So far, I have not seen any good studies or estimates. Right now, the market seems to consist of vocal artists enamored of a new medium to work in.

And nearly everyone with some knowledge of this industry acknowledges that there are limitations with lower cost, maker versions of AM equipment. Will the makers maintain their enthusiasm while some developers work to address those limitations?

Whether you are pro or con for this development, I want to share what Buddy Byrum, senior director of Global Marketing, 3D Systems had to say. He commented that the desire to print objects through AM technology is a bit like music. There are people who want to write the music, like the artist portion of the maker market and the engineer. There are people who want to play the music others have written. Those who make use of Ponoko, Shapeways, Thingiverse, and other services are examples. Then there are people who simply want to listen to the created music.

But it will be content that drives the growth of the maker market, continued Byrum. Content will consist of a large number of objects available in a digital format, or said another way, a reason to have a tool that will print the objects described by the digital files.

Despite all the hype, this market is truly embryonic. It could be a fad.

Then again, it could be a risk worth taking. But with all the talk, what is really needed now are some numbers. Just how big could this market be?

Leslie Langnau

 

Source: :: Make Parts Fast ::