1. What’s the biggest bottleneck in industrial 3D printing today?
Materials. Specifically, the lack of certified, affordable, application-specific materials for real production.
2. Aren’t there already lots of materials for 3D printing?
Yes, but many aren’t certified for regulated or high-performance applications like aerospace, medical, or electronics.
3. What materials are most widely used?
Plastics (like PLA, ABS, nylon) dominate, but metals (e.g., titanium, stainless steel) and composites (carbon or glass fiber-reinforced) are gaining ground.
4. Why can’t companies just use those materials at scale?
Because they’re either not available in certified form, too expensive, or hard to process at production volumes.
5. How many companies say material availability is an issue?
90% of manufacturers in the Jabil survey said they can’t get the materials they need.
6. Is material cost really that big of a problem?
Yes—74% of companies cite it as a top financial barrier to scaling AM.
7. What are custom-engineered materials?
Feedstocks formulated for specific performance needs—like thermal resistance, RF shielding, or biocompatibility.
8. Are companies using custom materials?
66% are. But these materials often come with longer lead times and complex validation requirements.
9. What certifications matter in 3D printing?
Common ones include UL 94 V-0 (flame resistance), ISO 10993 (biocompatibility), and ASTM F42 (additive manufacturing material standards).
10. Why is certification such a big hurdle?
Without it, you can’t use AM parts in safety-critical or regulated environments like aerospace or medical.
11. What about post-processing? Is that also an issue?
Yes. Support removal, heat treating, surface finishing, and quality checks are time-consuming and expensive.
12. Are there any automation solutions for post-processing?
Some exist, but they’re still limited and not standardized—especially for tight-tolerance or high-spec parts.
13. How are companies managing additive workflows?
Poorly. 42% say their AM processes don’t integrate with ERP, MES, or PLM systems.
14. What’s the impact of poor integration?
Limited traceability, fragmented data, and slower qualification—basically, less efficiency and more risk.
15. Is the workforce ready for this kind of additive growth?
Not really—29% of companies lack in-house AM expertise, especially in DfAM and thermal/process modeling.
16. So what’s holding back materials more—technology or regulation?
Both. The tech exists, but regulatory frameworks and qualification data often lag behind.
17. Can small and mid-sized companies even afford high-end AM materials?
Not easily. Metal AM systems, materials, and post-processing can cost well into seven figures.
Struggling to find the right 3D printing service? You’re not alone.
Get expert help from the team built to solve it.
Visit RapidMade.com today.