My Printer

  • Retired Basketball Legend Baron Davis Launches 3D Printed Shoe with Assist from Zellerfeld

    The inroads that additive manufacturing (AM) users have made into the celebrity branding market is underappreciated, perhaps because the value is difficult to quantify. But just last month, for instance, 3D printed furniture maker Decibel partnered with Justin Bieber’s Skylrk brand for the singer’s Coachella set, and, during the Masters, Bryson DeChambeau made headlines once again for his 3D printed clubs.

    Bieber and Skylrk also released a 3D printed sneaker at the end of last year with Zellerfeld, the Brooklyn-based, avant-garde design house responsible for a large chunk of the direct-to-consumer (DTC) products launched in partnership with celebrity-owned brands that have popped up in recent years. Around the same time as its Biebs collab, Zellerfeld also announced the launch of a basketball shoe prototype in partnership with Celtics’ All-Star Jaylen Brown’s 741 Performance.

    Considering the Brooklyn company’s repeated work with Nike, Zellerfeld may see deals with athletes as an attractive lane going forward, especially given how common it has become for professional athletes to pursue second careers as entrepreneurs. Baron Davis, who just launched the fashion brand OverDose on the back of his own 3D printed shoe deal with Zellerfeld, was a pioneer in the modern era of pivoting from pro sports to business ventures.

    After retiring from the NBA in 2012, Davis has branched out into just about everything: Hollywood producing, cannabis, venture capital, and even rapping (he’s good, too!). It’s indeed a bit shocking that it took this long for Davis to get into fashion.

    The first sneaker launch from Davis and OverDose is the OD Easy PZ, a $199.00, limited release drop in five color ways. OverDose is categorizing the Easy PZ as a “recovery sneaker,” which is a growing area of the footwear market that targets consumers who are into fitness and are looking for extra comfort in their post-workout hours.

    According to Davis, the Eazy PZ’s were designed to embody OverDose’s ‘From Analog to AI’ ethos:

    “I came from a time where the game, the culture, and the product were all connected, but ownership wasn’t,” Davis said. “This is about changing that. ‘From Analog to AI’ is about taking everything we grew up on and building it into something new, where creators actually control what they create.”

    This aligns perfectly with what Zellerfeld has been building throughout this decade. It also ties in precisely with Davis’s venture capital brand, Business Inside the Game (BIG), which was created expressly to support ‘multi-hyphenates’ like Davis; the BIG website refers to Davis as “the athlete/creator/entrepreneur/investor/founder.”

    Indeed, that seems to hit the nail on the head in terms of the value proposition that AM offers for celebrity-backed product launches. Anyone who remembers the fiasco that ensued when the Ball Brothers’ father, LaVar Ball, launched Big Baller Brand back in the 2010s, knows that it’s virtually impossible to stand up an entire sneaker supply chain on your own and have it be competitive, when sneakers are neither your expertise nor your main focus. The same goes for essentially any manufactured good one might try to sell.

    By partnering with Zellerfeld, on the other hand, entrepreneurs like Davis can test the waters in the footwear space without having to become full-time sneaker moguls. That also helps capture what’s most lucrative about these types of launches, which is the appeal for consumers interested in limited edition items.

    Footwear may be the space where this is most prevalent, currently, but there’s no reason why it couldn’t spread to other product categories, with athletic equipment jumping to mind most immediately. In fact, it will be interesting to see if Davis himself has plans for targeting that market with his BIG platform.

    Images courtesy of Zellerfeld/OverDose

  • Asia AM Watch: Advantages to the Chinese Way of Doing Business

    Timo Göbel, the Head of Additive Manufacturing at the BMW Group, spoke at the AM Forum in Berlin about industrializing additive. He had wise words to share, including that we shouldn’t do our own automation but rely instead on established automation providers. He also told us that they didn’t want any balkanized software tooling, so we should play nice with their existing tools. He also said we should be open to low-cost materials and, more broadly, reduce part costs. This is all very sensible, and I’m happy he said it. He also mentioned that a large order from BWM had gone to Farsoon and not Western suppliers because Farsoon was more flexible. Daimler Trucks also had a large spare parts project go to Farsoon because, reportedly, the company was more flexible on opening up data flows from its systems to the truck company.

    Among BMW’s metal 3D printers is this TruPrint 5000 from Atlix. Image courtesy of BMW.

    The European narrative goes something like this: Chinese companies are subsidized by the government, engage in IP theft, engage in unfair competition, make low-quality products, and European firms should not demean themselves by engaging in a race to the bottom. Let’s sidestep this discussion for now. Whether this is true or partially true is irrelevant. What is relevant to me is that, by believing this, many entrepreneurs and companies are limiting their strategic choices. I actually do think that you should see if you can race to the bottom, because it may just be that you can win. I also think that seeing yourself as a victim removes your agency. Somehow, your failure isn’t your fault, and somehow, you can now explore fewer options for countering the competition. I also think that bemoaning the other’s advantages is irrelevant. I see a lot of inaction and fatalism in the face of Chinese competition and think that this may be very damaging to Europe as a whole. Furthermore, in my experience, there are real advantages that Chinese entrepreneurs and businesses bring to the table. There are real advantages in zeal, flexibility, vision, and speed.

    Zeal

    I’ve seen a lot of deals won by Chinese firms because they’re just hungrier for success. Chinese firms will try harder and put in more effort for the deal. In terms of application development and customer service, we’ve seen success because these departments do more for customers at no extra cost. We see a real “conquer the world” attitude by firms. Staff often see themselves at the foot of a mountain of opportunity for them and their employers. It’s not just a job but a change for immense growth. A lot of times, individual Chinese teams just seem to work harder to get the opportunity.

    BMW’s metal 3D printer lineup includes this TruPrint 5000 from Atlix. Image courtesy of BMW.

    Flexibility

    Chinese firms have also shown a lot of flexibility to secure a deal. In customizing the product, introducing new materials, making changes to roadmaps, and adapting to their customers’ circumstances, they seem to do more than that. Western firms will say, “No, we can’t do that,” a lot. That’s not our market, that’s not how we do things, that’s not our style, we’ve never done this before, etc. This then results in hesitation. Sticking to your guns and principles is good. But often companies just say no reflexively and dig in their heels. Sometimes nonsensical policies or entrenched behaviors wreck deals. I’m not saying that you always have to say yes to the customer, but that there needs to be a reason for your no. And you know what? Often, there isn’t a reason, and people say no when they mean “we haven’t done that before.”

    Vision

    A number of large Western 3D printing incumbents do not have a strategy. Many incumbent firms have no particular plan to win or plan to improve themselves. Visionary thinking by CEOs often rings hollow or is not meaningful for the firm’s performance. Western firms tend to be highly amorphous, with many different power structures in place. Often, there is no real goal for the company aside from continuing to exist. There are a lot of companies being run on autopilot. Chinese firms often do not have a strategy beyond a general idea that “there must be growth.” But, without that mindset, Western firms just sleepwalk and amble, not going in any particular direction.

    Speed

    Additive manufacturing systems from Farsoon, HP, and TRUMPF (now ATLIX) inside BMW Group’s AMC. Image courtesy of BMW.

    The biggest difference, however, is in the speed of execution. Chinese firms are often just much faster at changes and responses in general. There is a lot of hesitation and structural slowness in many Western firms. Especially in decisions affecting multiple departments, we can see a marked slowness.

    Negatives

    Now, all of this is necessarily a generalization. And Chinese firms are not better in all respects. The language barrier is difficult, which inhibits effective customer service and application development. Chinese firms are often hampered by not having enough people overseas and by disconnects between home and away teams. Chinese firms can be fickle. Sometimes run by the whims of founders, companies can turn on a dime, but this can also be chaotic. Scrambling for growth, a long-term focus, and increased capability is sometimes not enough of a concern. Sudden firings, changes of direction, and new policies can often confuse customers. Speed often causes quality to suffer, and there is a real problem with long-term performance and part quality in devices.

    But my point is that there seem to be real advantages, especially in securing new business, in the Chinese way of doing things. Rather than complain and feel like helpless victims, Western firms should strive to become more flexible, faster, and better aligned.

  • Where the Money is Going, Part Two: Why All Roads Lead to AI

    In Part One of this article, Vanesa Listek expertly described the major themes driving infrastructure investment so far this decade, illustrating how the same concerns are driving both public and private entities — and all the major sectors of the economy — to fund the same sorts of projects. Simultaneously, she analyzed the implications of that trajectory for additive manufacturing (AM).

    Here, I’ll provide a baseline argument for why all of those infrastructure themes ultimately lead back to the one that gets all of the attention.

    The AI boom isn’t about AI (yet)…

    Featured image courtesy of 3DPrint.com: Data centers.

  • Mikhail Gladkikh on Digital Inventory: “Think of It as Netflix for Manufacturing”

    As manufacturers continue looking for ways to reduce supply chain risk, additive manufacturing (AM) is increasingly being discussed as more than just a production tool. Across aerospace, energy, defense, and industrial sectors, companies are exploring how digital inventories and distributed manufacturing could help reduce dependence on traditional warehousing, long shipping routes, and excess physical inventory.

    That shift is one of the areas Dr. Mikhail Gladkikh has been focused on throughout his career. Before joining Würth Additive Group as Global Director of Technology and Technical Projects, he spent 17 years at Baker Hughes, working across research, engineering, logistics, program management, M&A, and AM in mission-critical industries.

    Mikhail Gladkikh. Image courtesy of Mikhail Gladkikh via LinkedIn.

    With a PhD in Applied Mathematics from the University of Texas at Austin, Gladkikh’s background spans oil and gas, turbomachinery, hydrodynamics, and advanced manufacturing systems operating in highly regulated industries. More recently, he has focused on digital inventory and distributed manufacturing, helping lead the launch of Würth Additive Group’s Digital Inventory Services (DIS) platform, designed to enable secure, traceable digital supply chains through AM. Outside of his professional work, Gladkikh is also a lifelong learner and science fiction author whose books include Out of Time, reflecting his longtime interest in future technologies and big ideas.

    3DPrint.com spoke with Gladkikh about digital inventory, distributed manufacturing, supply chain sovereignty, and why AM could play a major role in the future of global supply chains.

    What is Würth and what is the value proposition?

    Gladkikh: The Würth Group is a worldwide wholesaler of fasteners, screws, and accessories. Würth expanded its range and today offers a full range of business equipment for craft businesses. Würth offers dowels, chemicals, electronics, furniture, construction fasteners, hardware, automotive parts, tools, machines, installation materials, and inventory management, among other products and solutions.

    The Group, made up of more than 400 companies across over 80 countries, has been servicing the automotive, woodworking, metalworking, industrial, and construction industries.

    Würth connects millions of suppliers and customers and manages inventory across a wide variety of channels. The Group has a large operational footprint, with warehouses and last-mile delivery mechanisms in many countries, which makes it a unique supply chain partner for many companies and individuals. The company says it is a leader in managing both physical and digital supply chains.

    What is the Digital Supply Chain?

    Gladkikh: Let’s think about what a supply chain is and what it does. First and foremost, it is a mechanism to ensure uninterrupted business operations that require physical parts and materials.

    Like any business process, supply chains come with inherent risks. Those can include disruptions such as strikes, blocked shipping routes, supplier shortages, or sudden changes in market demand.

    Traditionally, companies have managed those risks through physical inventory. Manufacturers buffer against uncertainty by keeping parts on shelves, which often means tooling investments for every geometry, minimum order quantities that lead to overproduction, thousands of SKUs spread across warehouses, and complex logistics networks moving goods from factories to distribution centers and eventually to customers.

    Digital supply chains approach the problem differently. The safety net is information, specifically certified manufacturing recipes with material specifications and quality control. Instead of storing large quantities of finished parts, companies can store digital manufacturing files and raw materials such as powders, filaments, or resins that can be used to produce many different geometries on demand.

    In this model, production moves closer to the point of need, reducing inventory requirements, international shipping costs, tooling costs, and some tariff exposure associated with moving physical goods across borders.

    In the end, you still need parts, not just information. How does the Digital Supply Chain address that?

    Gladkikh: Yes, digital inventory still requires physical production. The file must become a part. The idea is to move that production as close to the point of use as possible to avoid all sorts of waste, including the waste of making and holding inventory that may never be used.

    This is where material science, machine qualification, process parameters, and post-processing all matter. The digital-to-physical gap is where AM professionals add the most value.

    The future supply chain will likely be a hybrid system combining digital and physical infrastructure. That includes the digital distribution of encrypted manufacturing recipes with intellectual property protection, quality assurance, and OEM certification, alongside a physical network of machines and materials located close to the point of use to produce parts when needed. It also requires supply chain infrastructure capable of managing both the digital and physical sides of manufacturing, as well as traditional last-mile delivery and transportation systems to move finished parts where they are needed.

    A digital supply chain is a complex system of interdependent digital and physical tools and processes. Companies without a deep understanding of both components will not be successful.

    Why Additive and how does it fit into the Digital Supply Chain?

    Gladkikh: AM is a perfect fit for the digital supply chain since it is already digital by design. The manufacturing machine instructions exist as a digital file prepared by the engineer and executed by the printer.

    What happens to the traditional roles in the value chain? From OEM to End User?

    Gladkikh: In general, the system becomes more flexible, and some roles can be combined. In a traditional approach, there is always an IP Owner, usually a product company, that creates and owns the part design. The IP Owner might subcontract an engineering firm to redesign the part for AM.

    Then there is the manufacturer, usually the same entity as the IP Owner, which follows digital instructions and makes physical objects. Then there is a distributor delivering the physical parts to the end user where actual demand exists.

    When you replace this physical flow with information, some roles can be combined or even interchanged. The end user could become the manufacturer, while the IP Owner receives royalties on its intellectual property rights without having to physically produce anything. Think about digital platforms for music or book distribution.

    What are the critical concepts? What must be in place to enable a Digital Supply Chain with distributed manufacturing?

    Gladkikh: I’d like to mention three pillars of distributed manufacturing.

    First, there is supply chain sovereignty. Companies want to be in control. This fits into the “right to repair” paradigm. To ensure operational continuity, companies want to assert ownership downstream.

    Second, it is not about simply printing a part. It is about qualifying the whole process and ensuring every step is in conformance with the manufacturing router. This includes proper raw material controls, manufacturing steps, post-processing, assembly, and proper quality control mechanisms dictated by the IP Owner. This also includes proper safety measures and machine maintenance. All of this must be recorded and accessible at any time as a paper trail for provenance and audit purposes.

    Third, because we are separating design, manufacturing, and end use, proper liability-sharing mechanisms must be in place, and IP protection must remain a top priority.

    Würth Additive Group has launched a Digital Inventory Service. What is it and how is it positioned?

    Gladkikh: DIS is a sovereign manufacturing execution layer designed as a cloud-to-edge encrypted delivery platform.

    Think about it as Netflix for manufacturing.

    The Würth Group already connects millions of customers with millions of suppliers in a traditional distribution and supply chain model. We added a digital supply chain channel that works as described above and is available through the same programs and channels our customers already use.

    It gives customers greater control and sovereignty over their supply chains, allowing them to operate more efficiently without tying up capital in inventory sitting on shelves that may never be used.

    At the same time, it frees suppliers from the need to manufacture, package, and ship physical goods, since they are instead compensated for making their manufacturing recipes available digitally. Everybody wins.

    Metal AM component produced on the Alpha 140. Image courtesy of the Würth Additive Group.

    For Gladkikh, the conversation around digital supply chains is becoming increasingly urgent as manufacturers face geopolitical instability, supply disruptions, and growing pressure to localize production. He believes companies need to approach the transition strategically, starting with a clear understanding of their business needs, operational pain points, and applications where AM can provide real value.

    At the same time, he cautions against using 3D printing simply because the technology is available.

    “Should this be printed?” Gladkikh said. That is ultimately a more important question than whether it simply could be.

  • 3DPOD 300: Celebrating 300 Episodes with a Look at the Next Year in 3D Printing

    In the 300th episode of the 3DPOD, we take a look at what we think will happen over the next 12 months; for instance, what will happen with Bambu’s dominance, what will happen to Formlabs, what will happen to the market as a whole? Then we veer off into a discussion about heroes, Midway, and how the entire future of the US´s global dominance rests on the shoulders of two very different men.

    This episode of the 3DPOD is brought to you by FacFox, where your next product starts as a file and ends as a custom-made reality. With instant quoting, rapid design feedback, and on-demand 3D printing, CNC machining, injection molding, and more, FacFox makes it easier to test out ideas, fine-tune every detail, and manufacture with confidence. Curious what your design could become? Upload it and find out.

     

  • 3D Printing Financials: Velo3D Revenue Up Fueled by Defense Momentum

    Velo3D (Nasdaq: VELO) reported a strong start to 2026, with revenue rising as defense and aerospace customers continued shifting from pilot programs into full-scale additive manufacturing (AM) production. The company also showed major improvement in gross margins and losses, while executives pointed to a growing demand for its Rapid Production Solution (RPS) business model.

    CEO Arun Jeldi said the company continues to see AM treated as a true production technology, especially across defense and aerospace markets, instead of an experimental tool. What’s more, during an earnings call with investors, Jeldi indicated that management is seeing accelerating momentum across the business.

    Velo3D’s Arun Jeldi at Rapid+TCT. Image courtesy of Velo3D.

    First-quarter 2026 revenue reached $13.8 million, up 48% year-over-year and 46% from the previous quarter. The company said growth was driven by higher system sales, better pricing, and rapid expansion of its RPS business.

    Gross margin improved to 17.2%, up from 7.5% a year earlier and from negative margins in the previous quarter. According to executives, the improvement came from higher machine usage, better manufacturing efficiency, and stronger production volume.

    Velo3D’s losses continued to go down during the quarter. The company posted a $7 million net loss, a major improvement from the $25 million loss reported during the same period last year. Adjusted EBITDA also improved, moving from negative $6.9 million in the first quarter of 2025 to negative $3.6 million this quarter. Operating expenses were lower as well.

    At the end of the quarter, Velo3D had $16.6 million in cash, down from $39 million at the end of 2025. At the same time, the company reduced its debt by roughly 70% through debt-to-equity conversions. After the quarter closed, Velo3D also raised another $50 million through equity financing.

    The quarter also marked the first earnings report under new CFO James Suva, who joined the company in April after leadership roles at Goldman Sachs, Citi, KPMG, and, most recently, Cricut.

    Velo3D’s booth at MILAM 2026. Image courtesy of 3DPrint.com.

    A major focus during the call was the company’s RPS business, which centers on longer-term manufacturing agreements instead of traditional one-time printer sales. Under the model, customers use Velo3D systems as part of ongoing production programs, particularly in defense and aerospace.

    In fact, RPS represented roughly 25% of first-quarter revenue. About half of the company’s $30 million backlog is now tied to RPS-related business.

    Jeldi described the company’s RPS model as “transformational” for Velo3D, saying it creates deeper, longer-term relationships with customers instead of relying on one-time equipment sales.

    “Unlike traditional one-time system sales, RPS creates long-duration production relationships with repeat utilization across multiple programs, driving greater visibility, stronger customer integration, and what we believe will be improved long-term economics for the business,” he explained. “As adoption accelerates, we believe this mix shift positions us to pursue more durable, high-quality revenue streams and scalable profitable growth over time.”

    Velo3D team at MILAM 2026: Eric Cohen (Sales Director), Michelle Sidwell (CRO), Brice Cooper (VP of Defense). Image courtesy of 3DPrint.com.

    The company spent much of the call discussing defense growth. During the quarter, Velo3D underlined several major government and defense milestones, including an $11.5 million production contract with a U.S. defense prime contractor and a $9.8 million five-year contract with the Defense Logistics Agency tied to the Department of Defense’s Joint Additive Manufacturing Acceptability program. Velo3D also said it became the first additive manufacturing vendor qualified for U.S. Army ground vehicle applications.

    Executives said defense spending, reshoring, and supply chain concerns continue to support additive manufacturing growth.

    “We are seeing a growing number of defense primes and tier-1 aerospace suppliers transition from pilot projects into multi-system production deployments. This marks an important inflection point for additive manufacturing industry and further validates our belief that the market is increasingly moving from experimentation to scale production adoption,” Jeldi said.

    Plans are also underway for a major manufacturing expansion in California that could eventually support up to 100 production systems. Management expects to have more than 40 production machines operating by the end of 2026.

    Velo3D’s RPS. Image courtesy of Velo3D.

    For 2026, Velo3D maintained its full-year revenue guidance of $60 million to $70 million. The company also said it expects gross margins to move above 30% during the second half of the year and still aims to reach EBITDA profitability later in 2026 if it continues securing funding.

    Following the earnings release on May 12, Velo3D shares surged nearly 50%, climbing from around $1.50 before the announcement to more than $2.10 in after-hours and next-day trading as investors reacted to the company’s rapid revenue growth, improving margins, and expanding defense backlog.

    Velo3D released its earnings report after markets closed on May 12, when shares were trading around $17.50. The following day, the stock climbed more than 20% to as high as $21.36 as investors reacted to the company’s stronger revenue growth, improving margins, and expanding defense business. Since then, shares have pulled back a bit but have continued trading in a pretty high range between roughly $18 and $21 through the rest of the week.

  • ORNL Continues Research Into Making Large Format Metal Parts by Combining AM and HIP

    This can’t be stressed enough: the US needs to secure its supply chains for energy and power generation components. And, while the US needs to prioritize that objective across the board, the current greatest risk of shortage arguably lies with large format, metal parts.

    There are few American organizations doing more to address this issue than Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL). Moreover, ORNL is approaching the problem from a variety of different angles, exploring a broad range of advanced manufacturing techniques both individually and in concert with one another. Two years ago, for instance, the Knoxville-based institution announced it was developing a method to use wire-arc additive manufacturing (WAAM) to produce large vessels that could be used for powder metallurgical hot isostatic pressing (PM-HIP).

    PM-HIP is a method that utilizes pressure-sealed vessels and furnaces to form metal powder without melting. By making the PM-HIP molds with AM, ORNL was aiming to establish a process for making very large metal components without relying on casting and forging supply chains. Now, ORNL has announced an update on the project, with the researchers revealing that they’ve successfully made a component that appears to be a turbine blade by using a 2,000 pound canister made with multiple forms of 3D printing, which was subsequently incorporated into the standard PM-HIP process.

    In addition to enabling a bypassing of the US’s traditional domestic metal supply chains that have been gutted over the last several decades, the combination production method also unlocks the same geometric advantages associated with AM more generally. Additionally, the viability of using advanced alloys in PM-HIP gave ORNL the opportunity to draw from its wealth of materials science knowledge.

    In a press release about ORNL’s successful production of a large format PM-HIP component using a 3D printed mold,ORNL researcher Pavan Ajjarapu said, “This work lays the foundation for a transformative shift in the PM-HIP landscape for large-scale components. By harnessing the strengths of both additive manufacturing and hot isostatic pressing, we are paving the way for greater design freedom and expanded applications in hydropower and next-generation nuclear reactors.”

    ORNL’s Jason Mayeur said, “We further enhanced the effectiveness of PM-HIP technology by using a mechanics-based computational model to reduce developmental costs and lead times by eliminating trial-and-error approaches.”

    As with the vast majority of critical components that comprise US infrastructure, the US’s energy and power supply chains are existentially dependent on imports from China. It goes without saying how much leverage this gives China over the US, particularly given that the two nations are also at each other’s necks in an AI arms race (not to mention all the other arms races sustaining the tension between the two powers).

    The smartest thing the US could do right now is take half the defense budget and give it to the Department of Energy (DOE), but we would be silly to expect the US to do the smartest thing it could do. In lieu of that, then, it would be nice to see more companies like ARC form and partner with ORNL to help the lab commercialize its technology, at the same time as ORNL is helping expand access to high quality research.

    I do think that a vast wave of privatization is on the horizon for the US government, which is only surprising insofar as there is even still anything left to privatize. The Trump administration has already signaled that it wants to do this with NASA, continuing a pet project begun in the president’s first term.

    A final push to maximize privatization of US government services would likely change the entire appearance of how pure research is done in this country, although that already seems to have been happening regardless. Even in such a scenario, I would think that ORNL is one of the handful of entities that will endure no matter what. In any case, the US can’t afford to lose the contributions that the lab makes on a daily basis.

    Images courtesy of ORNL

  • Ford Uses Binder Jet 3D Printing to Make Boat Propellers for Sharrow Marine

    Ford’s Advanced Industrial Technology and Platforms (ATP) group has helped Sharrow Marine make a boat propeller in two weeks rather than 130 days. Thanks to the Michigan Central program, Ford and Sharrow were brought together, with prototypes produced at Newlab Detroit. The proprietary propellers are now made using binder jetting, with a sand-banding jetting sand-casting solution, replacing older methods like lost-wax casting and slip casting, which previously created lead times of up to 130 days. Working with Ford and a local foundry, Sharrow can now produce the parts in a fortnight. Debuted in 2020, the Sharrow propeller is designed to lower noise while improving efficiency.

    Using Ford Motor Company’s Advanced Industrial Technology & Platforms team and advanced 3D sand-casting, what once took 130 days with traditional wax and ceramic casting can now be completed in about two weeks.

    Additive Manufacturing Operations Supervisor at Ford Dan Michalski said,

    “Ford has been at the leading edge of 3D sand-casting for more than 20 years, and it’s rewarding to use that expertise to help another Michigan company scale so quickly.”

    While Sharrow Marine CEO and Founder Greg Sharrow added,

    “Scaling production has been our biggest challenge, particularly getting high-quality castings fast enough to meet demand. I could not make them fast enough. Less than seven minutes into my first conversation with Ford, they told me they had the solution. This sand-casting collaboration has solved our scale problem in a big way.”

    Sharrow will use the process to expand its production and sell more propellers. It also hopes to expand the use of its products into new markets. The company sees potential in drones, fans, and pumps. Ford has Desktop Metal and ExOne systems, including an S-Max Pro and an X series. The company uses binder jet for sand-casting engine blocks and other automotive components. It has ExOne systems in Europe as well and is a big user of 3D printing for jigs and fixtures across the company. The company has also put end-use 3D printed parts on some niche vehicles, notably a Raptor version for the Chinese market and a set of brackets for the Shelby Mustang GT500. In 2019, the firm spent $45 million on an Advanced Manufacturing Center that brought together 23 systems from 10 firms in Michigan.

    Judging by the Furan sand and the images above, Ford used the ExOne S-Max to make Sharrow’s parts. Sand-casting is not often talked about in the 3D printing world, but for marine propulsion companies, engineering firms, energy firms, and car firms, the technology is a mainstay in some applications. One of the things it does extremely well is propellers. Faster, more flexible, and more accurate 3D printing for sand casting saves firms millions a year.

    Sharrow says that its propeller changes “how your boat accelerates, holds plane, grips in turns, docks, cruises, and sounds. It is not a small performance tweak. It changes the experience.” The unit could save as much a 20% in fuel costs. At a fast clip, a small speedboat could use 3 gallons an hour while a twin-engined offshore center console boat could use 50 gallons an hour. Daily fuel costs for many boaters are higher than $50 t0 $300 per day. Especially now, this will add up quite quickly. Reducing vibration could make your boat ride much more comfortable, while reducing noise could help as well. According to the firm, your boat can cruise at lower RPM and get to planning faster. The company also says that it handles better and is more maneuverable.

    The total amount of benefits, if true, is very compelling. Sharrow also offers six different versions of its propellers and would probably make more to better suit different vessels if it could. That can also strengthen the business case for 3D printing here. I don’t know if Ford is doing this for some kind of “hug Michigan” marketing thing or if there is a business logic behind it beyond PR. It could actually be interesting to build up capacity and do a kind of Amazon AWS play for manufacturing. If Ford invests and partners with companies to fill its machines more efficiently, the company could significantly improve machine utilization and lower part costs. This could be very powerful, and it could let a company outspend another in innovation while lowering overall costs. It would make even more sense, for example, if car sales were lower in the summer and boat sales higher. Ford used to make anti-submarine boats during the First World War and later on made marine engines. Currently, Ford makes marine engines with the inboard company INDMAR. So the work with Sharrow may yet be relevant to Ford in other ways. On the whole, this is a great story about how, through sand casting, 3D printing can accelerate time-to-market and make more products possible. More sand-casting business cases should be done, especially in Marine propulsion and engines, where we’re seeing more happening.

    Images courtesy of Ford

  • Printing Money Episode 38: Additive Manufacturing Deal Analysis with Rajeev Kulkarni

    Welcome to Printing Money Episode 38. Rajeev Kulkarni returns for this episode, and we find it hard to believe it’s been nearly two years since his first appearance. In the interim, one of Rajeev’s three focus-companies (Ackuretta) was acquired in a positive outcome and the other two (Axtra3D and Caracol) have experienced significant growth and fundraising.

    Episode 38 begins with a look at Rajeev’s career and current work. From there, Danny and Rajeev set the stage by reviewing last month’s RAPID event in Boston and highlighting certain trends there that are playing out in real-time in the 3DP/AM M&A and financing world.

    Did we say 3DP/AM M&A and financing? This episode tips the scales at just over one hour of 3DP/AM deals galore, so please enjoy all the nuggets of knowledge and analysis. Themes include private equity’s deepening embrace of the AM services business, notable transactions from publicly traded companies, ongoing developments in the Nano Dimension telenovela, validated speculation about EOS’ acquisition trail, and a number of impressive VC rounds and strategic investments.

    Please enjoy Episode 38 and check out our previous episodes too.

    This episode was recorded May 12, 2026.

    Timestamps:

    00:13 – Welcome to Episode 38, and welcome back to Rajeev Kulkarni

    00:38 – Rajeev’s career at 3D Systems (DDD) and his current work at Axtra3D, Caracol, and more

    05:48 – Workflow considerations for 3DP/AM business growth

    07:00 – RAPID 2026 review: Smaller, More focused, New leadership, Defense and Drones, LPBF dominance

    08:52 – Real market growth, not evenly distributed

    11:16 – For OEMs, it’s time to polarize your products

    14:15 – Bullish M&A trends for 3DP/AM

    14:47 – AFM acquires Incodema3D

    15:32 – BTX Precision subsidiary I3D acquires Burloak from Samuel (breaking news as of this recording date!)

    21:18 – Prodways (PWG.PA) sells its software business for EUR 35M

    25:12 – Materialise (MTLS) transferring its RapidFit business to management team

    30:56 – Nano Dimension (NNDM) sells its AM Electronics business for not very much, and to a co-founder of… Nano Dimension

    35:36 – What will come of what’s left at Nano Dimension?

    36:30 – Johnson Controls (JCI) acquiring Alloy Enterprises

    41:09 – EOS acquires Metalpine

    42:11 – Amnovis acquires Westconn

    44:37 – Tethon3D acquires Fortify3D IP

    48:33 – Freeform raises $67M Series B

    50:53 – Firestorm raises $82M Series B

    55:06 – Nanochon closes $4.1M Seed Round

    57:11 – Kureha invests in Z-Polymers

    59:57 – Velo3D (VELO) $50M private placement offering

    1:01:50 – Thanks again to Rajeev, and thanks to you for listening!

    Disclaimer:

    This content is for informational purposes only, you should not construe any such information or other material as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice. Nothing stated on this podcast constitutes a solicitation, recommendation, endorsement, or offer by the hosts, the organizer or any third-party service provider to buy or sell any securities or other financial instruments in this or in any other jurisdiction in which such solicitation or offer would be unlawful under the securities laws of such jurisdiction.  The information on this podcast is of a general nature that does not address the circumstances and risk profile of any individual or entity and should not constitute professional and/or financial advice. Referenced transactions are sourced from publicly available information.

    Danny Piper is a registered representative of Finalis Securities LLC, member FINRA/SIPC. This material has been prepared for information and educational purposes only, and it is not intended to provide, nor should it be relied on for tax, legal, or investment advice. Investors should consult with their own tax, legal, and financial professionals before investing. Real estate investments are generally highly risky. They can be volatile, unpredictable, illiquid, and are subject to ebbs and flows and market shifts. Investors also risk the loss of all principal investments.

  • 3D Printing Financials: 3D Systems Returns to Growth in Q1 2026

    3D Systems (NYSE: DDD) reported one of its strongest quarters in recent years, showing signs that the company may finally be moving past the tough slowdown that has weighed on the additive manufacturing (AM) industry. Growth in healthcare, dental, and aerospace helped increase revenue, while aggressive cost-cutting and new product launches helped improve profitability. In this quarter, management pointed out that demand for production-scale 3D printing is starting to return, especially in mission-critical industries like defense and medical devices.

    SLA 825 Dual at 3D Systems’ RAPID+TCT 2026 booth. Image courtesy of 3DPrint.com.

    The company reported first-quarter 2026 revenue of $95.5 million, up 11% year-over-year. Its Healthcare Solutions division revenue grew 21% to $50.1 million, surpassing Industrial Solutions as the company’s largest segment during the quarter. Industrial Solutions revenue reached $45.4 million, up 1.6% year-over-year.

    Printer sales, material sales, and parts manufacturing all posted double-digit growth. Metal printing was a major contributor, especially in aerospace and medical applications. The company also reported improving profitability, with adjusted gross margin rising to 36.1% from roughly 30% a year earlier, after adjusting for divestitures. Meanwhile, adjusted EBITDA turned positive this quarter at $2.1 million, while net loss narrowed sharply to $4.4 million, improving by $32.6 million from the same period last year, thanks mainly to lower operating expenses, stronger sales, and a better product mix.

    CEO Jeffrey Graves told investors during an earnings call that the quarter is an important turning point for the company and the broader industry.

    “The additive manufacturing industry is now beginning to emerge from a multiyear trough, driven largely by global economic and geopolitical challenges that led customers to severely curtail capital spending,” Graves told investors. “It was a bet a few years back that we should hang on to our R&D spend and refresh our portfolio. And it turned out it was a good bet. We refreshed our entire product line in time for 3D printing to start regaining traction in the market.”

    Furthermore, Graves stressed that thanks to these moves, “no company in our industry can match this range of technologies nor the product performance that these systems can deliver. While it’s been a painful period, the results can now begin to be seen in our performance, and there’s much more excitement to come.”

    Much of the company’s momentum came from healthcare. Medical implant manufacturing, surgical planning services, and metal printer sales all grew strongly during the quarter. Titanium spinal implants and orthopedic implants were especially mentioned as strong demand areas. The company also highlighted growing demand for personalized surgical planning and oncology-related applications.

    NextDent 300. Image courtesy of 3D Systems.

    Dental was one of the company’s best-performing businesses. 3D Systems said demand grew for both aligner materials and prosthetic dental materials sold under its Vertex brand. Executives also pointed to strong early adoption of the company’s NextDent 300 Jetted Denture Solution, which launched in late 2025.

    Graves called the product launch “the most successful new product launch since my arrival at 3D Systems 5 years ago.”

    What’s more, the executive said dental labs and dentists have responded positively to the system, with ROE Dental Laboratory becoming the first major U.S. dental lab to deploy a large fleet of the printers across multiple locations. According to Graves, ROE has already expanded its purchases after the initial rollout, tripling its production capacity for high-precision dentures. He also said the product has quickly gained traction because of its faster workflows, easier integration into dental labs, and strong acceptance from dentists and patients. The company also recently secured European regulatory approval for the system ahead of schedule, expanding the market opportunity globally. 3D Systems said the platform now targets more than 60 million edentulous patients globally.

    Jeffrey Graves speaks at AMS 2025. Image courtesy of 3DPrint.com.

    Defense and aerospace also continued to gain importance for the company. 3D Systems expects aerospace and defense revenue to grow by more than 20% this year, reaching roughly $35 million in 2026. The company said demand is being driven by satellite components, turbine blades, propulsion systems, drones, and naval applications.

    To support that growth, 3D Systems is expanding its Littleton, Colorado, manufacturing site by 80,000 square feet, focused on metal parts production. The expansion is expected to open later this summer.

    Executives repeatedly stressed that the AM market still “remains volatile,” especially given ongoing geopolitical tensions and supply chain issues. However, Graves said he feels more optimistic than he has in years.

    “I feel good about things for the first time in a few years,” he told investors.

    For the second quarter, 3D Systems expects revenue between $93 million and $95 million, while forecasting an adjusted EBITDA loss of $2 million to $4 million, partly due to normal seasonal healthcare trends.

    Investors reacted positively to the results. Following the earnings announcement, 3D Systems shares jumped more than 20% in trading, going from around $2.47 before the report to roughly $2.51 afterward and rising even more three days later, reaching $3.28.