My Printer

  • Continuum Powders Launches On-Demand Alloy Service for Small-Batch Production

    The need to meet demand for high-mix, low-volume (HMLV) production is one of the dominant catalysts driving new manufacturing investment. One explanation for this lies in a rare dual transformation taking hold in global supply chains: typically, the manufacturing sector alternates between cycles in which it’s mostly focused on adapting to changes in product technology and cycles in which it’s mostly focused on adapting to changes in process technology.

    The relatively infrequent phases commonly referred to as ‘Industrial Revolutions’, however, are defined by cycles where both product and process technologies shift, in more or less equal measure, simultaneously. In the context of this historical trend’s current manifestation, the growing demand for HMLV capabilities is a primary reason for increasing additive manufacturing (AM) adoption. A good example of that is the latest announcement from Continuum Powders, its launch of a service called Custom Foundry Runtime (CFR).

    The Houston-based materials supplier is now offering customers the opportunity to order custom alloys in small batches, produced using Continuum’s Greyhound platform, which leverages the company’s proprietary Melt-to-Powder (M2P) technology. The M2P process enables scrap to be converted into new metal powder without the need to convert the old metal into ingots first.

    The Greyhound Melt to Powder (M2P) Platform. 

    Now, with CFR, customers can gain the same advantage with alloys tailored to their specifications. In addition to directly serving demand for HMLV output, this should appeal to enterprises and organizations involved in R&D work, as well as those working with particularly high-value materials like gold and platinum. Continuum notes that it anticipates typical batch sizes will range from 100 kg/day (“For complex, multi-variant, or constrained trials”) to 500 kg/day (“For favorable alloys and stable production setups”).

    In a press release about Continuum Powders’ launch of its Custom Foundry Runtime service, the company’s CEO, Jon Cozens, said, “Custom Foundry Runtime represents an important evolution for Continuum Powders. We’re seeing growing demand for flexible alloy development and secure processing capabilities, particularly for customers working with highly specialized or precious materials. CFR gives companies access to advanced atomization infrastructure without forcing them into traditional large-scale production models that don’t fit their needs.”

    Continuum Powders’ Melt-to-Powder (M2P) process converts diverse metal feedstocks into high-performance powders for additive manufacturing applications. 

    Recycling seems like it could be a growth industry from now until the end of time, give or take. This isn’t because people have finally started to care about environmental destruction: rather, it has everything to do with the pragmatism inspired by this new era of geopolitical ruthlessness.

    Oil prices should be far higher than they are right now, and the fact that they have been suppressed back under 100 dollars a barrel is actually a much more terrifying reality than the alternative. That is because it has taken unprecedented efforts of globally coordinated strategic reserve releases just to keep prices in the high 90s, and the “cushion” of oil reserves is being rapidly depleted, with levels in the US Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR), for instance, now near all-time lows. No one can predict how high prices could spike once that cushion runs out, if that indeed takes place without normal Middle Eastern flows returning to the market — a scenario that experts say could happen as soon as next month.

    Moreover, oil is far from the only resource affected, with aluminum prices, for instance, recently hitting four-year highs because of lost capacity resulting from the Strait of Hormuz closure. This is why, barely three weeks into the war, I urged readers to please localize their supply chains. Transportation of goods will only get more expensive because of oil, materials will only get more expensive because of energy prices and direct lost capacity, and let’s not even get into the frightening prospect that Iran’s success at leveraging its control over Hormuz may inspire other nations proximate to worldwide shipping chokepoints to establish their own makeshift tollbooth mechanisms.

    Metal powders manufactured by Continuum Powders using its proprietary Greyhound Melt-to-Powder platform. 

    There are no easy solutions to any of that, but recycling is a difficult — but also real — solution that I think the most proactive enterprises will start to take more seriously, very quickly. And while it’s no easy task to change how you source material inputs, a solution like the one Continuum is offering should make it much more feasible in many cases.

    Images courtesy of Continuum Powders

  • Incodema3D Buys 14 Metal EOS Systems, Now One of the World’s Largest Metal 3D Printer Operators

    Recently, a majority stake of 3D printing service bureau Incodema3D was purchased by AFM Capital. Under new ownership, the Freeville, New York company is now using its cash-rich parent for renewed expansion, and bought four EOS M 400-4 systems and one EOS M4 ONYX. It will get an additional four EOS M4 ONYX printers, two EOS M 400-4 printers, and three EOS M 300-4 printers. Someone definitely made their bonus this year.

    This will make Incodema3D the largest EOS customer, and one of the largest operators of metal 3D printing systems worldwide, with over 50 EOS systems. The company, which manufactures mainly for defense and suppressors but also aerospace and high-tech industry, is forging ahead in increasing capacity.

    Incodema3D CEO Sean Whittaker, wisely left in place by AFM Capital, said,

    “Through 2030 we project continued high growth, and our business requires us to expand our existing facilities, add a new facility, and significantly increase our hiring – all challenges we are tackling right now. With a sense of urgency to support national priorities, we truly feel that we are setting the bar for contracted metal AM production and have created well-oiled processes to produce everything from 10 mission-critical parts for a defense customer to 10,000 parts for an energy company.”

    The company is now aiming to increase its capacity by 300% by 2030 and open a new facility. Incodema has been loyal to EOS since 2012. The company has also relied on Haas, Mazak, Midaco, HK Technologies, and Solukon. These partners and their long-standing relationships have allowed Incodema to build one of the most efficient and highest-quality operations out there. The team is very experienced as well, which has allowed the company to excel. Several people there have spent a decade or more in additive, some have 30 years of experience, and many have been with Incodema for over a decade. Tenure and tribal knowledge are key in safeguarding costs and excellence. Incodema also focuses on a similar quality level across the board, so it doesn’t have the mixed cost of quality problem that many services have. The video above is surprisingly helpful in understanding Incodema and how they think.

    Matt Lewis, Incodema3D’s Vice President of Programs, said,

    “We are constantly introducing process improvements and efficiencies through automation wherever possible to achieve quality and throughput. By integrating design for additive manufacturing, industrial-scale 3D printing, post-processing, precision machining, inspection, and fulfillment under one roof, we can move complex metal parts into production with speed, consistency, and confidence. This end-to-end approach allows us to support demanding production programs while reducing lead times, improving part performance, and simplifying the supply chain.”

    Glynn Fletcher, the potentially very happy president of EOS North America, stated,

    “Incodema3D’s continued growth is a strong reflection of both their technical leadership and unerring vision for AM on an industrial scale. Our enduring collaboration with Sean and his extraordinary team is a privilege. The trust they have placed in EOS for more than a decade is something that we are very proud of.”

    Relying on one supplier is a bit of a risk. But, it should make maintenance, training, and operations easier. It’s very Ryanair-like in a way. By running the 300s, 400s, and the new Onyx, Incodema is showing us that it really sees differences in the EOS portfolio. It has not ventured out into larger systems, probably because higher volume and smaller part production is more efficient and reliable in smaller systems, and most only venture to the big ticket items if they have to because they have huge parts. Having said that, this is a major bet on the quad systems and shows that Incodema3D believes in EOS going forward.

    This is also great news for the Onyx. The black system will probably look a bit out of place at Incodema. But, the metrics will be more than welcome: with lower part cost, better powder recovery, and higher throughput, this system is an evolution of the earlier quad systems. Not crazy big or super new, just better, and equipped with six lasers. And with sensible things such as shorter turnaround times, Volkmann automated powder handling, better gas flow, better microstructure, better surface quality, and fewer clouds the system seems to be precisely what highly efficient manufacturers need.

    At times, progress at EOS seems to be glacially slow, with the company releasing fewer new systems and improvements. But, by making a better, more productive LPBF printer, the company is making an important stride forward in holding the line and expanding its customer base. With bigger projects, bigger clients, and operators now using more and more machines, EOS’s reputation will count more in their favor. But, what industries will opt for lower cost systems? And what part of the defense market will go for the super large SLM systems? EOS is betting that there is a middle ground for production-oriented, small technical part producers.

    As for Incodema, it sure is doing something right in suppressors, defense, or both. Additive Manufacturing Research has been following the suppressor market since before it became big, releasing the first report on 3D printed silencers in 2017. There is currently a boom occurring, and we are predicting market penetration of over 29% in what could be a market of more than one billion in revenue. Now there will be a point where there will be a shakeout in producers. For now, it’s growth up to the skies, and if Incodema maintains quality and output, it should be able to do well even in a less rambunctiously optimistic time as well.

  • HP Wants 3D Printing to Stop Being a “Novelty”

    At this point, most people in additive manufacturing (AM) agree on one thing: the industry has spent years talking about potential. After years of promises and future-looking concepts, companies are now trying to prove that 3D printing can reliably manufacture real products at an industrial scale.

    That was a major focus of a recent 3DPrint.com interview with Arvind Rangarajan, Global Head of Product and Strategy for HP’s additive manufacturing business. Rangarajan repeatedly returned to the idea of moving AM beyond a novelty and making it a dependable production technology.

    “I think that’s basically the key theme inside HP now,” Rangarajan said. “We have been talking about additive as a novelty. But what we want now is to think about it as a real tool for production. So it sits on par with other traditional manufacturing technologies, and when designers are designing their products, they think about additive as a manufacturing process and not as prototyping.”

    For HP, that means moving beyond prototyping and small pilot programs. The company wants AM to become a regular manufacturing option alongside processes like injection molding and other traditional production methods.

    “When designers are designing their products, they think about additive as a manufacturing process and not as prototyping,” he said. “And for that, we need to make additive work at scale. When we think about true scaling, we are talking about a production facility that is running 10 plus printers that are actually producing parts for end-use products. We are moving from tooling and prototyping to series production.”

    One of the best examples, he said, is orthotics and prosthetics, where 3D printing is already producing large volumes of customized parts. HP customer organizations are now manufacturing hundreds of thousands of end-use products through distributed production facilities using multiple printers.

    “You could print the same design anywhere and expect the same product quality,” Rangarajan said. “That’s how you start thinking about it from a production and scale perspective. Many of these distributed manufacturing sites now operate multiple printers producing end-use parts continuously.”

    Arvind Rangarajan at RAPID + TCT 2026. Image courtesy of HP via LinkedIn.

    That matters because repeatability has long been one of AM’s biggest challenges. HP believes companies will only fully trust 3D printing for production if they can get reliable results across different machines and production sites.

    Rangarajan said three things are critical if 3D printing is going to scale: performance, cost, and reliability.

    “The first one is that additive needs to deliver a clear performance benefit,” he said. “The second thing is that it has to be competitively priced and cost-effective compared to conventional manufacturing processes. Manufacturers also need reliable and repeatable results if they are going to trust AM for production.”

    A major part of HP’s strategy revolves around lowering total cost of ownership (TCO), which Rangarajan sees as one of the biggest factors behind broader industrial adoption of AM. He said HP has already reduced TCO by roughly 50% over the past several years through improvements in materials, software, automation, and workflows.

    “Our focus is on continuously reducing the total cost of ownership,” Rangarajan explained. “Every time you drop the TCO by 2x or 50%, the total addressable market grows by 10x.” He pointed to HP’s newer PA 11 material generation as one example, noting that improved powder reuse and material consistency can significantly lower production costs. “Compared to a general material, if you make the same part in Gen 2, it’s 40% cheaper.”

    HP’s new Metal Jet S100 Solution is opening the doors for a digital reinvention of the global metals manufacturing sector. Image courtesy of HP.

    But software and workflow optimization are becoming equally important. HP has introduced tools that optimize part packing inside builds, automate printer operations, and improve throughput. According to Rangarajan, even changing packing strategies can significantly affect manufacturing economics, having seen customers improve their cost by 10% by just changing their packing strategy.

    HP is also increasingly positioning itself less as a hardware company and more as a broader AM solutions provider. That shift became more visible recently with the introduction of HP’s Industrial Filament platform, which moves the company beyond its core Multi Jet Fusion systems and into high-temperature industrial filament printing applications. According to Rangarajan, the move came largely from customer demand for additional manufacturing options and materials.

    “What we see is that in this industry, customers are asking us, ‘How are we doing high-temp?’ We want to become an additive manufacturing solutions provider, where we help customers scale additive. HP’s move into industrial filament printing came largely from growing demand for additional applications and materials beyond the company’s traditional Multi Jet Fusion platform.”

    HP unveils the Fusion 1200 printer on the RAPID + TCT 2026 show floor. Image courtesy of Sarah Saunders/3DPrint.com.

    Rangarajan also pushed back on the idea that additive manufacturing has to replace traditional manufacturing entirely. Instead, he described AM as another manufacturing option designers can use when it makes the most sense for the product, cost, or application.

    “I think the complementing is probably where [it goes],” he said. “There’s always going to be trade-offs. When a designer is trying to solve a problem, they don’t really care how the part is made. What we want to do is provide options to meet the product’s functional requirements in the most cost-effective way. Additive is really well-positioned for that. The technology is also beginning to unlock new areas like mass customization in footwear, eyewear, and medical applications, where personalized products are becoming commercially realistic at a larger scale. We can actually start doing affordable mass customizations. Now you’re paying the same you would pay [otherwise], so it becomes an easy choice.”

    Rangarajan also admitted that the AM industry spent years making promises that were sometimes too ambitious. According to him, some of the sector’s biggest problems came from overpromising.

    “We need to stop saying additive is going to replace everything in manufacturing. A lot of those overblown promises are what set the industry back.”

    Instead, HP’s current strategy appears much more grounded: improve reliability, reduce costs, focus on applications where additive provides a clear advantage, and slowly integrate the technology into mainstream manufacturing workflows. In fact, for Rangarajan, success would ultimately mean that additive manufacturing would become “ordinary.”

    “Additive should just become another manufacturing option. Then designers can choose and deploy it the same way they would any other manufacturing technology,” he concluded.

  • Creality’s Listing: A Sign That China’s Consumer 3D Printing Has Entered a New Phase of Global Competition

    Just days ago, the bell rang at the Hong Kong Stock Exchange (HKEX) for Creality. The company opened at HK$33.80 per share, up from the IPO price of HK$18.8, giving it a market capitalization approaching HK$16 billion. Demand was remarkable. The Hong Kong public offering was oversubscribed 3,829 times, the international offering nearly 27 times, and cornerstone investors subscribed to nearly half of the shares offered.

    Many people interpret this as “just another 3D printing company going public.” But after reviewing the prospectus, industry data, and global market trends, it becomes clear that the real significance of Creality’s IPO is not the listing itself, but that China’s consumer 3D printing industry has entered a new phase of global competition.

    From Creality, I see a clear strategic vision — but also some critical concerns that cannot be ignored.

    Creality IPO on the HKSE. Image courtesy of Li Haixiong/Nanjixiong 3D Printing.

    A “Platform Empire” Taking Shape

    Creality has an undisputed dominant position in the global consumer 3D printing market. In 2025, its printer gross merchandise value (GMV) ranked second globally (11.2% share), its scanner GMV ranked first (45.3%), and its laser engraver business also placed among the top four categories.

    Beyond hardware sales, Creality is increasingly positioning itself as a platform company. And this may be the most important part of Creality’s long-term strategy. Creality doesn’t just want to sell machines; it aims to build an ecosystem. Creality Cloud has over 5.7 million registered users and 2.7 million 3D models, numbers that are highly competitive in the industry. This is the core asset that enables its transition from “selling hardware” to “building a platform” and explains the higher valuation the capital market is willing to give.

    The company’s reach is also remarkably global. Its business now operates in more than 140 countries and regions. The US market alone contributes nearly 30% of revenue (28.4%), with North America and Europe together accounting for over 57%. This was not built through OEM manufacturing alone. It represents a genuine global presence under the Creality brand. Very few Chinese consumer 3D printing brands have achieved this depth of penetration.

    The supply chain serves as the ballast stone behind Creality’s growth. The company operates three major production bases in Wuhan, Huizhou, and Shenzhen, totaling more than 260,000 square meters. This is a classic example of the “Shenzhen model” dividend: extreme cost control, rapid iteration, and remarkable speed of distribution. This manufacturing muscle is something many competitors cannot replicate.

    AI is not a gimmick — it is becoming embedded in the DNA of the company’s product lineup. From AI-assisted modeling (text-to-image, image-to-3D) to in-print AI leveling, flow calibration, fault detection, and AI-driven path planning for laser engraving, AI has permeated the entire product workflow. This gives Creality a strong position in the “AI + manufacturing” narrative.

    Deeper Signals Hidden in Creality’s Data

    Beneath the glossy numbers lie several signals worth examining more closely. The “revenue without profit” scissors gap. Revenue grew strongly from RMB 1.88 billion in 2023 to RMB 3.13 billion in 2025. However, operating profit fell from RMB 177 million in 2023 to an operating loss of RMB 198 million in 2025. Although the net loss in 2025 was largely due to a one‑time payment of RMB 240 million to pre‑IPO investors, even excluding that, adjusted net profit dropped from RMB 130 million in 2023 to RMB 92 million in 2025.

    So, where did the money go? Two places: sales and marketing, and R&D. The sales expense ratio jumped from 16.0% to 18.2%, with absolute spending rising from RMB 300 million to RMB 570 million. The extra spending went mostly toward platform promotions, such as Amazon and overseas KOLs. Competition is so fierce that without paying for traffic, orders become harder and harder to secure.

    The R&D expense ratio rose from 5.1% to 7.1%, nearly doubling in absolute terms. This is necessary spending to avoid falling behind in a rapidly evolving market, but it also squeezes profits.

    The competitive picture becomes clearer in the prospectus itself. The filing states that the largest market participant holds more than 40% market share, while the remaining top five each hold about 10%. That “largest participant” is widely understood to be Bambu Lab.

    Creality’s own global printer GMV share fell from 15.4% in 2023 to 11.2% in 2025. Who has taken that share is obvious. Industry observers would likely point to Bambu Lab as one of the major beneficiaries of that shift. Creality’s response strategy appears clear: first, product premiumization through higher-end systems such as the K2 Plus, which helped raise the average printer selling price from RMB 1,612 to RMB 2,404; and second, expansion of direct sales channels, with online sales rising from 35.7% to 48.5% of total sales. This is a head-on confrontation rather than a passive defense.

    Despite the impressive number of users, the ecosystem still contributes very little revenue. Creality Cloud’s user and model numbers look impressive, but the revenue contribution is negligible. In 2025, revenue from “3D printing products and services” (mainly platform subscriptions, model transaction commissions, and related services) totaled just RMB 6.28 million, representing only 0.2% of total revenue.

    The “ecosystem” is currently more of a powerful user-engagement and brand moat than a mature revenue source. The newly launched Nexbie platform is still in its early days and essentially functions primarily as a self-operated e-commerce site.

    Another figure worth watching is operating cash flow. In 2025, operating cash flow was negative RMB 63.98 million. This is one of the figures that stands out most in the company’s filing. The explanation is straightforward. To prepare for US tariffs and intensifying competition, the company built up overseas warehouse inventory levels, causing inventory to surge from RMB 438 million to RMB 634 million and tying up huge amounts of working capital.

    Behind this is a typical aggressive strategy of “exchanging cash flow for market share.” Whether that approach remains sustainable under the more rigorous financial scrutiny that comes with being a public company is a major unknown.

    Creality’s IPO. Image courtesy of Creality via LinkedIn.

    Four Challenges Ahead

    Based on all publicly available information, I believe Creality’s future is bright, but it must overcome four deep challenges.

    An asymmetric war with Bambu Lab

    This is not just a battle for market share — it’s a clash of two business models. Bambu Lab follows what could be described as an “Apple‑style play,” defining the industry ceiling with one or two exceptional products, locking in core users through the MakerWorld ecosystem, and building high barriers around the user experience. It attacks from the top down.

    Creality, by contrast, follows more of an “Android‑style play.” It relies on a broad product matrix and a deep distribution network to cover every price segment and serve different types of users. It attacks from the wide base upward.

    The question is whether “width” can withstand “sharpness.” As more users are drawn to Bambu Lab’s “foolproof” user experience, how much of Creality’s large mid- to low-end installed base could be eroded? And can the K2 series truly compete with Bambu Lab’s flagship systems in technology, reliability, and user experience while establishing a genuine premium brand position?

    Squeeze on profitability and cash flow from both ends

    The company also faces what could be described as a “sandwich” dilemma. Moving upmarket needs sustained investment in R&D, while defending market share needs sustained heavy marketing spending. At the same time, managing tariff-related risks has forced the company to maintain higher overseas inventory levels, tying up cash flow.

    The result is that revenue continues to grow, but profitability and cash generation face increasing pressure and could turn negative. If revenue growth slows while expenses remain elevated, profitability will be severely challenged. Sustained negative operating cash flow is not an attractive signal for a newly public company.

    The long wait for ecosystem monetization

    The platform and ecosystem are the core story behind Creality’s high valuation, but they won’t contribute meaningful revenue in the short term. Platform development, content incentives, and AI R&D all require continuous “cash burning.”

    The question is whether investors will remain patient enough to wait for that strategy to mature. If market conditions weaken over the next several years and investors shift their focus toward profitability and cash flow, the ecosystem narrative could become harder to sustain and may weigh on the stock price.

    Over‑reliance on the US market

    Nearly 30% of Creality’s revenue comes from the United States, a market that currently faces several challenges. Combined tariffs now range from roughly 40% to 50%, significantly eroding price competitiveness. The future direction of U.S.-China trade relations remains uncertain, while local competition continues to intensify, with Bambu Lab maintaining a strong position in the market.

    This creates a high‑reward, high‑risk gamble. Any major volatility in the US market (whether due to additional tariffs, trade restrictions, or an anti‑dumping investigation) could affect Creality’s revenue and profitability. While the company is exploring manufacturing in Vietnam, it is unlikely to provide an immediate solution.

    Creality’s IPO. Image courtesy of Creality via LinkedIn.

    Creality is an excellent company with strong partners. It has successfully navigated the journey from 0 to 1 in consumer 3D printing, building impressive supply chain, distribution, and execution capabilities along the way. Its listing on the HKSE is a well-deserved milestone.

    But standing at this 2026 juncture, the challenges ahead may be even greater than those it has already overcome. Transitioning from a successful hardware company to a successful platform company requires crossing a vast chasm. The competition with Bambu Lab, the test of profitability models, the long cycle of ecosystem monetization, and over-reliance on a single market represent the four major risks that could shape the company’s future.

    In the short term, the key question is competition. In the medium term, it is profitability. In the long term, it is the ecosystem. Creality’s future depends not only on how good its products are or how wide its distribution network becomes, but also on whether it can find a breakthrough in this “battle of the century” that may help determine the future shape of the consumer 3D printing industry landscape. Ultimately, the goal is not simply to sell more machines, but to convert a massive global user base into sustainable long-term commercial value. The road ahead will certainly not be smooth, but I must extend my congratulations to Creality for its successful listing on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange!

    Xu Fanglei

    About the Author

    Xu Fanglei is an industrial designer, entrepreneur, and industry commentator focused on additive manufacturing and digital fabrication. He is the founder of SCRAT3D and 3D Printing Technology, one of China’s emerging media platforms covering the global 3D printing industry. Over the past decade, Xu has worked across industrial design, product innovation, and advanced manufacturing, while building connections between designers, manufacturers, researchers, and technology companies. His work explores the impact of 3D printing on manufacturing, education, consumer products, and entrepreneurship. Xu regularly publishes industry analysis and interviews, with a particular focus on developments within China’s rapidly growing additive manufacturing sector.

  • Disney Gives Muppet Favorite Scooter a 3D Printed Comeback on Rock ‘n’ Roller Coaster

    For many Disney fans, Rock ‘n’ Roller Coaster Starring Aerosmith was a rite of passage. The attraction opened at Disney’s Hollywood Studios in 1999 and quickly became one of the park’s most popular rides, mainly because it was the only one with inversions and a pretty unforgettable soundtrack from Aerosmith. For decades, it was one of the biggest attractions at the Orlando theme park. In fact, a 75-minute wait was just part of the experience. Guests happily stood in line for the chance to blast from 0 to 57 mph in just a few seconds. But time catches up with everything.

    I got to ride Rock ‘n’ Roller Coaster when it first opened and again just a few weeks before its final run (with many rides in between over the years). The launch was still thrilling, but by the end, the attraction felt tied to a different era of music and pop culture. In fact, many of the kids getting on the ride didn’t recognize the songs or the band, making the upcoming refresh feel like the right move at the right time.

    The change is also important for another reason. A year ago, Disney closed Muppet*Vision 3D, leaving fans worried that The Muppets were disappearing from the parks. The theater attraction had been entertaining guests since 1991 and was one of the last projects Muppets creator Jim Henson worked on before his death. By bringing the characters to Rock ‘n’ Roller Coaster, Disney is ensuring that Kermit, Miss Piggy, Scooter, and the rest of the gang have a major place in the park’s future. And we also learned that 3D printing is playing a role in bringing at least one of those Muppet characters into the future.

    Rock ‘n’ Roller Coaster Starring The Muppets. Image courtesy of Walt Disney World Resort.

    During a preview of the attraction, CNET’s Bridget Carey spoke with Todd Richins, Executive Producer at Walt Disney Imagineering, who confirmed that Scooter’s new Audio-Animatronics figure includes a 3D printed shell, in a rare look at how Disney is using additive manufacturing (AM) as part of its attraction-development pipeline.

    Disney said Imagineers used motion-capture technology to create the figure.

    According to the company, “Guests will be fully immersed in the story with the first-ever Audio-Animatronics figure of Scooter, brought to life using motion-capture technology of Scooter the Muppet. By recording and tracking Scooter’s performance, Walt Disney Imagineering was able to build and program a figure that looks, moves, and emotes exactly like Scooter should, right down to the small details.”

    By recording and tracking Scooter’s performance, Walt Disney Imagineering was able to build and program a figure that looks, moves, and emotes exactly like Scooter should. Image courtesy of Walt Disney World Resort.

    According to Disney, 3D printing now plays a role in the creation of many of its Audio-Animatronics figures. The company has discussed how technologies such as digital modeling, advanced fabrication methods, and 3D printing help Imagineers develop increasingly sophisticated figures for attractions around the world. Earlier this year, Walt Disney Imagineering also revealed that it had worked with 3D printing company Haddy to create a large-scale 3D printed outrigger canoe for the Jungle Cruise attraction at Disneyland. Disney described it as the first permanently installed attraction prop produced using large-scale 3D printing. For Disney, 3D printing can help designers create complex shapes, refine character details, and manufacture parts more quickly than many traditional methods.

    For Muppet fans, however, the bigger story may simply be that the franchise continues to have a place inside Disney’s parks. Scooter has been part of The Muppets since the late 1970s, when he appeared as the show’s stage manager. Nearly 50 years later, the character is still going strong. Now, thanks to Disney’s reimagined Rock ‘n’ Roller Coaster, Scooter is getting a high-tech update of his own.

    Rock ‘n’ Roller Coaster Starring The Muppets. Image courtesy of Walt Disney World Resort.

    The timing is especially interesting because Walt Disney Imagineering is gearing up for another major animatronic project. Disney recently announced plans to update Walt Disney’s Carousel of Progress, one of the most historic attractions in its theme parks. The reimagining will include a new Audio-Animatronics figure of Walt Disney himself, along with updates throughout the attraction.

    Disney has not said whether the upcoming Carousel of Progress figures will include 3D printed components. But after revealing a 3D printed shell for Scooter, it would hardly be surprising to see the same technology show up in future Audio-Animatronics projects.

    Whether it’s a Jungle Cruise prop, a Muppet animatronic, or something still to come, Disney’s growing use of 3D printing is worth watching. What starts inside Imagineering often ends up in front of millions of guests around the world.

  • 3D Printing News Briefs, June 6, 2026: Expansions, New 3D Printers, & More

    We’re starting with business in this weekend’s 3D Printing News Briefs. Axtra3D just opened its expanded facility in Italy, and Austal USA expanded its leadership team. Then we’ll move on to 3D printers, with Mastrex and Sinterit each launching a new system. Finally, ExxonMobil used Meltio’s industrial DED technology to redesign an important component.

    Axtra3D Opens Expanded EU Facility in Italy

    This past week, Axtra3D announced a major expansion of its European operations, coinciding with the company’s recent fifth anniversary. As part of its EU growth strategy, Axtra3D acquired a much larger facility in Vicenza, Italy, and opened the doors just a few days ago. The 17,000 square foot facility, which was designed to support increased global demand for Axtra3D’s production-grade solutions, will become the main hub for the company’s European operations. In addition to hosting live demonstrations, validation programs, and technical workshops, the site will also integrate advanced application development, customer support operations, manufacturing, material validation, and product engineering. The facility emphasizes long-term operational efficiency and sustainable growth, and will also support cross-functional collaboration between the company’s materials, software, engineering, and customer application teams. Since it was founded in 2021, Axtra3D says it’s achieved more than 55% repeat customer growth and year-over-year increase in installed systems around the globe. So this expansion is reflective of its growing customer adoption, global momentum, and investment in scalable manufacturing infrastructure.

    “The move to this new facility marks a significant milestone in Axtra3D’s evolution. This expansion is not simply about adding space. It is about building the operational and innovation infrastructure required to support the next generation of additive manufacturing applications at industrial scale,” said Gianni Zitelli, CEO and Founder of Axtra3D.

    “Over the last several years, we have seen a meaningful shift in how manufacturers approach additive manufacturing, from prototyping toward validated end-use production. Customers increasingly require deeper collaboration, faster validation cycles, and integrated production support. This new facility enables us to strengthen those capabilities while scaling the infrastructure behind Axtra.Workflow, our fully connected manufacturing ecosystem.”

    Austal USA Announces New President & Additions to Senior Leadership Team

    Gene Miller, President of Austal USA

    After a three-month search by its Board of Managers, ship manufacturer Austal USA recently announced that Gene Miller will be the company’s new president, effective immediately. Miller has served as interim president since February of 2026, after former president Michelle Kruger retired. Miller will lead more than 3,500 shipbuilding professionals across the company’s operations in San Diego, Mobile, Washington D.C., and several locations across Virginia. Inheriting a portfolio that has majorly grown in the past few years, he will oversee all aspects of Austal USA’s ship and submarine module manufacturing, and development of autonomous, sea-ready technologies. Miller certainly has the background for this position, having spent more than three decades in naval architecture and shipbuilding. He spent over 20 years in various leadership roles at General Dynamics Bath Iron Works, served as director for amphibious ship programs at Ingalls Shipbuilding, held senior leadership roles across the industry, and joined Austal USA as COO in 2024.

    Austal USA also welcomed three other members to its senior leadership team. Each has, as Miller said, “broad defense backgrounds that will contribute unique perspectives to their Austal USA leadership roles.” Michael Pruit, Vice President of Surface Ship Programs, managed multi-billion-dollar Navy surface ship portfolios at Northrup Grumman Shipbuilding and Huntington Ingalls Industries. He has a proven track record of fostering compliance, operational excellence, safety, and risk mitigation in all stages of ship building and delivery. Retired Captain Michael Oberdorf, Vice President of Submarine Programs, spent over 30 years in the Navy, bringing with him expertise in Navy program funding and nuclear submarine operations. Most recently, he was senior director of operations at Bath Iron Works. Finally, Andrew Hinkebein, Director of State and Local Government Relations, will lead Austal USA’s engagement efforts with local and state governments, strategic partners, community stakeholders, and economic development organizations. He’s a U.S. Marine Corps veteran, previously served as State Director for U.S. Senator Tommy Tuberville of Alabama, and was on the staff of Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Roger Wicker of Mississippi.

    Mastrex Launches Affordable Metal LPBF 3D Printer

    Advanced AM solutions provider Mastrex, headquartered in New Jersey, has launched the industrial and affordable MX300, a metal laser powder bed fusion (LPBF) 3D printer priced at $185,000. With a 300 x 300 x 350 mm build volume, dual 500W lasers, and compatible with industrial alloys like aluminum, Inconel, and stainless steel, the new MX300 is meant for users who need dependable performance, scalability, and precision for demanding applications like aerospace, defense, and medical. It was developed to build a bridge between prototyping and full metal parts production, with a streamlined workflow, high-throughput architecture, and ability to repeatably handle large industrial applications as well as detailed geometries. Mastrex says the new MX300 is meant to make production environments simpler and reduce downtime, so manufacturers can more easily integrate metal LPBF into their existing operations.

    “Launching the MX300 is an important milestone for Mastrex, as we continue our mission to enable the current and next generation with technologies that are robust, reliable, and accessible. Combined with our legacy in laser excellence, the MX300 is the pinnacle of precision and performance,” said Mastrex Co-Founder Ilay Fridland.

    Sinterit Introduces Compact BIANCO2 CO₂ SLS 3D Printer

    Sinterit introduced the new BIANCO2 in response to growing demand for more advanced process control and material freedom. It’s a compact SLS 3D printer, powered by RF CO₂ laser technology, that pairs an open material ecosystem with industrial-grade SLS capabilities. It features print volumes up to 130 x 180 x 330 mm, 4-zone heating architecture and 19 independent heating elements, print speeds up to 30 mm/h, a dedicated high-performance laser water chiller, and more. The BIANCO2 supports a wide range of application areas, including automotive and mobility parts, industrial and engineering, consumer products and wearables, flexible end-use products, and medical, dental, and orthotics components. Paired with Sinterit Studio Ultimate, the printer enables Full Open Parameters, with access to over 130 adjustable print settings, which allows users to experiment, optimize applications, and develop custom print profiles. The BIANCO2 Preorder Program is also open, so participants can test applications, validate materials and workflows with Sinterit experts, order sample prints from their own CAD models, and get a 15% discount with 50% pre-payment; standard price is €47,000.

    “BIANCO2 – our new SLS printer with a CO₂ laser – is the essence of Sinterit’s mission: giving engineers, R&D teams, and manufacturers access to technology that previously required significantly greater investment, infrastructure, and compromise. The new printer isn’t designed to compete on technical specifications alone. We’re introducing a complete, practical tool for solving real-world problems: from faster material validation and more flexible prototyping to the production of short-run parts,” said Łukasz Adach, CFO at Sinterit.

    “The CO₂ laser opens up new application possibilities for our customers while remaining true to what has defined Sinterit for years – professional, accessible, compact, and user-friendly SLS.”

    ExxonMobil Lowers Costs & Lead Times with Meltio’s Wire-Laser Metal Deposition

    Meltio shared how the ExxonMobil Baton Rouge refinery transitioned from subtractive manufacturing to its wire-laser metal deposition (LMD) technology. ExxonMobil’s anti-wicking device, which prevents oil from wicking up thermocouple wires into the instrument cabinet and contaminating system panels, had a lot of design and operational limitations. Meltio redesigned the component, including adding a 75° overhang limit, so it could achieve a solid, leak-proof barrier, and printed it on the industrial M600 DED system. They used Titanium 64, which is more lightweight and inexpensive than the previous material, and as an added bonus, it had already been “parameterized” to work with Meltio’s technology. The team chose non-planar printing, using the M600’s probing functions to deposit features right onto the curved surface so support structures weren’t needed. In the end, ExxonMobil achieved major operational advantages with this method, reducing the unit cost for the complete assembly by 42% and the production lead time by an astonishing 90%.

    “This successful industrial use case highlights something very significant for the industry: metal additive manufacturing is no longer a laboratory technology, but a real industrial tool for critical sectors such as energy, petrochemicals, and defense. The ability to manufacture complex titanium components while reducing costs, lead times, and logistical dependence is a complete game-changer,” said José Luis Sánchez, the Managing Director at Meltio.

    “Oil & Gas is one of the sectors where our technology adds the most value, especially given the need for parts resistant to corrosion, high temperatures, and extreme environments. Being able to produce or repair titanium components quickly and locally represents a huge strategic advantage for operators and major energy companies.”

  • University of Arkansas Researchers Test Metal 3D Printing in a Mars-Like Atmosphere

    If humans eventually establish a long-term presence on Mars, they will face a major manufacturing challenge almost immediately. Tools will break. Parts will wear out. Equipment will need repairs. But unlike on Earth, there will be no nearby supply chain, no replacement parts arriving overnight, and no warehouse stocked with backup components.

    That is one reason researchers continue exploring how additive manufacturing (AM) could support future space missions. Now, a new study from the University of Arkansas looks at one small but important piece of that puzzle: whether metal 3D printing could work in an atmosphere similar to the one found on Mars.

    The research was led by Zane Mebruer, who completed the work as an undergraduate mechanical engineering student at the university under the supervision of assistant professor Wan Shou. The findings were published in a study titled “Exploring Metal Additive Manufacturing in Martian Atmospheric Environments” in the Journal of Manufacturing and Materials Processing.

    Mebruer’s research explains that one of the challenges is that most metal AM systems rely on argon gas during production. The gas protects molten metal from oxidation as parts are built layer by layer. Without that protection, defects can form inside the component that weaken the final part. But the problem is that people settling in Mars would not have access to large supplies of argon, and bringing it from Earth would be expensive. Also, producing it on Mars would require additional equipment and resources.

    Mars’ atmosphere is made up of more than 95% carbon dioxide. Instead of shipping large quantities of specialized gas from Earth, researchers wanted to see whether metal printing could be performed directly in a carbon dioxide environment. If that was possible, future settlers might be able to use resources already available on the planet.

    For the task, the team used a custom laser powder bed fusion (PBF-LB) system developed at the University of Arkansas to print simple 316L stainless steel test samples. Equipped with a 500-watt IPG fiber laser and a sealed chamber that could be filled with different gases, the system allowed researchers to compare printing under argon, carbon dioxide, and normal air conditions. The samples were then examined for surface quality, oxidation, and structural cohesion. 

    Overview of experimental setup for PBF-LB with an artificial environment. Image courtesy of University of Arkansas.

    Argon still delivered the strongest overall performance, which was not surprising. But what caught the researchers’ attention was that the carbon dioxide environment performed much better than ordinary air. The parts did not perform as well as those made with argon, but they performed well enough to encourage more research.

    “It’s a proof of concept,” said Shou, who helped Mebruer conceptualize the work and oversaw the research in his lab. 

    The research is still at a very early stage. The team was not printing finished tools or functional parts, but simple stainless steel test samples, including individual laser-melted lines and small flat structures, to see how the material behaved in a carbon dioxide atmosphere similar to Mars’. After all, there is quite a long list of challenges left to solve before going to Mars, because it is a tough place to manufacture anything. Aside from the atmosphere itself, future systems would have to operate in lower gravity, and deal with dust, radiation, and some of the most extreme temperature changes in the solar system.

    Laser power effect on fabricated 2D samples. Image courtesy of University of Arkansas.

    Even so, the study points to a question that space agencies have been thinking about for years: how do you make what you need when Earth is millions of miles away? 

    That question is becoming more important as governments and private companies push toward longer missions beyond Earth orbit. NASA’s Artemis program, for example, wants to return astronauts to the Moon and establish a more sustainable presence there before future missions head to Mars. A key part of that effort is what NASA calls in-situ resource utilization (ISRU), the idea of using local resources whenever possible instead of shipping everything from Earth. That idea applies to fuel production, habitat construction, life-support systems, and manufacturing. After all, the farther humans travel from Earth, the more important local production becomes.

    A trip to Mars would be very different from a mission in Earth orbit. Crews could be away from home for years, and there is no easy way to send replacement parts when something breaks. That is why researchers are looking at 3D printing. Instead of packing every spare part they could need, future astronauts could potentially bring raw materials and manufacture some tools and components on demand. In fact, researchers have already explored several Mars-related 3D printing concepts over the past few years.

    Scientists at Washington State University previously demonstrated that simulated Martian regolith could be mixed with titanium alloys to create strong printed materials that may one day be used for tools, structural components, or protective coatings.

    What makes this study interesting is that the researchers are not looking at what can be printed on Mars. They are looking at what can be printed in Mars’ atmosphere. And that could be super important, because if future missions could use gases that are already available on Mars, instead of argon, it could make manufacturing there much easier.

    The idea may even have applications on Earth. The researchers point out that carbon dioxide is generally more available and less expensive than argon. Much more testing would be needed, but the findings suggest there may be situations where carbon dioxide could serve as an alternative.

    Of course, nobody is setting up metal 3D printers on Mars anytime soon. In fact, space agencies are still working toward a human presence on the Moon. NASA still officially talks about sending humans to Mars in the 2030s, but that has started to sound more like a long-term goal. In fact, analysts have suggested the early 2040s might be a more realistic window for a crewed Mars mission. But if humans do make it to Mars one day, they’ll need ways to make and repair things once they get there.

  • UT Researchers Use 3D Printing to Develop “Tabletop EUV Lithography” Process

    Photolithography, the semiconductor manufacturing process whereby lasers transfer patterns onto chemical layers coating a substrate, is one of the most amazing industrial processes humanity has ever created. It is also by far one of the most expensive, with the most sophisticated machines (High-NA EUV) only produced by a single company (ASML) and carrying a price tag of around $400 million.

    Researchers at the University of Texas (UT) are attempting to upend the barriers-to-entry standing in the way of broad access to EUV lithography by developing a low-cost, “tabletop” machine that leverages volumetric 3D printing. This process typically involves spinning vats of photopolymers exposed to light from every angle, allowing users to print entire objects all at once. The method the UT researchers utilized instead relies on a single source of light that passes through stationary, self-assembling nanospheres — still creating objects all at once, but on a much smaller scale.

    Traditional EUV lithography can only create 3D structures by building them from a large number of 2D layers, patterned one layer at a time. The method the UT researchers have created, documented in a recent article in the journal Nano Letters, prints entire 3D nanostructures all at once, drastically shrinking the time from design to output.

    A new 3D printing device and technique could speed up semiconductor research.

    In addition to the machine they developed, the team at UT’s Cockrell School of Engineering also benefited from access to EUV materials developed by collaborators at UT Dallas and Johns Hopkins. The work was funded in part by a 2024 grant from the National Science Foundation (NSF), awarded to winners of the Future of Semiconductors (FuSe2) competition.

    In a press release about UT researchers’ development of a low-cost EUV process centered around volumetric 3D printing, UT professor Chin-Hao Chang (one of the lead authors for the associated research paper) contrasted the novel method, which reportedly works on a scale of minutes, against conventional EUV lithography: “The actual printing [in conventional EUV] might not take very long. But the processing can take days.

    Saurav Mohanty, a recent Ph.D. graduate student in the group and the first author of the study, said, “Beyond semiconductor manufacturing, the ability to pattern 3D nanostructures can find applications in medicine for nanodrugs, quantum computing or synthesizing novel materials.”

    I’ve noted many times that the additive manufacturing (AM) industry needs to continue to pay just as much attention as it always has to R&D applications, even as companies simultaneously pivot towards focusing on a growing number of production-level use cases. It’s perfectly logical that the AM industry would want to move past being relegated almost exclusively to the world of prototyping, but AM’s evolution is far more nuanced than a simple binary choice between prototyping and production.

    For one thing, in practical terms, prototyping and production are not mutually exclusive phases. The industries in which AM has achieved the greatest penetration when it comes to end-use parts tend to be precisely those industries where AM had already reached some significant degree of adoption first in the R&D stage.

    Additionally, now would be the worst time to stop targeting the R&D market, which is booming and should continue to do so for the foreseeable future. The semiconductor industry is the best example of this, but it is far from the only one. And even in the case of semiconductors, if projects like the one at UT can ultimately yield broadly accessible research tools, it will vastly expand the number of industries that can afford to fund their own semiconductor research.

    Among the most profound consequences of the long-term accumulation of greater AM adoption is that the traditional lines between R&D and production have been blurred. The successful companies will be the ones that view prototyping and production not in terms of an either/or, but rather in terms of a deliberately strategized pathway from the former to the latter.

    Images courtesy of the University of Texas

  • CEO Yoav Zeif on Why Stratasys’ Markforged Acquisition Is Really a Bet on Industrialization

    When Stratasys announced plans to acquire Markforged, the immediate focus was on the deal. Markforged is one of the most recognizable names in additive manufacturing (AM), known for its continuous carbon fiber technology and metal printing systems. The acquisition also comes after a turbulent few years for the company, which was valued at more than $2 billion during the SPAC boom before being acquired by Nano Dimension and then sold again.

    But according to Stratasys CEO Yoav Zeif, the bigger story is not the transaction. Instead, he believes the AM industry is moving into a new phase, one where reliability, workflow integration, and scalability matter just as much as new hardware. That doesn’t mean innovation is no longer important. Rather, Zeif argues that manufacturers increasingly want reliable workflows, repeatable results, manufacturing standards, and systems that can be integrated into existing production environments.

    In fact, Zeif believes that Markforged’s technology fits directly into that strategy.

    “We have been following them for a long time and have a lot of appreciation and respect for their technologies,” Zeif told 3DPrint.com. “Markforged is by far the leader in continuous carbon fiber.”

    For Stratasys, acquiring those capabilities was not simply about adding another machine platform. Zeif said the company sees an opportunity to combine Markforged’s technology with Stratasys’ established position in industrial FDM.

    “The combination is practically a huge contribution to our customers. We are bringing together the unmatched reliability and FDM knowledge that Stratasys has. No one has better, stronger industrial parts in FDM. Now that we put them together, we can really transform the value proposition of FDM in industrial applications.”

    Stratasys booth at MILAM 2026. Image courtesy of 3DPrint.com.

    More Than a Consolidation Play

    The timing of the acquisition is also interesting. Just a few years ago, Markforged was one of the hottest companies in AM, reaching a valuation of more than $2 billion. Today, Stratasys is acquiring the company for a fraction of that amount. Zeif sees that “not as a reflection of the technology itself and more as a sign of a market finding its balance.”

    “The $2.5 billion valuation was an overshooting, and today’s valuation is also an overshooting,” he said. “There is value because customers ask for it. There is demand, there is growth, there is need in the market. It’s not two and a half billion dollars, and it’s probably not the lower valuation we see now. So it’s somewhere in the middle.”

    The deal has also drawn attention because of what it says about the broader AM market. In his analysis of the transaction, 3DPrint.com’s Matt Kremenetsky described it as a potentially best-case outcome for Markforged after years of industry consolidation. He reported that Stratasys gains a leading continuous carbon fiber platform and installed customer base, while Markforged gains access to the scale, customer network, and global reach of one of the industry’s largest AM companies.

    Markforged’s FX10. Image courtesy of Markforged.

    Rather than seeing the Markforged deal as another example of industry consolidation, Zeif describes it as a strategic move to add capabilities that fit Stratasys’ long-term plans.

    “As far as consolidation goes, I don’t perceive it as practical consolidation. This is what I call targeted capability acquisition, because we have a clear vision and strategy at Stratasys. That strategy is centered on building a portfolio of technologies, software, materials, and services that work together to strengthen end-to-end manufacturing workflows and help customers move additive manufacturing into production environments.”

    Zeif said many of those decisions are influenced by direct feedback from customers: “Over the last several years, Stratasys has assembled Customer Advisory Boards for both healthcare and industrial that include additive manufacturing leaders from companies such as Boeing, Airbus, Toyota, General Motors, Northrop Grumman, General Atomics, and others.”

    Interestingly, Zeif said many of those discussions have not centered on the next breakthrough technology.

    “One of the things that was really surprising was when I asked them what the main barrier to scale is,” he explained. “They told me, ‘Innovation is secondary. We need the workflow to work and the integration with our systems.’ In other words, if you bring a new machine that is innovative but not reliable or repeatable, and the overall equipment efficiency is not good enough, they cannot adopt it. They need standards.”

    Today, Zeif says the challenge for large manufacturers is often not whether a printer can produce a part but whether that technology can fit into existing production systems, deliver consistent results, and meet manufacturing requirements at scale.

    “A machine may offer impressive capabilities, but if it cannot be integrated into existing processes or consistently produce parts at the required quality level, adoption becomes much more difficult. Companies are no longer evaluating a printer on its specifications alone. For us, that is where Markforged complements Stratasys’ broader vision. They are focusing not on prototyping but on tooling and on end-use parts. And this is where we want to create this unique leading platform that we are building.”

    Why Defense Is Leading Adoption

    For Zeif, defense is one of the clearest examples of where additive manufacturing is gaining traction.

    “By far, number one is defense,” he said. “What wins wars is logistics. The fact that you have great aircraft, great weapons, innovation, and everything doesn’t do anything if you cannot deliver the right part in the right place. This is unfortunately an opportunity for additive because this is the industry that can deliver the right part in the right place. Only last year, Stratasys directly printed more than 100,000 parts for defense, and continuous carbon fiber reinforcement is becoming critical for aerospace components, sustainment, logistics, and drones. This is a signal that the demand is coming.”

    Zeif told me defense organizations are increasingly adopting AM to support logistics, sustainment, and distributed production. The ability to produce parts closer to where they are needed can reduce supply chain constraints and improve operational readiness, particularly in aerospace and defense applications. He also sees growing demand for carbon fiber-reinforced components used in drones, aircraft, and other mission-critical systems.

    AMS 2024 CEO Panel’s Yoav Zeif. Image courtesy of 3DPrint.com.

    In Zeif’s view, the deal is less about getting bigger and more about strengthening Stratasys’ ability to serve production applications. The acquisition adds technologies that the company believes can help customers move beyond prototyping and into production.

    As manufacturers increasingly focus on reliability, workflow integration, and scalability, Zeif believes the combination of Stratasys and Markforged can help address some of the biggest barriers to broader adoption of AM.

    Zeif is also scheduled to return to the stage at next year’s Additive Manufacturing Strategies (AMS) conference, taking place February 23-25, 2027, in New York City. After headlining AMS 2026, he is expected to once again share his perspective on the state of the AM industry and the challenges and opportunities facing manufacturers as additive technologies continue to mature.

  • 3D Printing & the Autonomous Era: Defense Tech’s Latest Mutation

    When we last checked in on the broad defense tech landscape and the role of the additive manufacturing (AM) industry in that environment, it became clear that the connecting thread amongst the latest developments in 3D printed weapons systems is self-disruption. Whether one looks at the government budgets that are largely responsible for funding military technology, or the private enterprises competing for said funding, the central process taking place is a story of status quo leaders trying to adapt before they die.

    Autonomous weapons systems — military drones — aren’t the explanation for why this change is happening, but they are probably the most immediate single catalyst enabling the change. At 3DPrint.com and AM Research, we’re taking great efforts to make sure we stay on top of this constantly unfolding story, with a primary example of that being the UAS Additive Strategies: The Present and Future of Drone Manufacturing webinar taking place on June 30 from 11:00 a.m. to 2:30 p.m. Eastern, which you should register for now if you haven’t already done so.

    Drones for All Occasions

    One thing to point out about the webinar is that, given the need to balance time constraints with the objective of delivering the most valuable available information, the content will focus, more or less exclusively, on aerial drones. This is the first time we’ve done this webinar, so who knows if it’s just a one-off or the beginning of a regularly occurring event, but I would guarantee that, in any possible future versions of UAS Strategies, the ‘A’ will stand for ‘Autonomous’ rather than ‘Aerial’.

    That is, drones on land and at sea are already on their way to becoming just as significant as the drones we’re all most familiar with, the ones that fly. Indeed, the Defense Innovation Unit (DIU) recently asked for proposals (due midnight June 13) from companies capable of supplying uncrewed surface vessels (USVs) (drone boats) for the Indo-Pacific region. This is a perfectly logical result of the fact that Iran is relying in no small part on USVs in its gambit to control the Strait of Hormuz, although it’s worth pointing out that the DIU has been periodically asking for such proposals for years.

    There isn’t one single factor that’s pushing militaries more and more in the direction of drones: it is, perhaps, precisely that they simultaneously solve many different challenges involved in the logistics of contemporary combat, which accounts for the widespread shift towards autonomous systems. Ukraine, for instance, has shown that a nation can hold its own against a much larger, much more populous adversary by offsetting manpower disadvantages with drones. In a nation like the US, that same dynamic suggests that drones make far more sense than conventional weapons when facing a future where recruitment numbers will likely never be what they once were.

    From a production standpoint, meanwhile, the newfound credibility for low-cost systems validates the processes of companies with much smaller operational footprints than those maintained by traditional contractors. And, because this new class of smaller companies disproportionately leverages digital manufacturing techniques that facilitate profitability at a much lower scale of output than is historically the norm in the defense sector — at the same time as those techniques also imply the ability to pivot more seamlessly from one product mix to another — such companies allow governments to commit to readiness while taking on less financial risk than has previously been the case.

    Hyperion Systems CEO Joshua Wigley shows TitanCell. Image courtesy of Hyperion Systems

    This is why a company like Australia’s Hyperion Systems, which both makes and uses robotic arm 3D printing cells, can plausibly serve both the construction and maritime markets, among others. Hyperion just launched a USV called the Astra 460, made with recycled polymer. Another company in the Indo-Pacific, Voltage Materials of Hawaii, also just launched its own USV made from recycled polymer, specifically a material that has been validated by the Advanced Structures and Composites Center at the University of Maine — an institution that also possesses similar amounts of expertise in both maritime and construction.

    Construction and shipbuilding are two of the most capital-intensive industries, but now, with enough expertise, a robotic system that costs less than a supercar and a skeleton crew of engineers is a reasonable starting point for launching a single company that can supply both houses and military vessels. So ‘autonomy’ may, most concretely, refer to the weapons systems themselves. But, interestingly enough, that implies autonomy in another, equally important sense, as well: supply chain autonomy.

    3D printed boat. Image courtesy of Voltage

    Hormuz Today, Malacca Tomorrow

    In the post linked to in this post’s first sentence, I mentioned that, in April, Singapore’s foreign minister said what all global strategists had already been thinking, that Hormuz is “a dry run” for the Pacific, i.e., for potential conflict between the US and China over the South China Sea and the Malacca Strait. Obviously, this is why the US military is so concerned with the Indo-Pacific, even as the Pentagon is so rapidly depleting its hardware in Southwest Asia.

    Here, it’s important to remind everyone that the US weapons supply chain is still unable to exist without Chinese suppliers. Two striking figures in this regard are: 41 percent of semiconductors in US weapons systems come from China, and China is responsible for supplying 91 percent of critical minerals in the US Navy weapons supply chain. In terms of the topics most important to shaping US-Chinese relations, I would imagine that China’s position is something along the lines of, “You can buy Chinese hardware for your weapons, or you can support Taiwanese independence, but you can’t do both.”

    That’s probably somewhat of an oversimplification, but Pete Hegseth did sing a completely different tune on Taiwan at this year’s Shangri-La Conference than he did at last year’s. However, concerning the US position, I don’t think the idea is to just acquiesce to China, once and for all, but rather to tread lightly and maintain the status quo for as long as possible while the Pentagon builds up as many contingency plans as it can, with both US suppliers and those of American allies.

    Returning to Australia, this is why the southernmost locale in the Anglosphere is more important to the US than ever, and why it has to build up its own autonomy, both in the sense of its weapons systems, as well as in the sense of the production processes that churn out those weapons systems. Aurora Labs, another Australian company that is both a supplier and user of digital manufacturing hardware, just received a A$1,000,000 grant of matching funds from Australia’s Department of Defence, which will facilitate the company’s purchase of a metal 3D printer, part of the Australian government’s Sovereign Industrial Priorities Stream.

    AU2 Turbojet Engine. Image courtesy of Aurora Labs

    Aurora will use the printer for micro gas propulsion systems for interceptor drones, at the same time that the company has just entered into an agreement with MBDA, a joint venture between three of Europe’s largest aerospace contractors, Airbus, BAE Systems, and Leonardo. Fascinatingly, even though Aurora also makes its own metal 3D printer, it notes that it will use its own 3D printers for R&D and off-the-shelf systems for commercial production. The primary rationale is that this will allow Aurora to ensure complete IP protection, demonstrating the extent to which protection of industrial autonomy is being embedded into the next generation of defense tech.

    Minerals are Critical

    Finally, the obscure reality that all industrial autonomy ultimately rests on materials-processing capabilities looks poised to become less and less obscure as the emerging new world order continues to assert itself. That theme rose to the forefront once again in the last week or so with the announcement from US critical minerals supplier IperionX that fasteners made from the company’s titanium powders exceeded the strength of steel counterparts tested by US Army GVSC DEVCOM, the Pentagon’s primary hub for ground vehicle research.

    Earlier this year, I wrote about how American Rheinmetall ordered 700 prototypes from IperionX for US Army ground vehicle systems. It’s possible these aren’t the same components that were tested, but assuming they are, IperionX has demonstrated how you can actually make money off of having third parties validate your technology.

    In any case, the truly significant point is that the US Army appears to be making headway in securing domestic sources for critical minerals, sources that specifically design their products in alignment with circular economics. This is important not just for the US, but for allies like Japan, India, and, yes, Australia, the three other countries that, with the US, form the Quad Partnership, which at the end of May signed an agreement to cooperate on critical minerals supply chain development.

    Recycling is a central pillar of that agreement, which pledges to invest $20 billion in critical mineral security across the four nations over an undisclosed period. Eventually, I think we can expect that other nations will join in, too, specifically the EU nations, assuming the US and the EU are finally able to seal the deal on the trade agreement that’s been in the works for nearly a year now.

    Thus, the facts on the ground reveal that autonomy doesn’t mean every nation goes it alone, but rather that every nation needs to cultivate some sort of equilibrium between domestic resilience and reliable partnerships with other, domestically resilient nations. Automation as a force multiplier is the nucleus of this new governing philosophy, which stems from the need of all nations other than China to figure out how to work with China without being overly beholden to it. It’s not at all clear how all this will work out. One result I think we can anticipate, though, is that investors will be incentivized to throw as many things at the wall as they can to see what sticks, which tends to be a tailwind for the AM industry.