My Printer

  • Skuld to Work on DARPA’s Rubble to Rockets (R2R) Program

    Skuld will work on the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency’s (DARPA) Rubble to Rockets (R2R) Program, which turns scrap metal into missile components. Skuld will help with alloy design, characterization, and casting. Using AI, Skuld will analyze microstructure, determine properties, and perform spark testing. Spark testing is literally grinding metal to see what it is composed of. The company then hopes to make parts using its Additive Manufacturing Evaporative Casting (AMEC) process. The work will focus on wrought aluminum, such as 6061 and 7075.

    Skuld’s AMEC process combines 3D printing with lost foam casting to produce net-shape metal parts. Image courtesy of Skuld.

    Skuld’s AMEC process is already very inexpensive, able to produce parts using low-cost materials and printers. The process can also scale rather quickly, as you can add more printers and capacity in a granular way. Now the firm will be making compact portable casting setups for the project. This could be a very exciting development. Skuld’s desktop 3D printers and other inexpensive printers could easily be made to be portable, ruggedized, or containerized. Its foam printing process also seems to lack a lot of the exploding powder and high-energy laser problems that other processes have. Individual printers and casting units need not be expensive either. So if one gets mortared, it doesn’t cost the military two million dollars. This should be really doable for them to make a super cheap, super compact unit that can actually make stuff. For a lot of the other options out there, like combining a Meltio with a Hass VMC, the resulting machine still weighs over 1800 kilos, for example. One of the smallest metal solutions, therefore, may very well be Skuld. This could see these being pressed into service very remotely indeed. Rather than a large airbase overseas, e.g., Rammstein, this could go to the US’s Djibouti Camp Lemonnier, or perhaps an even more remote in-country outpost. Just getting these units there would be so much less expensive in weight and volume that it would let the military test more and try out more in more remote places. Smaller, they can be transported by more vehicle types, making them much more flexible to deploy than larger units.

    The Lightning Metal Model LM16, on-site micro foundry. Image courtesy of Skuld.

    Skuld will work with the Worcester Polytechnic Institute (WPI), Foundry Casting Systems, and MatMicronia on the project. Previously, WPI got $6.3 million for the same project to do a lot of the AI bit on software developed by Citrine. ASU, SRI International, and TRIEX (the company behind the Filabot) are also involved. DARPA indicated that a key part is adaptive design, whereby the system efficiently updates a baseline design to enable structural changes for components with newly predicted material properties that meet or exceed the minimum programmatic metrics.

    WPI researchers aim to revolutionize on-site additive manufacturing by combining materials science, artificial intelligence, and 3D printing. Image courtesy of Worcester Polytechnic Institute.

    Skuld’s CEO, Sarah Jordan, said,

    “Through the R2R effort, we are evaluating casting approaches, alloy behavior, and the use of AI tools that expand options for producing components in challenging environments.”

    Last year, we already speculated that a tie-up with the militarily connected University of Tennessee would be good for Skuld and its ability to meet the needs of the Army in particular, in its low-cost deployability. In the Army context, Skuld could be a real winner in developing an easy-to-deploy, easy-to-use solution for certain parts families. Remember, 3D printing technology doesn’t have to work for everything to be useful. If Skuld can make certain parts from certain recyclable materials, then it could meet a real need. Every kilo of material that can be successfully turned into a part saves tens of thousands of dollars in transport costs while quickly fulfilling an immediate need. Coupled with Skuld’s work on thin-walled structures, such as bridges, the company could be a real beneficiary of the Army’s increased spending on 3D printing.

  • Fleet Readiness Centers, a Six-Month Metal AM Push, and Shifting Defense Procurement

    As I wrote about earlier this month, the Trump administration has requested a record $1.5 trillion in Department of Defense (DoD) funding for FY 2027. In my post about what that signals for the additive manufacturing (AM) industry’s role in the defense sector, I discussed how defense industry experts have cautioned that a contentious fight over spending levels could most negatively impact precisely the sorts of companies — smaller, younger enterprises from outside the traditional defense fold — that the Pentagon needs to succeed in order to effect its long-term transition towards a more agile procurement process.

    Now, the newer spending programs that the emerging class of Western defense firms are most relevant to represent a much smaller portion of the defense budget than do behemoths like the F-35, aircraft carriers, etc. But, since they are newer and thereby have less proven track records than the programs managed by the handful of largest primes, the idea that such programs could be targets for lawmakers aiming to bring down the topline budget number seems like one potential likely outcome of the forthcoming defense budget fight. In the time since the post was published, for instance, I’ve seen other sources mention that lawmakers could be hesitant to give the Defense Autonomous Warfare Group (DAWG), a relatively new unit that oversees the development of unmanned weapons systems, the unprecedented budget increase it’s asking for.

    However, I would make a recommendation to anyone (especially anyone in the AM industry) whose livelihood depends on the disruptors winning the potential budget dispute that you push back aggressively on the idea that the length of a budget program’s history should be the most important consideration in determining how worthwhile it is. The work underway at the Fleet Readiness Centers, including Fleet Readiness Center East (FRCE) in North Carolina, is a perfect example of how collaboration across entire branches is succeeding at implementing new capabilities that DoD will benefit from more or less immediately. In the latest case, FRCE announced that it recently delivered its first metal AM parts to the US Navy fleet, including two different helicopter models and a transport aircraft.

    The most impressive thing about this isn’t solely the delivery of the final parts — a weapons pylon fitting, a repair fitting for landing gear, and a blanking plate — but the fact that FRCE qualified the parts in less than six months. The FRCE Advanced Technology and Innovation Team achieved that feat by working with the AM Team and Fleet Support Teams from Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR).

    FRCE recently delivered its first non-flight-critical metal additive manufactured aircraft parts to the fleet, boosting flight line readiness. Image courtesy of Samantha Morse/DVIDS.

    This echoes another announcement issued last summer, also by FRCE, involving work by the same FRCE group with collaborators from NAVAIR on a project to print 2,000 O-ring installation tools for the F-35 Lightning II. According to FRCE, the previous job reduced the lead time for the component by over 90 percent.

    In a press release about FRCE’s first delivery of metal 3D printed parts for the US Navy fleet, the unnamed lead for the FRCE Advanced Technology and Innovation Team said, “We were challenged to complete the qualification, production and certification processes for these parts in six months, and we not only met but exceeded that standard. This is the fastest this sort of thing has ever been done within Naval Air Systems Command, and it shows that we are competitive with industry standards. This entire process has been a team effort between FRC East, our headquarters, the site in Lakehurst, and the Fleet Support Teams, working together to ensure these parts are ready and reliable for our troops.”

    The unnamed lead for the FRCE AM Team said, “If there’s a fight and the fleet needs these parts tomorrow, they won’t have time to wait for those parts through traditional supply chains. The fleet was having a hard time getting their hands on repair fittings for the V-22 main landing gear – it’s basically a doorstop for the landing gear door when it comes up. They turned to [AM] and asked us if it was something we could make, so we took on that part, and a few others, as part of our capability demonstration. The goal is to give the fleet what they need when they need it, and we did just that.”

    The FRCE team, moreover, has been using its newly acquired metal AM capabilities to produce in-house tooling and support parts, demonstrating how adding AM capacity can, in the right hands, quickly lead to multifaceted gains. This is exactly why any decision to pull back on spending programs centered around the buildup of digital manufacturing processes would be such a mistake.

    A compromise solution would be to leave the funding for new programs untouched, but to require that they’re implemented via organizations like the FRC’s, in all situations where that makes sense. The fascinating thing about the FRC organizations is that they’re not funded via direct appropriations, but rather through the Navy Working Capital Fund (NWCF), which means that units within the Navy and Marines “fund” the FRC’s by spending portions of their allotted MRO appropriations. In that sense, the FRC’s generate revenue and operate at break-even in the long run.

    Filtering spending on new programs through the FRC’s would solve multiple problems simultaneously, including the problem of tracking the exact value of AM-enabled savings to give DoD a better idea of how much it could realistically reduce waste with 3D printed parts. The downside is that it would strain the limited manpower resources of the FRC’s, but that could also be addressed by supplementing personnel with rotating involvement from other DoD working groups, and by boosting hiring in the form of a workforce development program — another problem that such an initiative could address.

    While $1.5 trillion is, from any perspective, a lot of money, and objectively, would be an almost unprecedented year-to-year increase in funding, in terms of percentage of US GDP, it wouldn’t actually be the most the US has ever spent on its defense budget. I’d certainly prefer if federal spending were more evenly distributed over all government departments, but the topline number itself isn’t the biggest cause for concern: what Americans should be concerned with is how that money gets spent. We can’t keep pouring it into the same underachieving, behind-the-curve weapons systems that have played such a dominant role in driving the US into a budgetary crisis. The US has to spend smarter, not harder.

  • Surge Fulcrum: From Crafting the Exquisite To Forging Swarms at the Edge

    If you are due to meet a member of the US government to pitch some 3D printing scheme or other idea, you’d do well to bring a copy of Freedom Forge. The 2013 book showcases how maverick businessmen helped win World War II for America and subsequently helped establish an American Century. Currently, it’s in Vogue among the machine-oiled fingernails to power lunches, the Beltway crowd that has their hands, grubby from either or both Maine Jumbo Lobster or Mobil Vactra #2, on the purse strings of US military spending on advanced manufacturing.

    It is clear that the current crop of businessmen in the US is not helping the country win wars. Quite the opposite, in fact. The US looks weaker than it has ever been, save for when the British and Canadians burned Washington, D.C. in 1814. The US has, since the Second World War, consistently been the world’s most powerful country militarily, yet has been unable to secure victory in any major war since 1945. The US excels at conflict but can not win wars, and now everyone knows it.

    An F/A-18E Super Hornet, attached to Strike Fighter Squadron (VFA) 14, makes an arrested landing on the flight deck of Nimitz-class aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN 72) in support of Operation Epic Fury, March. 4, 2026. Image courtesy of the U.S. Navy.

    A reaction against the exquisite, high-priced, perhaps amazing but maybe not effective US military gear has been underway for a few years. Yes. The US has the best gear, but it is so expensive and so little of it. In a long war, crashes and enemy fire will quickly deplete the US arsenal. At the same time, even the best craft has its limits; there are only so many places a fighter can be. And there are only so many missiles it can carry. Cheaper missiles or other craft could do just as good a job, or craft such as drones could overwhelm US vehicles or troops. The technological edge could be further blunted by broader technological progress or by someone outproducing the US with more prosaic but cost-effective kit. Now, with the war in Ukraine being won with inexpensive 3D printed drones, it’s clear that much of the US arsenal is superfluous, and much of it could be eliminated by inexpensive drones. How will the US respond, with a surge in force?

    U.S. Sailors prepare for flight operations on the flight deck of Nimitz-class aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN 72) in support of Operation Epic Fury, Mar. 4, 2026. Image courtesy of the U.S. Navy.

    The US government is shifting from making a few expensive things well to making many things quickly. Many projects, research initiatives, and grants are going towards scaling up production. Lines for producing solid rocket engines, lines for producing energetics, production cells for drones, the hot thing right now is the automated production of lots of gear quickly. This kind of development is more than welcome. I’ve championed this approach since 2009 and believe that the automated, drone production at scale is the key to defense and warfare.

    One key example of the new approach away from the exquisite towards scale is Endless Forge. Whereas it may sound like a title for a romance novel or a Japanese computer role-playing game, this is, to me, one of the most important programs in the US right now. This AFRL-backed program describes itself as,

    “Endless Forge (EF) is Manufacturing as a Service (MaaS), an adaptive, surge-adaptive, resilient, and scalable manufacturing capability to enable US industrial base dominance. EF represents a new manufacturing paradigm, shifting away from vertically integrated and sequential value chains to adaptive and fast-acting regionalized production networks.”

    Beehive Industries was recently awarded a $29 million contract to scale up production of modular microturbine jet engines for missiles and drones. The AFRL is also backing Ursa Major´s affordable Draper rocket engine.

    Of that development, AFRL Commander and Air Force Technology Executive Officer Brig. Gen. Jason Bartolomei said,

    “This project proves that we can transform and leverage our acquisition models to rapidly deliver critical technology advancements to deter and win in a future conflict. We are not just building a single missile; we are forging a new path toward a cost-effective, mass-producible deterrent for the nation.”

    A Mark 38 25mm machine gun fires during a live-fire exercise aboard Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyer USS Frank E. Petersen Jr. (DDG 121), Feb. 10, 2026. Image courtesy of the U.S. Navy/Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Christian Kibler.

    The AFRL is the clear public face of this initiative, but there are other signs that it is happening more broadly, in this SBIR award from DARPA, Top Grain Technologies got $1.7 million to look beyond the current high-performance,

    “This approach is increasingly incompatible with current demands, particularly in the context of drone warfare where cost-effective manufacturing takes precedence over long-term reliability. This proposal addresses these evolving priorities by accelerating the deployment of a low-cost, additively manufactured, dispersion-strengthened nickel-based superalloy, specifically tailored for high-pressure turbine blisks in attritable gas turbines.”

    In an Air Force award, Material Hybrid Manufacturing received $1.2 million for conformal 3D printed batteries for drones.

    “Small unmanned aerial systems (sUAS), particularly Class I Group 1 drones, have become ubiquitous in modern warfare…As the Air Force moves toward distributed, autonomous drone operations, energy availability has become an existential constraint. Without significant gains in battery energy density, these systems will continue to face mission-limiting tradeoffs between flight time, payload, and maneuverability.”

    At the same time, there is broader investment in surge capacity across many industries to provide the US with enough spare capacity to increase production nationally. Often using the Defense Production Act to do this, this is in part aimed at increasing the US’s capacity to manufacture arms.

    Intertwined with this is the now-very-in-vogue Fabrication at the Tactical Edge. In an important paper, this is described as,

    “FATE is a transformative approach to modern warfare that will significantly reduce U.S. dependence on vulnerable supply chains and fixed bases. By dispersing production capabilities across the battlefield, FATE complicates adversarial targeting, making it harder for the PRC to neutralize U.S. forces. Most critically, FATE allows for rapid adaptation to evolving tactical and operational needs, enabling U.S. forces to stay ahead of threats, iterate solutions quickly, and impose asymmetric costs on opponents. This flexibility positions the United States for success in future conflicts, ensuring battlefield dominance through innovation and speed.”

    Containerized manufacturing has been underway since the beginning of the war in Afghanistan. RFab and other initiatives are underway to repair and produce on the edge. Firestorm and other firms are capitalizing on this as well.

    Typically, we can distill this new development into “distributed, containerized, 3D printing of swarms of robots at the edge while maintaining surge capacity at home.” Now, of course, not all manufacturing has to take place in containers, nor will it all be 3D printing. But, generally in missiles, munitions more broadly, and drones in all forms, the US needs this development to work. If not, it simply will have too few men, too few craft, with too few missiles at a given place to fight and win a future war.

    U.S. Air Force F-16 fighter pilots assigned to the 555th Expeditionary Fighter Squadron pose for a group photo during exercise Spears of Victory at a base in the Middle East, Feb. 5, 2026. Image courtesy of the U.S. Air Force/ Senior Airman Tyler A. P. Moody.

    Here’s where this heady elixir becomes positively intoxicating. The people saving America? Those who will build a new robotized US army? Business people, entrepreneurs. You can become a millionaire and be a patriot all at the same time. In a more isolated, ostensibly patriotic US, this is the stuff of dreams. Forge, therefore, as an idea, is the belief that businessmen can forge a new America through additive manufacturing. There are two ways of looking at this.

    Samuel Johnson has a famous quote here presented with context from biographer James Boswell, where,

    “‘Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel.’ But let it be considered, that he did not mean a real and generous love of our country, but that pretended patriotism which so many, in all ages and countries, have made a cloak for self-interest.”

    One way of looking at it is that we will know have scoundrels at the 3D printer. Our additive manufacturing dream will be misused by rent-seeking, self-interested people to feed at the trough. Just like solar, inmates or guns, we will have become not an issue or an industry but a meal ticket. Our technology may be able to address an existential threat to the US’s defense, but we could also face one. Through live fire testing on the front lines, we could be damned because of some kind of OceanGate Titan disaster brought on by an arrogant narcissist of some sort who is good at selling and lobbying but not much else.

    At the same time, this is a huge opportunity for the industry. Like flight, the automobile, or space, we could become a defining technological development for the militaries of the world. At a time of uncertainty, fragmentation, and great power competition, the idea of “distributed, containerized, 3D printing of swarms of robots at the edge while maintaining surge capacity at home” is surely being done with great success already in Ukraine. It is Ukraine that can cost-effectively strike thousands of kilometers away and intercept drones locally. This kind of vision is sure to have a strong appeal in China and to definitely resonate in Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Europe. And we could implement our technology locally in each of those countries, and many more, quite cost-effectively, given the alternatives.

    We are at a moment when many will want what we have. Rather than a side show, or a cottage industry with potential, or an apple in a VC’s eye, it is more than this now. Archimedes said, “Give me a lever long enough and a fulcrum on which to place it, and I shall move the world.” Depending on who you are, additive manufacturing can be either the lever or the fulcrum, but it is certain now that we will move the world. We’re not a technology, a part of manufacturing, but a way to move nations, a way to win wars. And whoever best harnesses 3D printing will win the future. So do pick up a copy of that book, Freedom Forge, when you go to Washington, or to a national capital of your choice.

    All images courtesy of CENTCOM

  • Cantor Fitzgerald Behind Velo3D Raise and Elmet IPO

    Cantor Fitzgerald is showing up across two advanced manufacturing deals at the same time, acting as sole book-runner on a $50 million stock raise by Velo3D and also involved in the initial public offering (IPO) of Elmet Group. The two moves point to growing activity around financing companies tied to aerospace, defense, and high-performance manufacturing, where scaling technology into real production still depends on capital and strong financial backing.

    Velo3D Raises $50M as It Pushes Toward Production

    Velo3D raised $50 million by selling new shares, pricing 3.57 million shares at $14 each, with Cantor Fitzgerald acting as the sole book-running manager for the offering. The company expects the deal to close at the end of April and plans to use the proceeds for working capital and general corporate purposes. The move brings in fresh cash, giving the company more financial flexibility, but it also reduces the value of existing shares.

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

    For a company that has been dealing with losses and low margins, the raise gives Velo3D more breathing room as it works toward steady production demand. Moves like this are common in the manufacturing space, especially for companies trying to move from development into full production. Getting there takes time, money, and real customer demand.

    At the same time, the company is making a bigger move into motorsports through a new partnership with Andretti Performance tied to the 2026 IMSA season, hosting customer events, and boosting its leadership team. The goal is to show that its metal 3D printing technology can perform in demanding environments. Motorsports is often used as a proving ground, where parts need to be lightweight, strong, and produced quickly.

    Velo3D has partnered with Andretti Global as an official sponsor and Additive Manufacturing technology provider for two rounds of the 2026 IMSA Michelin Pilot Challenge. Image courtesy of Velo3D via LinkedIn.

    In fact, Velo3D is now showing customers how its technology performs in real-world applications. The company announced on social media that it is hosting an open house today at its Fremont, California, facility, featuring driver Jarett Andretti and the No. 43 car. Velo3D invited visitors to see how it designs and produces “mission-critical metal parts for aerospace, defense, and energy.” Events like this are about turning interest into real business by showing the technology in action.

    On the leadership side, Velo3D also shared that Jim Suva joined as Chief Financial Officer earlier this month. Suva brings a long track record in public markets, with experience at Goldman Sachs and KPMG, more than two decades as a Managing Director at Citi, and, most recently, serving as SVP and Treasurer at Cricut. 

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

    Elmet IPO Puts the Materials Side of 3D Printing in Focus

    At the same time, Cantor Fitzgerald is also involved in the IPO of Elmet Group, a company focused on high-performance metals used in demanding applications like aerospace, defense, and high-power systems. The company raised about $125.5 million in net proceeds after pricing roughly 9.9 million shares at $14 each, including the full exercise of the underwriters’ option. The shares began trading on the Nasdaq Capital Market under the ticker “ELMT” on April 23. Elmet Group is going public, but its core business, Elmet Technologies, produces the materials behind those applications, including additive manufacturing.

    Elmet metal powder. Image courtesy of Elmet Group.

    While not a pure play 3D printing business, Elmet plays an important role in the additive manufacturing ecosystem. Through its materials business, it produces high-performance metal powders and components, including refractory metals like tungsten, molybdenum, niobium, and tantalum. These materials are used in advanced 3D printing processes for applications where strength, heat resistance, and precision are key, like aerospace, defense, medical, and energy. Elmet Technologies is the only U.S.-owned, fully integrated tungsten and molybdenum manufacturer, and the largest U.S.-owned producer of those materials, with nearly 400 employees.

    Its materials and components are already used across high-performance industries. NASA has used Elmet materials in its Artemis missions, where components must withstand extreme space conditions. The company also supplies into aerospace and defense supply chains tied to firms like Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, and Teledyne Technologies, as well as national labs including Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory and Los Alamos National Laboratory. In medical imaging, tungsten powders are used in CT systems. The company also works with partners like TANIOBIS to develop specialized powders for AM, strengthening supply chains for critical applications.

    The IPO points to a continued demand for these types of advanced materials, particularly in sectors where performance is more important than cost. 

    Tungsten heavy alloy powders for AM. Image courtesy of Elmet Technologies.

    Cantor Fitzgerald has been increasingly active in advanced manufacturing and industrial technology deals. The firm has worked with a range of companies across sectors like aerospace, defense, and digital manufacturing, helping structure capital raises and connect them with investors. Its involvement here points to the continued need for specialized financial partners as companies in the 3D printing sector work to scale into full production.

  • 3DPrint.com & AM Research Present: UAS Additive Strategies, Sponsored by EOS

    When your work involves a technological field, like additive manufacturing (AM), which still flies under the radar for most people, it can often feel like what you do every day exists in its own little container closed off from the rest of the world. The curious thing about that is that AM has repeatedly proven to be directly relevant to some of the world’s most impactful societal developments.

    We don’t have to get into those developments now, but the dynamic has reemerged once again in the form of the ongoing conflict in Iran. Just as with all other instances of contemporary military operations, the war in Iran is a drone conflict, and that means that AM has a disproportionately large role to play in the industrial base activities of the belligerents. International powers are already in “a new drone arms race,” one in which the central issue driving strategic competition is the production techniques used to deliver the weapons systems, even more so than the weapons systems themselves.

    This boom in unmanned aerial systems (UAS) has such potential to shape the next generation of the AM industry that AM Research and 3DPrint.com have decided to offer a new webinar event based on the topic, UAS Additive Strategies: the Present and Future of Drone Manufacturing. Sponsored by EOS, the global leader in both metal and polymer AM solutions — and one of the most important AM original equipment manufacturers for the US defense industrial base — the webinar will take place on June 30, from 11:00 AM to 2:30 PM Eastern time.

    In addition to a keynote from EOS’s Business Development Manager for Polymer, Dave Krzeminski, a market forecast from AM Research’s Scott Dunham, and a talk from the inimitable Joris Peels on the key AM trends and innovations currently at play in the drone market, the webinar on June 30th will include featured talks from industry professionals, as well as three panels: one on AM for tactical drone production, another on AM for strategic drone production, and a third on using AM to manufacture drones at the edge.

    I will also be speaking briefly on 3D printing’s future in drones used at sea and on land, two themes which should only continue to gain traction as both AM and autonomous systems persist in their rapid, overlapping evolution. Finally, there will also be ample time at the end of each panel for audience Q&A.

    Now, while this type of insight isn’t free, I think the current price of $49 is arguably the next best thing, so you should register here before the price goes up to $89 on June 18. On the other hand, for some people, this type of insight actually is free, kind of: for any registered attendee of Additive Manufacturing Strategies 2026, or any 3DPrint.com PRO subscriber, you can contact [email protected] to receive a free registration code.

    This field of activity is changing so quickly that even the most well-informed individuals on the topic have to update their knowledge constantly to stay that way. UAS Additive Strategies is a perfect chance to do just that. Or, you might be just getting started, and are so overwhelmed that you can’t even figure out where to begin — UAS Additive Strategies is equally suited to you, as well.

    Images courtesy of 3DPrint.com

  • 3D Printed Metal Brackets from LightForce Orthodontics

    Align has built a multi-billion-dollar business out of 3D printed thermoforming inserts that are used for silicone clear aligners that gradually align your teeth. That model has been copied by many, with companies trying to offer lower-cost solutions that work slightly differently. Now LightForce Orthodontics wants to do something that, if successful, could be very impactful and innovative.

    LightForce launched in 2019, 3D printing unique brackets that let braces be tailored to patients. The company later secured $80 million in funding, bringing its total to $150 million. Now they’ve released the LightBracket Metal, a metal patient-specific brace bracket. And going by the enthusiasm expressed in these images, this will be great and much better than being kidnapped. The design of the braces depends on the treatment plan, with each bracket specifically designed for that tooth.

    LightForce Orthodontics CEO Alfred Griffin said,

    “For more than a century, orthodontics relied on a stock bracket for patients who were never stock. LightBracket Metal changes the order of things. We’re giving doctors the most exact instrument they’ve ever had for the work they were born to do.”

    Meanwhile, the company’s President, James Lawton, stated,

    “For decades, every patient got the same bracket. That ends now. We are accelerating toward a future where the very idea of a universal, one-size-fits-all bracket is unthinkable.”

    Previously, the company has seen “up to 60% fewer appointments and 43% shorter treatment times over conventional braces.” That translates into more profit for orthodontists and easier treatments for patients. The company says it has a “proprietary 3D metal printing process.” We’re not sure right now what they mean by this, if this means that they have an adapted version of LPBF to do this, for example, or if they really came up with an entirely new process. The brackets can have a custom “bracket base, slot height, slot prescription, bracket position, tie wings, and hooks,” while the “base conforms to the morphology of the individual tooth.” It also says that a “lower-profile design with a breakthrough patient-specific tie-wing and hook delivers improved comfort and reduced debond rates.” Debonding occurs when the brackets fail and release from the teeth. A reduction of that, therefore, would be good news for patients. Bracket failure rates seem to run at between 2% and 6%, which adds up to a lot of extra work for orthodontists.

    LightForce seems to be making real progress in disrupting orthodontics. Others have found it difficult to dislodge Invisalign through trying to out-invisalign Invisalign, which, of course, is very difficult. LightForce, meanwhile, is taking a different approach, working with dentists, working on brackets, and could offer an alternative path for patients. We don’t know how LightForce is printing its brackets and what the costs are. If it can reduce the printing costs significantly or if it has developed a process that lets it print its parts well, then it could find a lasting advantage. If it has made a process that is perfect for small brackets with smooth finishes, then the company could really build on that to ensure that it can win well beyond when their patents expire. Orthodontics is a multi-billion-dollar industry where 3D printing is providing easier, more cost-effective treatment for patients. If LightForce continues to build on its own success and expands they could be a real financial force to be reckoned with as well. Indeed, with a current market cap of over $13 billion, Align may find LightForce an irresistible company to buy. Even if it would not be interested it surely would be more than a bit worried if Dentsply Sirona or Straumann managed to buy the firm or if LightForce went public. Either way the future seems bright for LightForce.

    Images courtesy of LightForce Orthodontics

  • Novineer Partners with Contract Manufacturer AM Craft on AI-Backed Reverse Engineering for CAD Models

    The need for replacement parts that are in limited production—or out of production altogether—will always be a demand catalyst for additive manufacturing (AM). Unless the entire global economy at some point shifts to using equipment designed to be serviced exclusively with parts produced on-demand, we will forever depend on systems whose replacement parts are more or less eliminated from mass production long before those systems themselves are out of use.

    This is of course a key piece of the explanation behind the interest that aerospace suppliers have in AM, with aircraft frequently staying in service well beyond the timeline anticipated upon their initial procurement. The biggest obstacle to leveraging AM in this context lies in the fact that the blueprints for replacement parts so frequently lack a digital paper trail. This in turn this drives demand for reverse-engineering capabilities that can quickly transform photographs into CAD models. That’s the basis for a new partnership between generative design software enterprise Novineer and contract manufacturer AM Craft.

    It’s certainly not impossible, without access to a dedicated software tool, to reverse engineer the blueprint for a component that only exists as a physical part. However, it typically requires hours of work by an engineer specifically trained for the task.

    NoviVision example at AMUG 2026. Image courtesy of Sarah Saunders.

    On the other hand, the solution that Novineer has made available to AM Craft, called NoviVision, relies solely on photographs taken with a smartphone, by workers who don’t need any additional training to perform the job. According to Novineer, the conversion of the images to editable CAD models takes about two minutes. For a company like AM Craft, which has produced over 35,000 flight-certified parts, all that time saved per part adds up.

    In a press release about Novineer’s partnership with AM Craft on AI-backed reverse engineering capabilities, Didzis Dejus, CEO of AM Craft, said, “Part availability is one of the most persistent operational challenges facing airlines and MROs today. AM Craft was built to solve it — combining EASA-certified [AM] with the kind of speed and flexibility the traditional supply chain cannot offer. Our partnership with Novineer takes that capability further. By integrating NoviVision into our workflow, we can move from a physical part to a certified replacement faster than has previously been possible, and we can do so from almost anywhere in the world. That matters enormously to the engineers and procurement teams we work with daily.”

    Beyond the specific benefit of broadening access to reverse-engineering software for design, one thing to like about this partnership is that Stratasys is a partner of and strategic investor in AM Craft. At the end of last year, Novineer announced its own partnership with Stratasys, centered around integrating Novineer’s NoviPath simulation function with Stratasys’ GrabCAD Print Pro software.

    Cupholders printed by AM Craft on Stratasys machines. Image courtesy of Stratasys.

    Thus, a user like AM Craft can now reverse engineer a part file on their phone, then upload that file into GrabCAD and use the simulation function to help guide the editing process. As Novineer’s CEO and co-founder, Dr. Ali Tamijani, told me in an interview about the Stratasys partnership, one of the big holes in the market that Novineer aimed to address with NoviPath was the lack of simulation software explicitly tailored to FDM printing.

    In the same way that the success of AI-for-manufacturing solutions requires that the specific needs of manufacturers be taken into account, AM users need software tools that go beyond a one-size-fits-all mentality applied to a field with as many internal subdivisions as manufacturing. This suggests that over the next few years, it will be especially important for AM companies to establish their own partnerships with software enterprises that specialize in addressing the precise set of challenges most relevant to the AM industry.

    That opens up opportunities for the software providers and the OEMs and contract manufacturers alike, but it also means that AM companies will likely have to go back to the drawing board for a few more years in order to genuinely capitalize on incorporating AI into their ecosystems. The capital expenditure associated with that kind of endeavor should further accentuate the relative positioning of the companies that are experienced at forming partnerships and attracting government funding.

    Featured image courtesy of Novineer

  • Astrobotic Tests Rocket Engine Made with Elementum 3D Materials

    Astrobotic has completed a series of hot-fire tests for its Chakram rotating detonation rocket engine, with additive manufacturing (AM) playing an important role in how the engine was built. The company conducted the tests at NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, where two prototypes ran across eight tests totaling 470 seconds, including a 300-second continuous burn that may be the longest of its kind to date. Of course, the performance stands out, but what really matters here is how the engine was built.

    Astrobotic used a metal 3D printing process called PermiAM, Elementum 3D‘s proprietary approach for controlling porosity inside parts, which lets engineers adjust how dense or porous different areas are during printing. That means a single component can combine dense regions for strength with more porous sections for cooling and fluid flow, which is especially useful for applications like propulsion and thermal management.

    That matters for rocket engines. Heat and fluid flow are hard to control, and traditional manufacturing usually requires multiple parts, complex internal channels, and assembly steps. With 3D printing, those features can be built directly into one component. Here, controlling porosity inside the metal helps handle heat, improve stability, and boost efficiency,  which are three of the biggest challenges in advanced rocket engines.

    Why Rotating Detonation Engines Are Different

    The engine Astrobotic tested is not a conventional rocket engine. Rotating detonation rocket engines use supersonic waves that travel around a ring-shaped chamber to burn fuel. As the company explains, this approach can extract more energy from the same amount of propellant, potentially improving efficiency by up to 15%.

    At the same time, these engines are harder to design and build. They face issues with stability, heat, and durability. That is where AM becomes more important. 3D printed metal components make it easier to build complex internal structures and manage heat, helping solve problems that are difficult with traditional methods.

    Astrobotic’s Peregrine Lunar Lander is encapsulated with ULA’s Vulcan rocket. Image courtesy of Astrobotic.

    During testing, each engine produced more than 4,000 pounds of thrust and reached stable operating conditions. Astrobotic reported no visible damage to the hardware after the test campaign. However, the company plans to continue developing the engine, with future work focused on cooling, throttling, and reducing mass. The technology could eventually be used in systems like lunar landers and in-space vehicles.

    This work is part of the broader push to return to the Moon. Programs like NASA’s Artemis are focused on building a long-term presence beyond Earth, and that will need more efficient and reliable propulsion systems. Advances like this, especially when combined with new manufacturing approaches, could help make those missions easier over time.

    Astrobotic’s work on propulsion ties directly into that goal. The company is preparing for its next major mission, the Griffin-1 lunar lander, which is targeting a launch no earlier than July 2026 as part of NASA’s Commercial Lunar Payload Services program. The lander is designed to carry scientific instruments, rovers, and commercial payloads to the Moon’s south pole, a key area for future exploration.

    Looking ahead, Astrobotic is planning additional missions beyond Griffin-1, including new landers and spacecraft systems aimed at supporting a growing lunar economy. In that context, technologies like 3D printed propulsion and in-space manufacturing are not side projects. They are part of a larger effort to make space systems lighter, more efficient, and easier to build.

    A rendering of Astrobotic’s Griffin lunar lander on the surface of the Moon. Image courtesy of Astrobotic.

    What’s more, this is not the first time Astrobotic has worked with 3D printing. The company has been using AM across several areas. Through its acquisition of Masten Space Systems, Astrobotic gained access to work on a 3D printed aluminum rocket engine, showing early interest in additively manufactured propulsion hardware. It is also involved in projects like MOONRISE, which aims to 3D print structures directly on the Moon using lunar dust. The idea is to build landing pads, roads, and other infrastructure without having to bring materials from Earth. 

    Over time, this points to a bigger goal, which is using 3D printing not just to build spacecraft, but to manufacture parts and structures off-Earth. It shows that Astrobotic is using 3D printing where it matters most, especially in tough environments.

  • How AtomForm’s 12-Nozzle System Cuts Multi-Color FDM Transition Waste by Up to 90%

    Pull up the print stats on multi-color FDM jobs. The number that stings isn’t time; it’s material efficiency. On six-color models, single-nozzle systems consume significant filament during transition flushing, expelling waste as purge towers or blocks. For high-transition prints, this overhead sometimes approaches the final part’s mass. Operators know this. Most have absorbed it into production economics and moved on.

    MOVA AtomForm, however, has chosen a different approach.

    Walking at RAPID + TCT 2026, you see plenty of multi-color solutions — most still fighting that same problem. But at Booth #1313, something stood out.

    Making its debut, the Palette 300 doesn’t just optimize flushing; it removes the condition that makes extensive flushing necessary. Twelve dedicated nozzles, each locked to its own filament path. Color change: an approximately 40-second mechanical swap. No shared nozzle requires flushing during material transitions.

    “It Wasn’t a Slicer Problem”

    Waste became hard to ignore during beta deployments, according to AtomForm. “This wasn’t solvable by optimizing slicer settings. It was a structural bottleneck inherent to single-nozzle architecture.”

    The OmniElement™ turret exists because software alone cannot fully eliminate shared-nozzle constraints. Waste optimization, however sophisticated, still operates within the limitations it’s trying to overcome. So, the Palette 300 engineers removed the reason for it.

    Twelve Nozzles and Why It Matters

    Here’s how AtomForm landed on that figure. Internal data showed 90% of real-world multi-color jobs use six colors or fewer. That’s the floor. Engineering constraints set the hard ceiling: twelve is the maximum the turret can accommodate without sacrificing the 300×300×300mm build volume. Between coverage, redundancy needs, and mechanical footprint, twelve satisfied all three.

    While the OmniElement™ houses twelve nozzles, the system supports up to 36 colors by daisy-chaining six RFD-6 filament units. This enables massive palettes that are impossible to achieve on a single-nozzle setup without hours of manual intervention.

    AtomForm palette 300.

    What twelve nozzles provide beyond six is redundancy. A nozzle clog on a conventional machine at hour eight of a ten-hour print is a total loss. On the Palette 300, onboard cameras catch the failure, the system pulls a spare of matching diameter, and the build continues from the exact layer where the interruption occurred. No restart. No operator intervention. That recovery capability has long been an industrial feature, but never before on a desktop machine.

    Beyond the Turret: Motion Control Is the Real Enabler

    Forget the turret. Look at the motion system.

    MOVA Group’s background is robotics: sensor fusion, closed-loop control, precision actuation at scale. That shows up in the Palette 300’s closed-loop step-servo motors: the actual position is checked against the commanded position, corrections applied in real time. This continuous synchronization maintains positional integrity under dynamic loads, mitigating the risk of mechanical drift during long-duration prints.

    Add 50+ sensors, four AI cameras performing live extrusion monitoring, a 350°C hotend, and a 65°C active chamber. The Palette 300 targets engineering-grade materials, starting with common filaments, with validation for high-performance options underway.

    AtomForm palette 300. Image courtesy of Mova.

    What the Waste Reduction Looks Like

    In AtomForm’s six-color benchmark, a traditional single-nozzle setup consumed 422.15g of filament, with 292.89g purged as waste. Using the OmniElement™ turret and ReadyPrint™ feeding system, the Palette 300 eliminates the purge tower, achieving a claimed 90% reduction in transition waste. For a studio, that means recovering over 70 kg of filament annually — a saving that multiplies quickly with engineering-grade materials.

    A New Brand Backed by Established Robotics Engineering

    AtomForm is a young brand. That’s worth saying plainly.

    MOVA Group is not young. The parent company’s manufacturing scale, engineering depth, and design recognition — MUSE Design Awards Gold, iF Design Award — back a subsidiary making significant hardware claims in its first major North American appearance. For any robotics spinout entering additive manufacturing, the gap between ambition and validation is normal. What closes it is production cycles, not press releases.

    AtomForm chose RAPID + TCT over a consumer electronics venue, a deliberate decision to stand before an audience that will scrutinize every claim here. The machine is on the floor. The engineers are in the room. That’s the right test.

    Two years ago, flushing 70% of your filament as waste on a multi-color job was just the cost of doing business. Today, that math is harder to defend. The Palette 300 largely removes the need for traditional purge-based flushing. Whether it holds up in daily production is the only remaining question.

    Reservations will be open soon at atomform.tech.

    Images courtesy of Mova

  • RAPID 2026: Democratizing Metal Laser Powder Bed Fusion 3D Printing with Mastrex

    Aside from a quick mention in an episode of our Printing Money podcast, I didn’t know much about Mastrex. But when I heard that the U.S.-based company had developed a $39,000 desktop metal laser powder bed fusion (LPBF) printer, I knew I had to learn more. So I’m very glad to have had the opportunity to speak with CEO Ilay Fridland at RAPID+TCT 2026.

    It’s not just polymer 3D printing that’s being democratized these days: metal 3D printing is as well. There are plenty of examples from the last few years, including Metal Base, Scrap Labs, Xact Metal, One Click Metal, FastForm, and more.

    “The growing number of consumer metal 3D printing applications in the market is leading to that the LPBF technology is gaining traction among end users and will increasingly be considered for producing a wide variety of products,” One Click Metal’s CEO Gerrit Brüggemann told Joris Peels when asked his predictions for industrial production in metal AM.

    Mastrex booth at RAPID+TCT 2026.

    At RAPID, Fridland told me that Mastrex started selling machines over a decade ago, offering polymer 3D printers, CNC milling machines, and fiber laser cutters.

    “We always had demand for metal 3D printing, but the technology wasn’t mature enough for our customers,” he explained. “It was great for some critical applications like aerospace, and parts that you can’t make any other way. But for our customers, it was too expensive, sometimes unreliable, and tolerances weren’t always great.”

    But, he said that this all changed about three years ago. The price of components went down enough, and the technology matured enough, that it was possible to get good LPBF-specific components, like software and laser optics.

    Fridland said that with other AM technologies, such as FDM and SLA, the machines started out huge and then went down in price and form factor.

    “Now we are seeing the same happen with metal LPBF 3D printing,” Fridland said.

    Mastrex MX100 at RAPID+TCT 2026.

    Then he showed me the desktop MX100, the company’s entry-level metal LPBF printer, which starts at an almost unbelievable $39,000. It features a 100 x 100 x 80 mm build volume, one 300 W laser, a “fast and reliable galvo scanner,” and 20-60 µm layer height. The printer is compatible with a variety of materials, including stainless steel, copper alloy, aluminum, titanium, Inconel, cobalt-chromium, and more.

    “You get real metal parts straight from the machine, you don’t need to sinter them, so you don’t have an issue with shrinkage and deformation,” Fridland said. “Same technology, same tolerances, same powder as industrial machines that cost over a million dollars, just with a smaller print area.”

    Mastrex offers several other metal 3D printers, going up in both print volume and number of lasers.

    The desktop MX100 is good for desktop prototyping, education, and R&D purposes, while the slightly larger MX120, which starts at $49,000, offers a 120 x 120 x 100 mm build volume, and also has a 300 W laser, is more for research labs and larger prototypes. After that, the lasers in the printers go up to 500 W, making them “comparable with the real industrial machines.”

    Mastrex MX300 at RAPID+TCT 2026.

    The other printers in the MX Series are:

    • MX150, 150 x 150 x 120 mm build volume, one 500 W laser
    • MX220, 220 x 140 x 200 mm build volume, two 500 W lasers
    • MX300, 300 x 300 x 350 mm build volume, two 500 W lasers
    • MX400, 400 x 350 x 400 mm build volume, four 500 W lasers
    • MX800, 800 x 600 x 900 mm build volume, eight 1,000 W lasers

    Mastrex is only selling its printers up to the MX400, as the MX800 is still in development and won’t be released until later this year.

    “With the largest system, you can get a 400 millimeter working area and eight lasers, which is suitable for real production. In one build, and depending on the size of the part, our customers are getting dozens of parts all the way up to a thousand parts plus.”

    Fridland says that the second largest Mastrex system, the MX400, “is still very reasonable in price.”

    “You are looking at 400 millimeters, four lasers, and it’s around $360,000. Other solutions with these specs would be a million plus,” he said. “So across the board, it’s revolutionary.”

    Mastrex is mostly seeing applications in dental labs, universities, and prototyping for its smaller MX Series printers, while the medium-sized systems are being used for medical applications and in machine shops.

    The larger format MX400 has mainly been sold for aerospace applications, but Fridland says they’re getting interest from the DoD, especially because Mastrex is a U.S. company and its printers are assembled in the U.S.

    The company was founded in New Jersey, but is moving most of its operations to San Diego in just a few months, in order to be closer to its aerospace customers and suppliers in California and Mexico. Mastrex will keep some offices and a showroom in New Jersey to maintain an East Coast presence, though.

    Mastrex has been making the rounds at 2026 trade shows, starting at CES in January and also attending AMUG last month, before coming to RAPID.

    “It’s very different than what people are used to,” Fridland said about the company’s technology. “Even after the events, I’m getting many emails and messages from people about how interesting it is to see something that is truly different. And not just 10% faster, but something that is really changing the industry.”

    With the company’s background of selling CNC milling machines for aluminum and stainless steel to machine shops, Fridland said that a lot of those customers weren’t using plastic polymers, so they never adopted FDM printers or any additive technology.  So for many Mastrex customers, this is their first LPBF metal 3D printer, or even their first 3D printer altogether.

    “When they see the parts that we have, great surface finish, great tolerances, the variety of materials…this is something they recognize,” Fridland explained. “These are the parts that they actually need. This is not just prototyping.”

    Fridland also said the cost of Mastrex’s printers is similar to a CNC machine, depending on which system you’re talking about. So they “don’t have to spend five times more on a piece of a equipment that they never had a chance to try.”

    “Most of them, they waited, just because it’s a big risk for them. But now, instead of getting another CNC machine, they’re getting one of these and they’re getting into LPBF.”

    He also told me that some customers have purchased one of the smaller Mastrex printers, like the MX100 or MX150, and liked them so much that they came back and bought the much larger MX400. This says a lot about the quality of these low-cost metal LPBF systems.

    “The first machines we sold about a year ago, and we have some repeat customers already, because they see the benefit, and it’s different than other solutions in the market,” Fridland said.

    Tool steel 3D printed mold insert, after and before polishing. Mastrex booth at RAPID+TCT.

    In his keynote presentation at AMS 2026, Stratasys CEO Yoav Zeif said that “desktop is taking over the industry.” It’s clear that this isn’t just the case for polymer 3D printing, but metals too. With its low-cost, high-quality desktop metal LPBF systems, Mastrex is definitely a company we’ll be keeping an eye on in the future.

    Images courtesy of Sarah Saunders.