In February, Innovate UK published a report about the state of publicly-funded AM research in the UK, following up a previous publication of September 2012. While private research activity was not considered, this latest report does outline at least part of the picture of AM development in the UK.
First, there is more research, and more money for research, as well as a greater number of organisations undertaking research, it finds. Funding has grown to £30 million across 244 projects (up 80%, compared to four years ago), with these carried out by 243 organisations. On that latter point, most growth has come via commercial organisations, increasing from 57 four years ago to 165 now.
Second, AM research is not universally popular across industry. It is particularly of interest among AM and materials companies, of course, as well as medical, aerospace and companies classed as ‘engineering/high value manufacturing’ operations.
AUTO AND DEFENCE DECLINING
Also, a majority of research involves metallic AM technologies, and this is particularly driven by aerospace and industrial clients. However, automotive and defence customers have reduced their R&D spend, compared to four years ago. The report speculates that this could be because in earlier research AM was found unable to achieve the repeatability required by the defence market and, in the case of automotive, the piece part economics required, but there’s no evidence offered to back these views up.
Third, lots of the research is at a relatively basic level, addressing issues of how AM fundamentally works. Some 40% of all the research is on enabling technologies, such as materials or software. Why? The report speculates that this is because current AM platforms aren’t suitable for industrial production, so research goes back to basics to understand the core technology, to be able to build it up again. (On the other hand, it also admits that another explanation that it can’t measure might be that organisations are bringing higher level research in house to protect intellectual property).
Fourth, there is no single cohesive AM community as such in industry; AM research as a whole is undertaken by lots of small teams, with no trade association or body bringing them all together. Research is often carried out by companies in isolation.
On the other hand, AM knowledge is more concentrated within the academic partners that are involved with a majority of the research projects (more than half of which are academic-industrial). Much of the research funding – 38% of the total – was received by just three universities: Nottingham, Loughborough and Sheffield, partly because of the legacy of one pioneering researcher, professor of manufacturing technology Phill Dickens at Nottingham, although pockets of research are starting to crop up elsewhere.
Across the Atlantic, US manufacturers seem little more willing to dive into AM for production, according to an April report by global consultancy PwC that, in conjunction with the US-based Manufacturing Institute, analyses a Zpryme Research October 2015 online survey of 120 manufacturers.
Two-thirds of the sample reported that they are adopting 3D printing in some way, the majority in prototyping, although the survey appears not to have differentiated between plastic and metal technologies.
Still, most respondents argued that AM has not yet reached a production tipping point: 59% said it was unlikely to be primarily used for high volume manufacturing in the next three to five years. In addition, 67% said they felt it would be used predominately for low volume or specialised applications.
And they were divided about whether they see the technology spreading through their competitors. When asked if more than half their peers will adopt AM in the next three to five years, only 56% said it would be likely. The report speculates that these respondents believe that they are further ahead in the technology stakes than their competitors.
What holds them back from greater use of AM is printer cost, the uncertainty of the final product and lack of expertise within the company, the report concludes.
This article was first published in the June 2016 issue of Machinery magazine.
