Additive Manufacturing: a brilliant but frustrating research relationship.

If you’re anything like me—curious, slightly obsessed with materials science, and always eager to push the boundaries of what’s possible—then you’ll understand why engineering research is so thrilling. Every day in the lab brings either a new challenge, or an opportunity, or sometimes both combined in an indistinguishable guise of ‘what on earth is going on?’. As someone currently working in Cold Spray Additive Manufacturing (CSAM), I’ve come to appreciate not just the hype surrounding AM, but also the potential, the complexity, the nuance, and—frankly—the limitations that many may simply gloss over.

AM—often coined 3D printing—has grown far beyond its original prototyping role in recent years. Defined by its ‘layer by layer’ building approach, today, it allows for the highly efficient use of materials to create complex, customisable products on-demand. Whether it’s lightweight aerospace parts, patient-specific medical implants, or intricate lattice structures for energy absorption, AM is enabling the production of things that were once considered too complicated, too expensive, or too time-consuming to fabricate using traditional methods. However, as a researcher working directly in this realm, I feel there is much more to the picture than meets the eye: AM is promising, yes, but it's also multifaceted, highly situational, and massively oversimplified. I’d like to take you on a more ‘balanced’ approach when exploring what the future may hold for this technology.

❤️ The Love  

Before unpacking all the worries I have, I feel it’s only right to give AM the credit it deserves. In no particular order, these are just some of the reasons I choose to focus on this particular aspect of manufacturing day in and day out.

1.  Its speed – AM has revitalised the pace at which parts can produced. By removing the need for dies, moulds, and specialist tooling, AM allows for parts to be printed in a matter of hours as opposed to weeks. Its digital reliance and user-friendly machinery make it extremely easy to simply print near-net shape parts from CAD files. This is of particular importance for emergency replacements and rapid prototyping.

2.  Its sustainability– a defining characteristic of AM is its layer by layer approach to building components. This in turn makes the process much more sustainable and economical, which is the opposite to many of the traditionally subtractive methods. By adding material precisely to where it is needed, much of the waste typically amounted in manufacturing plants is simply no more. AM can also print with fairly low-quality feedstocks, thus allowing for recycled powders and left over polymers to be reused for future prints. With global governments pushing for greener initiates and companies for lower costs, this is most definitely a win-win and will increase its acceptance.

3. Its availability – In a world full of highs, lows, unexpected detours and much instability, having greater control of supply chains is vital. AM enables localised manufacturing often on-site. Parts can be produced closer to where they’re needed, reducing lead times, shipping costs and logistical headaches, which, let’s be honest, are the bane of our existence when we’re stuck waiting for repairs and replacements.

4. Its simplicity - AM allows for the creation of complex internal geometries, hollow structures, and organic shapes directly from simple digital files such as CAD models, with little to no tooling. Advancements in 3D scanning software’s have also made it much easier to simply map out of and re-print legacy parts, without the need for a full re-structuring of the product.

😤The Hate

I know I know. Hate may be a strong word but for all the excitement I have for AM, there comes a point where the rose-tinted glasses come off when we face the hard truths about its current state.

Material limitations: Although the range of printable materials is growing, not all materials are available or perform as well as their traditionally manufactured counterparts. The substitute of conventional techniques to AM is not the simple plug-and-play scenario it was made out to be. There is still further research needed to optimise techniques with new materials.

Post-processing requirements: Many AM parts require additional steps after printing. As-printed parts are often not suitable for direct application. Heat treatments, surface finishing and support removal are just some of the post-processing procedures that parts may undergo before being fit for use.  These steps can add time, cost, and complexity to the overall workflow.

Certification bottlenecks: For AM to be widely adopted in regulated industries such as aerospace, healthcare or energy, robust quality assurance processes and international standards must be followed. With these still in draft form, many companies are hesitant to invest in the technology, where many are understandably complaining ‘what good is printing the parts if they can’t be qualified’.

Scalability reach: While AM is highly advantageous for small batches or complex parts, it may not yet be cost-effective for high-volume production—especially compared to mature methods like injection moulding or casting. A key question one must ask is whether the nature of the process even allows for it to be scaled to mass production levels.

📈 The Market’s take

The global market seems to be fairly optimistic about the course AM will take. With over a $6 billion net worth in 2017, a current market value of $91.84 billion, and a projected growth of up to $419.22 billion by 2032, global economies seem to favour its growth. Although many may argue the advancements to this point have been sub-optimal to what was originally expected, particularly with its integration industry. Nonetheless, the following sectors tend to be major driving factors in the advancement and continuing pursuit of the technology:

- Defence and aerospace adoption: Organisations like NASA, Boeing, and the U.S. Department of Defence are increasingly using AM for critical parts. The ability to reduce part counts, lighten loads, control supply chains and produce on-site is transformative for space missions and remote operations.

- Medical innovation: Orthopaedic implants, dental devices, and even tissue scaffolds are being custom printed for individual patients. This shift from mass production to mass customization is one of AM’s most powerful features.

- Industrial tooling and maintenance: Companies are now printing spare and legacy parts on-demand, reducing downtime and the need to store large inventories. This is especially useful in energy, mining, and transportation sectors.

- Sustainability mandates: As governments and corporations pursue greener manufacturing processes, AM offers a clear pathway for such due to its highlighted features of less waste, fewer emissions, and more efficient use of raw materials.

💡The final admissions

There’s no doubt that AM has earned its seat at the table in industries like aerospace, defence, and medicine. But it’s not magic. It’s a powerful set of tools— but like any tools, they require precision, understanding, and an honest evaluation of their limits. It is not a one size fits all solution that fits neatly into supply chains or inherently superior to other manufacturing methods.  

To maximise its true potential, a shift must be made from innovation to integration. For us researchers that means focusing on what really matters for industrial adoption. Machine leaning to aid in in-situ monitoring, industry wide benchmarks for standardisation, digital integration to bridge AM to other process and life cycle analysis beyond builds are just some of the key areas where our efforts need to be concentrated if we want AM to move from promise to practice.

That tension between fantasy and reality is what makes AM so fascinating to me. It’s not just about flashy prototypes or futuristic hype. It’s about figuring out where the technology truly fits, what problems it can solve today, and where it still needs support to grow. If we approach AM with a bit more humility and a lot more collaboration, it has the potential to change not just how we make things—but who gets to make them, where, and why.

Thanks for reading,

Amina Hussain