
A research report indicates tremendous growth in the 3D printer filament market in coming years.
Filament is the most popular material used in 3D printing today, simply because it is the format required for the most popular 3D printing process used: filament extrusion.
This technology was developed by Stratasys back in the 1980s, with their initial patents expiring starting in 2009. This legally opened the possibility of new companies using that very technology in their own equipment.
What was perhaps not expected was the introduction of very inexpensive desktop equipment. At that time 3D printers of any type cost near US$100K and required expensive proprietary materials. But companies like MakerBot pioneered the notion of inexpensive desktop equipment that carried pricing of only US$1K, far lower than the standard of the day.
After an initial rush of interest by consumers towards the idea of “home 3D printing”, hopes faded and many early desktop 3D printer companies failed. Those that survived pivoted their businesses towards new markets, most notably being the professional 3d printer market. This market segment contains engineers, prototypers, designers and architects, and has proven quite popular and profitable for manufacturers of professional desktop 3D printers.
That growth has been significant, and along with the sales of the equipment has come sales of associated materials. The growth has attracted the interest of several large-sized chemical companies, those who produce the thermoplastics used in 3D printing filaments. In the past couple of years we’ve seen very significant investments and ventures into 3D printing by the likes of BASF, SABIC, Mitsubishi and other major chemical companies.
But how much growth is expected? An industry report from AMECO suggests we may see a rise from the 2017 sales level of US$255M to an astonishing US$1.2B in 2024, only five years away. This represents a compound annual growth rate of 25%.
Although “only” 25% might seem to be a small growth rate in the 3D printing industry, where smaller companies often double in size annually if they can produce competent products, that is a spectacular growth rate for traditional industries.
Industries like the chemical producers, for example.
These highly competitive players have battled each other for years in traditional application spaces, and that competition moderates their potential growth rates. But what if there were another market that was unexploited? One that could provide massively larger growth?
That’s why BASF and others are so keen to get involved in the 3D printer market, even when the current size of the industry is so much smaller than the current markets addressed by the chemical industry.
It’s because they see huge potential for growth, and that’s exemplified in the estimates from AMECO. Remember, these chemical operations in some cases are many decades old; they look for long-term growth. It is likely true their strategists are peering far beyond a mere five years, but instead forecast even further out. Those future years will no doubt hold even larger market sizes.
All for the taking, but only if you start now. And that’s what they’re all doing.
Via AMECO
The debate over use of proprietary or open materials ecosystems is becoming a big topic in 3D printing.
The 3D printing industry is fast-changing. Sometimes taking a step back, though, is necessary to grasp the bigger picture.
Charles Goulding and Preeti Sulibhavi consider how two prominent automotive firms, Ferrari and Ford, are using 3D printing.
There have been multiple attempts to develop continuously operating 3D printers, but none seem to have been widely adopted. Why is this the case?
A key patent assigned to 3D Systems expires in 2022. What will this mean for 3D Systems and everyone else? We have some thoughts.
Some thoughts about the ongoing dilemma of obtaining good surface quality on production parts made using additive manufacturing.
The use of “3D Printing” is beginning to fade, at least with respect to application-focused 3D print services. As for the rest, we’ll find out what happens.
A company terms their process as “volumetric” 3D printing, but is it really so?
One of my questions about the new volumetric 3D printing approach seems to have been answered by a mysterious contributor.
No one seems to offer collaborative 3D printing modes on dual extrusion devices. We explain why this is the case.