Charles R. Goulding and Preeti Sulibhavi discover how 3D printing is transforming NIH-funded university labs into agile, cost-effective research powerhouses amid growing budget scrutiny.
The recent controversy over proposed funding cutbacks by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) has shone a spotlight on the massive scale of federal support for university-based research. Headlines are dominated by news of a US$800 million proposed reduction at Johns Hopkins and scrutiny over large NIH grants awarded to elite institutions such as Columbia, Harvard, and Princeton. Yet, many are unaware of the breadth of NIH support across the academic landscape, such as the University of Chicago’s more than 3,000 active NIH grants totaling over US$1 billion. These grants span fields from cellular biology and orthopedics to pharmaceutical development, and increasingly, they involve an essential technology: 3D printing.
As debate continues over the legitimacy and direction of NIH budget reductions, one reality remains clear—university laboratories must operate with greater efficiency and accountability. This is especially true for laboratories led by brilliant but often inexperienced graduate students and postdoctoral researchers who lack the operational acumen to run large, resource-intensive projects smoothly. This pressure for accountability and efficiency coincides with a broader trend: the rise of automation and digital manufacturing in the life sciences. At the intersection of these trends lies a powerful enabler—3D printing.
3D Printing as a Force Multiplier for Life Science Labs
3D printing, also known as additive manufacturing, has matured into a robust and reliable tool for biomedical and life science research. It enables the rapid, cost-effective production of custom lab tools, experimental apparatuses, tissue scaffolds, and microfluidic devices. For NIH-funded university labs, integrating 3D printing into research workflows can significantly reduce lead times, cut costs, and foster experimental innovation.
For example, when a research group at a university needs a unique culture chamber or an experimental bioreactor, they typically must work with external manufacturers, endure long lead times, and pay high costs for prototyping and fabrication. With in-house 3D printers, labs can now fabricate these components within hours, allowing experiments to proceed without delay and reducing dependence on costly suppliers. This agility can save thousands of dollars across even small projects, with exponential savings across hundreds of ongoing NIH-funded efforts.
Custom Labware and Experimental Tools
One of the most immediately impactful applications of 3D printing in university labs is the production of custom labware. Standard glassware and plastic components often fall short when researchers need to conduct novel experiments. With 3D printing, researchers can design and produce specialized components tailored precisely to their experimental needs.
For instance, Harvard’s Wyss Institute has used 3D printing to create specialized pipette holders, reagent organizers, and customized PCR tube racks that streamline complex workflows. In one case, 3D printed microscope stages enabled researchers to test new cellular imaging techniques without waiting weeks for traditional machining.
Moreover, with technologies like Formlabs’ SLA (stereolithography) printers or Ultimaker’s FDM (fused deposition modeling) systems, these components can be produced using biocompatible or chemically resistant materials. This is particularly useful in cellular biology or pharmaceutical development, where interaction between materials and reagents can jeopardize experimental results.
Microfluidics and Organ-on-a-Chip Devices
Beyond simple labware, 3D printing has revolutionized the design and production of microfluidic devices—tiny platforms that manipulate small fluid volumes for drug screening, diagnostics, and cell culture. Traditionally, microfluidic chips required clean-room fabrication using photolithography, an expensive and highly specialized process. Today, with resin-based 3D printers capable of micrometer-level precision, researchers can create fully functional microfluidic chips in-house.
This transformation is exemplified by the work of researchers at the University of California, Irvine, who developed a 3D printed microfluidic liver model for drug toxicity testing. Not only was the chip significantly cheaper to produce, but its rapid development cycle allowed for iterative improvements that improved its accuracy and reliability—factors critical in NIH-funded toxicology studies.
Tissue Engineering and Bioprinting
Another frontier where 3D printing intersects with NIH-funded research is in tissue engineering and regenerative medicine. Bioprinters like those offered by CELLINK and Allevi are used to deposit living cells and biomaterials into 3D structures that mimic human tissue. These structures are essential for developing organoids—miniature, simplified versions of organs grown from stem cells—that are used to study diseases, test new drugs, and even explore personalized medicine approaches.
University labs involved in NIH-funded orthopedic and regenerative medicine research can utilize 3D printing to generate scaffolds that promote bone and cartilage growth. These scaffolds can be precisely tuned in geometry and porosity to match the desired biological properties, something nearly impossible using traditional manufacturing methods.
An example comes from the University of Michigan, where researchers used 3D printing to develop a porous bone scaffold that releases growth factors over time, encouraging new bone formation in large defects. This technology, which would have been prohibitively complex and expensive to prototype using conventional tools, is now being replicated in academic labs across the country.
Integration with Laboratory Automation Systems
As laboratory processes become increasingly digitized and automated, 3D printing complements broader efforts to streamline operations. We’ve recently covered developments such as Cambridge-based Lila, an AI-powered lab management system, and Dotmatics, now under Siemens, which offers a unified platform for data-driven R&D.
When integrated with automated platforms, 3D printing enhances flexibility and customization. For example, automated liquid handlers or robotic sample processors often require precise fixture designs that must fit existing lab layouts and specific tasks. Rather than wait weeks for outsourced parts, labs can design and print exactly what they need—often overnight.
Additionally, combining 3D printing with real-time lab data systems allows for on-the-fly prototyping and modification. A robotics team can adjust a 3D printed component’s geometry based on performance feedback from the system’s sensors, rapidly iterating toward better performance. This iterative design approach is uniquely suited to academic research, where objectives shift quickly and agility is crucial.
Toward Smarter, Leaner NIH-Funded Labs
With the NIH funding model under scrutiny, university laboratories are under pressure to show both fiscal responsibility and scientific productivity. Implementing 3D printing and associated automation technologies offers a clear path toward both.
However, to realize this potential, universities must support this technological shift from the top. Senior research administrators and department heads should ensure that lab leaders—especially young PIs and graduate students—are trained in 3D printing technologies or partnered with faculty who have the relevant operational knowledge. Core facilities that provide shared access to advanced fabrication tools should be expanded and strategically located. Moreover, lab budgets should prioritize investments in versatile 3D printers and compatible materials.
Universities like Stanford, MIT, and Georgia Tech have already embraced this model, with centralized 3D printing labs offering design support, prototyping services, and user training. Such facilities are increasingly seen not as luxuries, but as critical infrastructure—just like mass spectrometers or DNA sequencers.
The Research & Development Tax Credit
The now permanent Research and Development (R&D) Tax Credit is available for companies developing new or improved products, processes and/or software.
3D printing can help boost a company’s R&D Tax Credits. Wages for technical employees creating, testing and revising 3D printed prototypes are typically eligible expenses toward the R&D Tax Credit. Similarly, when used as a method of improving a process, time spent integrating 3D printing hardware and software can also be an eligible R&D expense. Lastly, when used for modeling and preproduction, the costs of filaments consumed during the development process may also be recovered.
Whether it is used for creating and testing prototypes or for final production, 3D printing is a great indicator that R&D Credit-eligible activities are taking place. Companies implementing this technology at any point should consider taking advantage of R&D Tax Credits.
Conclusion: 3D Printing as an Efficiency Imperative
As NIH funding undergoes heightened scrutiny and potential restructuring, the life sciences research community must adapt. 3D printing offers more than convenience—it is a fundamental enabler of laboratory efficiency, innovation, and cost control. From custom lab tools to complex bioprinted tissues, additive manufacturing empowers researchers to iterate faster, test bolder hypotheses, and make the most of every dollar.
In a landscape where fiscal oversight is intensifying and scientific questions are growing more complex, 3D printing isn’t just a nice-to-have; it’s a strategic necessity.
