Reading Science, Writing to Society: Is 3D Printing Overhyped in Engineering and the Public?

Imagine a technology that could literally create something out of nothing. This is exactly how people viewed 3D printers when they burst onto the scene 15 years ago. People were amazed by 3D printers and they became extremely popular. Since then, they have become increasingly attainable and affordable [1], with many schools and universities having 3D printers for their students to use (Fig. 1). More technically sophisticated 3D printers have also made their way into niche sectors, such as the production of airplane parts and even the construction of houses [2], [3].

3D printing is a form of additive manufacturing, in which material is continuously added to create a part. Most other manufacturing techniques involve subtractive manufacturing, where material is taken away. Mills and lathes are two common examples of this. 3D printers are understandably seen in a positive light by the public, including education and industry. Some go as far as considering them revolutionary for the future of manufacturing. However, some argue that they are overhyped and bring too many limitations. Due to their recent and rapid adoption, a clear understanding of 3D printers' true place in the engineering industry and the public will help foster a more optimal usage. This blogpost will explore the benefits and limitations of 3D printing and its excitement by the public and the engineering industry. It will consider whether the excitement surrounding it exceeds its actual potential, ultimately showing that 3D printing justifiably brings great value and excitement, but this excitement neglects its limitations, causing it to often be overhyped.

Fig. 1: Student using 3D printers in school, taken from MakerBot

What 3D Printing Does Well

3D printing’s main utility lies in rapid prototyping. It allows engineers to physically model their designs quickly and affordably and gain valuable information without expensive manufacturing. This makes it extremely valuable to students and smaller engineering firms, especially in the stages of late design and early production. More specialized 3D printers that work with metal and other materials do exist and offer a way to manufacture finished products.

Additive manufacturing allows for complex structures to be created in one piece, something that would not be feasible with subtractive manufacturing. This helps create stronger and more durable parts. Additionally, additive manufacturing allows for complex internal structures, such as lattices or internal cooling systems. This can help increase the energy efficiency in systems that use these parts. For example, GE Aerospace created a jet engine fuel nozzle (Fig. 2) using additive manufacturing that previously would have been made of 20 parts welded together. This construction resulted in the nozzle’s weight being reduced by 25 percent and notably, fuel efficiency increased by up to 15 percent [4]. Similarly, a study on “the potential effect of additive manufacturing on global energy use” found that additive manufacturing could save between five and 25 percent of energy used within the aerospace sector [5]. The use of additive manufacturing clearly allows for easier manufacturing of complex parts which can improve systems to be more efficient.

The applications of 3D printers in engineering and rapid prototyping along with the technical benefits of additive manufacturing help justify the excitement felt by many. It’s impossible to not accept this excitement as logical.

Fig. 2: GE Aerospace’s 3D printer fuel nozzle, taken from GE Aerospace

The Limitations of 3D Printing

While 3D printing is clearly very beneficial, it is not without drawbacks. One of these is a limited material selection [6]. Standard 3D printers use some type of thermoplastic (usually PLA or ABS), which tends not to perform well under high loads. Metals used by 3D printers are similarly scarce and require much more costly printers. The main limitation of 3D printed parts lies in their mechanical performance. Since 3D printed parts are made layer by layer, they are anisotropic, meaning that the material is not uniform in different directions. Notably, the parts are weaker between the layers. Recent studies on the anisotropic mechanical properties of 3D printed parts found that, with a load applied in the same direction as the layers were printed, the material measured a greater Young’s modulus (a measure of stiffness under tension or compression) [7] and fracture strength [8] compared to when the load was applied across the layers. While the orientation of a 3D printed part can be managed to optimize these properties, this large variation in mechanical properties is generally not a good thing.

Another limitation of 3D printing is its poor suitability for large industrial applications. A study comparing the cost effectiveness of 3D printing and injection molding (a very common manufacturing technique for plastic parts) found that to make 1,000 parts, 3D printing was 85% more cost effective. However, after about 13,000 parts, injection molding became more cost effective [9]. Since large industrial manufacturers create countless parts, this highlights a downside of 3D printing. Additionally, 3D printed parts create more material waste than injection molded parts due to supports, brims, and rafts, which are material printed to assist the printing process that will be removed after the part is printed. Injection molding does not use these. While there are practices in place to recycle this wasted material into new filament, this takes time and money, which again worsens 3D printers’ ability to scale for mass production. Expensive materials like metals only make this issue worse.

These technical limitations contribute to the belief that while novel, 3D printing may be overhyped. It’s evident that 3D printers are by no means flawless machines of the future.

Where does the (Over)hype Come from?

3D printing has exploded in popularity in the past 15 years, with expiring patents allowing diversification within the technology. Its popularity brought a wave of excitement and wild expectations. In his 2013 State of the Union address, President Obama spoke of 3D printing as the technology with “the potential to revolutionize the way we make almost everything” [10]. Members of the public who hear about 3D printing solely on the hype are naturally not generally aware of the limitations previously discussed. An expert within the industry of 3D printing notes that “the main issue [with 3D printing] lies with raised expectations, build quality, price and usability” [11], showing the relationship between the lack of knowledge surrounding the technical limitations and the high expectations of 3D printers that contributes to the overhype by the public.

Another interesting source of hype comes from 3D printers in schools. While this is still obviously a good idea, it’s important to understand the context. A study from 2023 on the implementation of 3D printing in engineering education found that in many cases, schools and colleges made this implementation due primarily to external factors, rather than curricular readiness [12]. Because students are then working with 3D printers without education on the proper engineering topics, their exposure to them is based more in exploration and excitement than in a rigorous application. This makes them less likely to be aware of the technical limitations that are evidently so pertinent.

Balancing Expectations and Reality

It’s very easy to see where the hype for 3D printers comes from. They offer an exciting way to quickly and (relatively) easily turn designs into reality. More than that, they enable the production of complex structures that would be much more difficult to manufacture with more traditional methods. However, it comes with technical limitations that show it is not the best option for most manufacturing. These limitations are often either not known about or looked past, causing an excess of hype surrounding 3D printers.

The reality is that while 3D printers are a fantastic technology, they have their place among all other manufacturing techniques and technologies. Many 3D printers are most useful for rapid prototyping and are not generally sufficient for production. Understanding this will help bring about better use of 3D printers and let people avoid the trap of overly ambitious expectations.

References

[1] J. F. Sargent Jr and R. X. Schwartz, “3D Printing: Overview, Impacts, and the Federal Role,”

Print..

[2] “Revolutionizing Aerospace Parts Manufacturing with High-Precision 3D Printing.” Accessed: Jul.

03, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://aipprecision.com/high-precision-3d-printing-in-aerospace-parts-manufacturing/

[3] H. Lacava, N. Cherrington, A. Corrado, S. Bigdellou, and Q. Chen, “A Preliminary Study of 3D

Printing Home Designs for Improving Efficiency and Sustainability of Indigenous Housing in

Canada,” Sustainability, vol. 16, no. 13, Art. no. 13, Jan. 2024, doi: 10.3390/su16135781.

[4] “Manufacturing Milestone: 30,000 Additive Fuel Nozzles | GE Aerospace News.” Accessed: Jul.

02, 2025. [Online]. Available: