3D printing is a gimmick, a sub $10k metal 3D printer, and Burning Man: Old News
0Shares
3D Printing Industry has over a decade of reporting behind us; the daily news is focused on the present and, periodically, the future. Once in a while, it may be interesting to look at the past. And even in a high-tech industry with a pace that might be expected to be dizzying, some things stay the same. Perhaps you’re interested in the news, or perhaps you wondered what 3D printing at Burning Man looks like. Fortunately, we have a video. 3D printing: a passing fad
Kicking off with a quote. In 2013, we looked at how China viewed 3D printing , contrasting opinions like Foxconn’s Taiwanese founder Terry Gou, who called it a “gimmick,” with leaders in the 3D printing industry. Stratasys co-founder Scott Crump noted that while 3D printing could localize some manufacturing, it wouldn’t displace mass production in China. The Chinese government had already invested heavily in 3D printing technologies, anticipating future growth. In 2017, 3DPI reported on China’s Additive Manufacturing Industry Development Action Plan (2017-2020) , which identified six suggestions to advance 3D printing in the country. Metal 3D printing at home? New York Maker Faire 2013 saw the Vader Systems team, led by Scott and Zachary Vader, introduce a metal 3D printer that some believed might make its way into homes. In 2013, anything seemed possible! Using Liquid Metal Jet Printing (LMJP) technology, the 3D printer melted metal ingots, like aluminum, and printed metal objects using magnetism and inkjet-like technology. The Vader printer was aimed at small businesses, with plans for a sub-$10,000 metal 3D printer for home prosumers. It promised a new frontier in home metal printing, offering an alternative to laser sintering. This was not the trajectory that the company followed. Finding a 3D printer at a Maker Faire was fairly standard, but encountering a RepRap in the desert? In 2013, 3D printing appeared at Burning Man , an annual art event in Nevada’s Black Rock Desert. At camps like “Objects of Worship” and “Creativity,” participants used 3D printers to create various objects on-site, demonstrating the technology’s versatility even in remote environments. This marked one of the early instances where 3D printing intersected with large cultural and artistic festivals. Whatever happened to immersive video? Twelve years ago, TCTLive 2012 had just concluded. Merger talk involving Stratasys was just one topic covered; the exhibition showcased the growth of high-end professional 3D printing for manufacturing and prototyping. Familiar names like 3D Systems, Stratasys, and EOS exhibited advances, such as metal printing and applications in medical fields. The event also highlighted emerging entry-level consumer 3D printers, including those from MakerBot and Ultimaker. The 2012 coverage of the Wiki Weapons Project highlighted efforts to create a fully 3D printed firearm , sparking widespread debate. Stratasys, confiscated the 3D printed destined for use on the project, citing ethical concerns. The project faced funding platform closures but continued to raise funds through alternative means like Bitcoin. The story exemplified the controversy surrounding 3D printed guns. It was reported that Cody Wilson had raised $20k in bitcoin, at current prices that sum would be worth over $100 million. Back in 2012, LUXeXceL was recognized for its groundbreaking Printoptical Technology, which enabled the 3D printing of high-quality optics directly from CAD designs, without the need for molds or post-processing. This innovation was said to reduce production time and costs, offering versatile applications in LED lighting, advertising, and solar industries. LUXeXceL would later expand into 3D printing of custom ophthalmic lenses, becoming a leader in advanced optics manufacturing. Ten years later, Meta aquired Luxexcel and its 3D-printed prescription lenses with Augmented Reality (AR) capabilities. The 3-Sweep software, developed in 2013, allowed users to convert 2D images into 3D models by combining human perception with an algorithm. This innovation enabled 3D modeling for those without prior experience. It worked by identifying an object’s edges and depth from a photo, similar to Photoshop’s tools, and allows for full 3D manipulation. 3-Sweep demonstrated new possibilities in turning ordinary images into 3D printable objects . Emerging 3D printing business models
How to make money with 3D printing? We reported on Blu-Bin, founded in 2012, as one of the first retail 3D printing service stores in Vermont, offering custom design and 3D printing services. Customers could create and order personalized items, even without owning a 3D printer. The concept aimed to democratize 3D printing by making it accessible to the public through a storefront model. Today, while Blu-Bin’s physical retail model didn’t achieve massive expansion, the broader concept of accessible 3D printing has evolved, with services like Protolabs and Xometry fulfilling similar roles in a more scalable way. A year later, in 2013, 3D For US, a UK-based company, began to offer personalized 3D printed models based on user-submitted photos. The service focused on capturing special moments, such as graduations or weddings, and transforming them into “lifelike” 3D models. The company collaborated with the University of Exeter on work that was then 3D printed and shipped globally. Also in 2013, 3D Hubs marked its 6 month anniversary as the company rapidly grew as a platform connecting 3D printer owners with people needing prints. With a network of over 1,100 printers, it enabled users to access a variety of materials and local printing services. The interview discussed trends like the rise of Ultimaker printers in Europe and the importance of material variety in expanding 3D printing’s home-use applications. Today, 3D Hubs is part of Protolabs.

3D printing is a gimmick, a sub $10k metal 3D printer, and Burning Man: Old News

In 2019, Xerox made a big statement with its acquisition of Vader Systems, a New York-based start-up bringing to market a Liquid Metal additive manufacturing technology.

Explained: What’s going on at Xerox Elem Additive?

In 2019, Xerox (NYSE: XRX) made the decision to purchase Vader Systems, the startup known for its liquid metal 3D printers. The company began commercializing the technology last year as...

View the entire article via our website.

Xerox Liquid Metal 3D Printing Available via Vertrex Manufacturing

“
LOS ANGELES, United States:The report titled Global Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment Market is one of the most comprehensive and important additions to QY Research’s archive of market research studies. It offers detailed research and analysis of key aspects of the global Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment market. The market analysts authoring this report have provided in-depth information on leading growth drivers, restraints, challenges, trends, and opportunities to offer a complete analysis of the global Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment market. Market participants can use the analysis on market dynamics to plan effective growth strategies and prepare for future challenges beforehand. Each trend of the global Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment market is carefully analyzed and researched about by the market analysts.The market analysts and researchers have done extensive analysis of the global Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment market with the help of research methodologies such as PESTLE and Porter’s Five Forces analysis. They have provided accurate and reliable market data and useful recommendations with an aim to help the players gain an insight into the overall present and future market scenario. The Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment report comprises in-depth study of the potential segments including product type, application, and end user and their contribution to the overall market size. Get Full PDF Sample Copy of Report: (Including Full TOC, List of Tables & Figures, Chart) https://www.qyresearch.com/sample-form/form/1869493/global-material-jetting-mj-equipment-market
In addition, market revenues based on region and country are provided in the Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment report. The authors of the report have also shed light on the common business tactics adopted by players. The leading players of the global Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment market and their complete profiles are included in the report. Besides that, investment opportunities, recommendations, and trends that are trending at present in the global Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment market are mapped by the report. With the help of this report, the key players of the global Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment market will be able to make sound decisions and plan their strategies accordingly to stay ahead of the curve. Competitive landscape is a critical aspect every key player needs to be familiar with. The report throws light on the competitive scenario of the global Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment market to know the competition at both the domestic and global levels. Market experts have also offered the outline of every leading player of the global Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment market, considering the key aspects such as areas of operation, production, and product portfolio. Additionally, companies in the report are studied based on the key factors such as company size, market share, market growth, revenue, production volume, and profits. Key Players Mentioned in the Global Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment Market Research Report: 3D Systems, Stratasys, Keyence, ExOne, Voxeljet, Optomec, Addwii, Vader Systems, Xjet, Zhuhai CTC Electronic Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment
The Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment Market report has been segregated based on distinct categories, such as product type, application, end user, and region. Each and every segment is evaluated on the basis of CAGR, share, and growth potential. In the regional analysis, the report highlights the prospective region, which is estimated to generate opportunities in the global Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment market in the forthcoming years. This segmental analysis will surely turn out to be a useful tool for the readers, stakeholders, and market participants to get a complete picture of the global Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment market and its potential to grow in the years to come. Key questions answered in the report:
What is the growth potential of the Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment market? Which product segment will grab a lion’s share? Which regional market will emerge as a frontrunner in coming years? Which application segment will grow at a robust rate? What are the growth opportunities that may emerge in Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment industry in the years to come? What are the key challenges that the global Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment market may face in future? Which are the leading companies in the global Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment market? Which are the key trends positively impacting the market growth? Which are the growth strategies considered by the players to sustain hold in the global Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment market? Request for customization in Report: https://www.qyresearch.com/customize-request/form/1869493/global-material-jetting-mj-equipment-market
Table of Contents:
2.1 Global Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment Market Size, Estimates and Forecasts
2.1.1 Global Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment Revenue Estimates and Forecasts 2015-2026
2.1.2 Global Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment Production Capacity Estimates and Forecasts 2015-2026
2.1.3 Global Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment Production Estimates and Forecasts 2015-2026
2.2 Global Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment, Market Size by Producing Regions: 2015 VS 2020 VS 2026
2.3 Analysis of Competitive Landscape
2.3.1 Manufacturers Market Concentration Ratio (CR5 and HHI)
2.3.2 Global Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment Market Share by Company Type (Tier 1, Tier 2 and Tier 3)
2.3.3 Global Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment Manufacturers Geographical Distribution
2.4 Key Trends for Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment Markets & Products
2.5 Primary Interviews with Key Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment Players (Opinion Leaders) 3 Market Size by Manufacturers
3.1 Global Top Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment Manufacturers by Production Capacity
3.1.1 Global Top Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment Manufacturers by Production Capacity (2015-2020)
3.1.2 Global Top Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment Manufacturers by Production (2015-2020)
3.1.3 Global Top Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment Manufacturers Market Share by Production
3.2 Global Top Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment Manufacturers by Revenue
3.2.1 Global Top Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment Manufacturers by Revenue (2015-2020)
3.2.2 Global Top Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment Manufacturers Market Share by Revenue (2015-2020)
3.2.3 Global Top 10 and Top 5 Companies by Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment Revenue in 2019
3.3 Global Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment Price by Manufacturers
3.4 Mergers & Acquisitions, Expansion Plans 4 Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment Production by Regions
4.1 Global Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment Historic Market Facts & Figures by Regions
4.1.1 Global Top Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment Regions by Production (2015-2020)
4.1.2 Global Top Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment Regions by Revenue (2015-2020)
4.2 North America
4.2.2 North America Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment Revenue (2015-2020)
4.2.3 Key Players in North America
4.2.4 North America Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment Import & Export (2015-2020)
4.3 Europe
4.3.2 Europe Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment Revenue (2015-2020)
4.3.3 Key Players in Europe
4.3.4 Europe Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment Import & Export (2015-2020)
4.4 China
4.4.2 China Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment Revenue (2015-2020)
4.4.3 Key Players in China
4.4.4 China Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment Import & Export (2015-2020)
4.5 Japan
4.5.2 Japan Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment Revenue (2015-2020)
4.5.3 Key Players in Japan
4.5.4 Japan Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment Import & Export (2015-2020) 5 Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment Consumption by Region
5.1 Global Top Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment Regions by Consumption
5.1.1 Global Top Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment Regions by Consumption (2015-2020)
5.1.2 Global Top Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment Regions Market Share by Consumption (2015-2020)
5.2 North America
5.2.2 North America Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment Consumption by Countries
5.2.3 U.S.
6.1 Global Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment Market Size by Type (2015-2020)
6.1.1 Global Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment Production by Type (2015-2020)
6.1.2 Global Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment Revenue by Type (2015-2020)
6.1.3 Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment Price by Type (2015-2020)
6.2 Global Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment Market Forecast by Type (2021-2026)
6.2.1 Global Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment Production Forecast by Type (2021-2026)
6.2.2 Global Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment Revenue Forecast by Type (2021-2026)
6.2.3 Global Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment Price Forecast by Type (2021-2026)
6.3 Global Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment Market Share by Price Tier (2015-2020): Low-End, Mid-Range and High-End 7 Market Size by Application (2015-2026)
7.2.1 Global Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment Consumption Historic Breakdown by Application (2015-2020)
7.2.2 Global Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment Consumption Forecast by Application (2021-2026) 8 Corporate Profiles
8.1 3D Systems
8.1.2 3D Systems Overview
8.1.4 3D Systems Product Description
8.1.5 3D Systems Related Developments
8.2 Stratasys

Material Jetting (MJ) Equipment Market 2020 Global Share, Growth, Size, Opportunities, Trends, Regional Overview, Leading Company Analysis, And Key Country Forecast To 2026 | 3D Systems, Stratasys, Keyence

Persistence Market Research has recently compiled a report on ‘ Material Jetting market ’ which offers a comprehensive synopsis of revolving market valuation, market size, SWOT analysis, revenue estimation and geographical spectrum of the market. The report further elucidates primary business obstacles and growth prospects within the forecasted timeline, while examining the current competitive sphere involving key players of the ‘Material Jetting market’. Material Jetting Market Overview
The term 3D printing has become widely recognised in the last few years, but hardly anybody would know the term ‘Additive Manufacturing’. In reality, 3D printing is just one of several Additive Manufacturing techniques. While the media likes to use the term 3D printing to refer to all AM processes, there are actually 7 different categories. They are VAT Photopolymerisation, Binder Jetting, Material Extrusion, Powder Bed Fusion, Sheet Lamination, Directed Energy Deposition, and Material Jetting. The Material Jetting Market is responsible for creating objects in a similar manner to a 2D inkjet printer. The material is thrust onto a build platform with either a Drop on Demand (DOD) or continuous approach. Once jetted onto the platform, the material solidifies and the object is built in a layer by layer approach. The nozzle depositing the material moves in a horizontal fashion across the build platform. Machines in the Material Jetting Market vary in size, complexity and their methods of controlling the method of depositing the material. The materials are then treated with ultraviolet light which hardens them. The number of materials available to use in this method is severely limited, as it must be deposited in drops. The most suitable and commonly used materials are polymers and waxes due to their adhesive nature and ability to form drops. Some of the polymers used include HDPE, PS, PC, HIPS, ABS, EDP and Polypropylene. Material jetting is the only form of additive manufacturing that can combine different printing materials within the same 3D model in a single print job. It is also capable of making functional assemblies, reducing the need for multiple builds. Material Jetting Market Drivers
The material jetting market has major utility in the field of biomedical technology. Most healthcare infections are because of biofilms which form on the medical device surface. They develop a higher tolerance to antibiotics and the immune system compared to their planktonic counterparts. Material jetting allows a precise morphology, size and shape for printed devices. Human tissue, pressure sensitive fingers and smart limbs have all been created using this revolutionary technology. A second driver is the reduced manufacturing time and resources along with the advantage of being able to use multiple materials in one print. Products can be made and customised in specific areas where different materials are placed. This removes the need to print separate layers of various materials and combine them later. In one production run, a complete product can be created with unique materials only in the material jetting market. The printing method makes products with a layer resolution as low as 15 microns. Material Jetting Market Restraints
A major restraint in the material jetting market is the limited materials available to use. While it provides a high degree of accuracy, only some waxes and polymers like HDPE, PS, PC, HIPS, ABS, EDP and Polypropylene can be used. Material jetting is a very complex procedure, with several technical issues throughout the process. One challenge is formulating the liquid material for example. If the material is not liquid in the beginning, particles might need to be suspended in a carrier, dissolving the materials in a solvent, melting a polymer, or mixing a formula of monomer or prepolymer with an initiator. The second technical challenge is formulating and depositing the droplets. The material needs to be converted from a liquid into small discrete drops. After this, the droplet fall path, impact, and interaction or wetting must all be properly controlled. This complexity inevitably leads to a cost increase of the overall process, challenging the growth of the material jetting market. Material Jetting Market Key Regions
North America is the largest material jetting market due to a large number of high-tech industries like aerospace & defence, automobile manufacture, and healthcare companies. All these sectors either already use or plan to use material jetting technology. Asia Pacific accounts for the fastest growth rate with China and Japan in particular leading the way because of government funding in R&D and an established manufacturing base. Material Jetting Market Key Market Players 
Companies operating in the material jetting market are 3D Systems, Solidscape/ Stratasys and XJet and Vader Systems. The research report presents a comprehensive assessment of the market and contains thoughtful insights, facts, historical data, and statistically supported and industry-validated market data. It also contains projections using a suitable set of assumptions and methodologies. The research report provides analysis and information according to market segments such as geographies, types and applications. The report covers exhaustive analysis on:
Market Segments
Eastern Europe (Poland, Russia)

Global Material Jetting Market Recent Trends, In-depth Analysis, Market Size Research Report Forecast up to 2025

Aurora Machine specializes in precision manufacturing within the aerospace, commercial, passenger rail, and Department of Defense sectors. The company offers services including sheet metal fabrication, precision welding, precision machining, powder coating, and assembly. It is based in Rochester, New York.

Aurora Machine

Now , Vader Systems has announced an exclusive manufacturing partnership with Rochester-based Aurora Machine to manufacture components for the final 3D printer , which is expected to be available as early as next year .

Vader Systems metal 3D printer enters manufacturing phase, expected delivery by 2016

Companies in the advanced manufacturing tech space, including companies focusing on technologies across R&D, mass production, or sustainability

Advanced Manufacturing

Acquired

Vader Systems is commercializing high volume, low cost metal additive manufacturing using its proprietary technology called MagnetoJet Printing.

Date	Round	Amount	Investors	Valuation Valuations are submitted by companies, mined from state filings or news, provided by VentureSource, or based on a comparables valuation model.	Revenue	Sources
2/8/2019	Acquired		Xerox	$XXM	0 FY undefined	1
6/20/2016	Angel - II	$XXM	Subscribe to see more	$XXM	0 FY undefined	10
10/27/2015	Seed VC	$XXM	Subscribe to see more	$XXM	0 FY undefined	10
9/6/2015	Angel	$XXM	Subscribe to see more	$XXM	0 FY undefined	10

Date	2/8/2019	6/20/2016	10/27/2015	9/6/2015
Round	Acquired	Angel - II	Seed VC	Angel
Amount		$XXM	$XXM	$XXM
Investors	Xerox	Subscribe to see more	Subscribe to see more	Subscribe to see more
Valuation	$XXM	$XXM	$XXM	$XXM
Revenue	0 FY undefined	0 FY undefined	0 FY undefined	0 FY undefined
Sources	1	10	10	10

First funding	Last Funding	Investor	Rounds	Type	Location
2/8/2019	2/8/2019	Xerox	1 Acquired	Corporation	Connecticut
00/00/0000	00/00/0000	Jonathan Amoia	Subscribe to see more	Angel Investor (Individual)
00/00/0000	00/00/0000	Larry Stolzenberg	Subscribe to see more	Angel Investor (Individual)

First funding	2/8/2019	00/00/0000	00/00/0000
Last Funding	2/8/2019	00/00/0000	00/00/0000
Investor	Xerox	Jonathan Amoia	Larry Stolzenberg
Rounds	1 Acquired	Subscribe to see more	Subscribe to see more
Board Seats
Type	Corporation	Angel Investor (Individual)	Angel Investor (Individual)
Location	Connecticut

How VCs Use CB Insights

Professional Services

Platform Overview

Vader Systems

Total Raised

Investors Count

Funding, Valuation & Revenue

Vader Systems Investors