Additive Manufacturing

DLP, SLS, MJF, SLA or FDM — the right process for your parts, volume and material

Tenco DDM is service provider in Additive Manufacturing, offering DLP, SLS, MJF, SLA, and FDM services and specialised in series production.

We are dedicated to bringing real value to your operations by finding meaningful applications for Additive Manufacturing. Our experience in series production gives us the edge to define proper applications which are both technically and economically feasible.

Tenco was the first in Europe to run Direct Light Processing for series production, collaboration companies such as Henkel in development of materials for industrial use.

Why choose for Additive Manufacturing?

Despite being primarily used for (rapid) prototyping today, Additive Manufacturing holds significant potential for the production of end-use parts. The key to integrating 3D printing in production, is identifying and addressing the gaps left by conventional manufacturing processes, and exploring how Additive Manufacturing can complement and enhance existing production methods.

Better products through ‘freedom of design’

Additive manufacturing enables the production of complex shapes and internal features without the constraints of traditional manufacturing methods. This is often an underestimated advantage of AM, as it offers substantial opportunities for improving product performance and functionality.

Consider, for example, the potential for weight reduction through the use of internal lattice structures or optimised topologies, or the simplification of assembly by consolidating multiple components into a single 3D printed part.

Additive manufacturing also allows for the integration of advanced features, such as internal cooling channels for improved fluid flow or flexible, functional elements like living hinges.

Material Efficiency

In 3D printing, material is deposited only where needed, this creates significantly less waste in comparison to subtractive manufacturing methods.

Reduced Lead Times

Shorter production cycles from design to finished part enable faster turnaround times and efficient manufacturing of end-use components in series.

Cost-Efficiency for Small Batches

Traditional manufacturing methods require costly moulds, tooling, or time-intensive machine setups. Additive manufacturing does not, making it economically viable for low-volume production. Additional cost savings can be achieved through build-to-order AM strategies, reduced inventory requirements, local sourcing, risk mitigation, and lower development costs.

(Mass) Customisation

3D printing makes it much easier to produce customised or personalised parts that meet specific customer requirements. Examples include hearing aid housings, glasses frames, insoles, and orthotic devices.

Additive Manufacturing is the only process that truly meets the definition of Direct Digital Manufacturing, enabling the direct production (3D printing) of end-use parts from a CAD file. Although AM allows for direct part production, prototyping remains essential to mitigate risks and to support the ongoing development of a part throughout its lifecycle.

Applications for AM Additive Manufacturing

Additive Manufacturing is used across a wide range of industries, including aerospace, semiconductors, medical equipment, machinery, electronics, and implantable medical devices, many of which are High-Complexity/Low-Volume markets.

A common pitfall when introducing Additive Manufacturing is approaching it from a technology-first mindset. Starting with the technique tends to narrow the focus to its limitations rather than encouraging a broader view of product development or innovation through AM.

Instead, one should start from the user or application perspective. In other words, begin with why (the application), and arrive at what (the technology).

In between lies the how – the process of aligning the application’s requirements with the relevant benefits of AM. Every unique application comes with specific needs and requires careful consideration to determine whether or not Additive Manufacturing is the right solution.

FAQ – Additive manufacturing vs traditional production

There is no universal answer to this question. It comes down to a combination of factors that together determine whether AM is the right choice. These considerations can broadly be divided into two categories: technical and economic. In other words, just because you can print something does not mean you should. However, economic considerations can sometimes be the deciding factor — such as fast delivery, stock reduction, tooling costs that cannot be recouped due to low production volumes, weight savings, and so on.

Purely technical reasons might include a design so complex it can only be produced by printing, the need to add functionality (cooling channels, living hinges, etc.), or the integration of parts — although this can of course also result in cost savings.

Ultimately, there needs to be a (business) case: the right reasons that tip the balance in favour of printing. The case may result in cost savings, but it could equally be about supply security or improved product properties — even if the product itself turns out to be more expensive, enhanced properties may justify a higher end price.

In the end, it is all about completing this puzzle: finding the right arguments and assigning the correct weight to each of them.

When it concerns series production, many applications are found in high-complexity/low-volume markets — where manufacturability is challenging, volumes are small, and products can vary significantly. Think of machine building, medical devices, semiconductors, measurement and scanning applications, production lines, defence (UAVs), and food processing.

AM will never be able to fully replace traditional manufacturing, although there are already cases where it has done so. Tenco itself once received an order for 50,000 nozzles in order to guarantee an extremely short delivery time.

Again, there is no universal answer. Aside from how you calculate your own cost price, it largely depends on the material, the chosen technique, and the post-processing required. Roughly 50% of what is printed in series also requires post-processing.

What is of great importance is that the application should be the starting point. The application determines the requirements and demands placed on the material, and the material in turn determines the printing technique. PA, for example, is typically printed using Laser Sintering (SLS). SLS is known as a more cost-effective AM technique because parts can be efficiently nested within a production batch, allowing more components to be produced in a single build. With FDM, nesting is not possible, meaning fewer parts can be produced per batch, which makes individual components relatively expensive.

So, starting from the application, you determine the material — and with it the AM technique and the associated post-processing.

Begin by discussing the application and your challenges with your service provider. Based on that conversation, a material and therefore a technique can already be identified. The most logical next step is to establish an indicative unit price based on the expected volumes (forecast). If the quoted unit price falls within expectations, you can decide to take the next steps towards AM.

Based on the agreed firm requirements and committed volumes, your service provider can then make a definitive offer.

You therefore begin the journey with your application — not the technology — and your service provider should guide you in making the right choice. This may well also mean being advised against printing.

For producing prototypes in-house, the answer is certainly yes. Costs for a low-end printer are so low that there is hardly any risk involved. Another advantage is that you are building experience with Additive Manufacturing within the organization. That being said, there are plenty of companies with one or more 3D printers collecting dust. In other words, one should anticipate a learning curve — and the length of that depends mainly on the sense of urgency and the willingness to invest time and resources to build up expertise

For series production, the same consideration applies as when the purchase of a milling machine: with such an investment, there must be certainty that sufficient production will be run to justify the expenditure.

Knowledge and experience also need to be built up and maintained. The purchase of a 3D-printer is frequently underestimated, and many companies discover that AM is a more complex technology than it initially appears. Underestimating the complexity of AM is therefore a very common pitfall.

On-board your parts for Additive Manufacturing!