An assessment of implementation of entry-level 3D printers from the perspective of small businesses

Conner, Brett; Manogharan, Guha; Meyers, Kerry

doi:10.1108/rpj-09-2014-0132

Cited by 35 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…36 For spectacle manufacture, currently most desktop 3-D printers provide insufficient resolutions, and industrial 3-D printers, with their higher precision, are necessary. 60,61 Unfortunately, the use of industrial machines means higher costs due to energy consumption, space and settings requirements. 10,62 Thus currently, large production runs for 3-D printed spectacles are relatively more expensive compared to other technologies.…”

Section: The Challenges and Future Of 3-d Printing Spectaclesmentioning

confidence: 99%

3‐D printed spectacles: potential, challenges and the future

Lee

Burnett

Panos

et al. 2020

Clinical and Experimental Optometry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Three‐dimensional (3‐D) printing offers the potential to custom‐produce a wide range of manufactured objects and improve manufacturing processes. The additive manufacturing process involves material (resin, metal, ceramics or biological cells) being deposited layer upon layer, which is fused to create a 3‐D object. While 3‐D printing has been readily available in the aerospace and automotive industries, and is being used increasingly in the medical field, its potential for optometry and ophthalmic optics has rarely been discussed in depth. 3‐D printing of spectacles has the potential to provide customised experiences, to cater for those who do not fit standardised frames or for those with irregular prescriptions, and to reduce delivery times and inventory with the opportunity of increasing access to underserved populations. Here we review available 3‐D printing technologies, and the current 3‐D printed spectacle market, including testing three commercially available spectacle frames to assess compliance with ISO:12870 standards. The article then explores the challenges faced and environmental impact of implementing 3‐D printing of spectacles.

show abstract

Section: The Challenges and Future Of 3-d Printing Spectaclesmentioning

confidence: 99%

3‐D printed spectacles: potential, challenges and the future

Lee

Burnett

Panos

et al. 2020

Clinical and Experimental Optometry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The influence conveys even stronger power when such adopting adds straight to market competition (Chong et al, 2009;Nelson et al, 2005;Wang et al, 2010;Zhu et al, 2006). Challenged with competitive pressure in the industry, some companies are obligatory to adopt 3D printing (Wang et al, 2010;Conner et al, 2015) in order to improve inventory,…”

Section: E Environmental Dimensionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Disruptive Technology Adoption: An Empirical Investigation in Saudi Arabia

Bugawa¹,

Al-Harbi²,

Mahamid³

2018

Seventh International Conference on Advances in Computing, Communication and Information Technology - CCIT 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study will use the technology-organizationenvironment (TOE) framework; which has been broadly used to clarify how to adopt technological innovation from the standpoint of a business (Tornatzky and Fleischer, 1990; Wu and Chen, 2014) and integrating it with the TAM Model which is modified to incorporate two factors such as perceived usefulness and perceived of ease to TOE framework which recognizes three factors that influence an organization's implementation of technological innovations directly, and they are technological dimension, organizational dimension, and environmental dimension. The link between these technological, organizational and environmental factors and technology adoption such as web services and 3D printers is a conception worth to examine and explore. Although, previous studies have acknowledged significant factors through TOE frame work that can encourage the adoption of 3D printer (CC Yeh, YF Chen, 2018), but as the study recommends that future researchers can add more factors or methods to investigate 3D printer adoption, therefore it's more effective to include the three factors with the TAM factors. The research will help to locate the effect of the three criteria's using TOE framework and TAM Model. In addition, Cost is a major player or a major mediator to these elements that will affect the 3D printer adoption decision, which will measure the readiness and acceptance to adopt and use this technology.

show abstract

“…Additionally, a survey was conducted to see the advantages and disadvantages of using entry-level 3D printers in small businesses. The main disadvantage was that the machine was unreliable and required a great deal of maintenance [23]. Although there are several advantages of this emerging technology, it comes with its own additional risks.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A critical review of 3D printing in construction: benefits, challenges, and risks

El-Sayegh

Romdhane

Manjikian

2020

Archiv.Civ.Mech.Eng

190

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper provides a critical review of the related literature on 3D printing in construction. The paper discusses and evaluates the different 3D printing techniques in construction. The paper also discusses and categorizes the benefits, challenges, and risks of 3D printing in construction. The use of 3D printing technology offers several advantages over traditional methods. However, it comes with its own additional challenges and risks. The main benefits of 3D printing in construction include constructability and sustainability benefits. The challenges are categorized into seven groups. The main challenges, found through the literature, are material related. The most cited challenges are material printability, buildability, and open time. Additionally, scalability, structural integrity, and lack of codes and regulations are frequently cited as major challenges. The additional risks are categorized into seven groups: 3D printing material, 3D printing equipment, construction site, and environment, management, stakeholders, regulatory and economic, and cybersecurity risks. The paper fills a gap in the literature as it addresses a new aspect of 3D printing, which is risk. The paper also provides some insights, recommendations, and future research ideas.

show abstract

An assessment of implementation of entry-level 3D printers from the perspective of small businesses

Cited by 35 publications

References 14 publications

3‐D printed spectacles: potential, challenges and the future

3‐D printed spectacles: potential, challenges and the future

Disruptive Technology Adoption: An Empirical Investigation in Saudi Arabia

A critical review of 3D printing in construction: benefits, challenges, and risks

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About