From Prototyping Tool to Procurement Solution – Interview with Stefan Klaussner of 3D Druck München on the Changing Role of FDM

3D Druck München operates a web-based 3D printing service built around the FDM process and focused on practical, real-world applications. Using an online calculator, users can upload STL or other 3D files, select material, color, and quantity, and get a price quote within a short time without additional email back-and-forth. Parts are typically produced within a few business days and then shipped to both commercial and private customers.

The service relies on a deliberately focused material portfolio: PLA+ in several colors for standard applications, UV- and weather-resistant ASA, a PLA/PHB material approved for food contact, and PA12-CF, a carbon fiber–reinforced nylon for higher mechanical and thermal requirements. Key properties such as temperature resistance, stiffness, and typical use cases are explained transparently on the company’s website.

Typical applications include prototypes, functional end-use parts in small series, assembly and production aids, brackets, and specialized solutions, including components for aquaristics. In addition to the printing service, 3D Druck München provides guides and blog posts that address topics such as design for additive manufacturing, wall thickness, overhangs, and material selection. The offering is aimed especially at technically experienced users and development teams that want to handle FDM production externally in a structured way.

Interview with Stefan Klaussner

In the following interview, Stefan Klaussner, founder and head of 3D Druck München, talks about current developments and challenges in additive manufacturing and how the industrial use of FDM has changed in recent years. The materials scientist, who previously worked at BMW and Siemens and specializes in functional plastic parts, provides insights into material selection, process aspects, and the future role of 3D printing service providers.

From your perspective, how has demand for FDM-printed functional parts developed in recent years in terms of functionality, mechanical load capacity, and repeatability?

I see a clear shift: in industry, FDM has moved from a “prototyping tool” to a pragmatic production and procurement solution for functional parts. A recent industry survey shows that almost half of respondents use additive manufacturing on a regular basis and about a third are already experimenting with it; FDM is the dominant process with a 76% usage share.

Customers are less likely to ask “can we somehow print this” and more likely to ask for reliable data and references, consistent dimensional accuracy, and simple repeat ordering. An underrated driver is availability: spare parts and auxiliary tools need to be ready quickly, especially when supply chains falter or tooling is missing. The fact that this is no longer a niche topic is illustrated, for example, by Deutsche Bahn, which has produced over 200,000 additively manufactured parts and saved more than 20 million euros.

What are the main challenges in day-to-day professional 3D printing, and what typical problems or misconceptions do you see among customers and users?

The truth is that the printing itself is rarely the main problem. The blind spots are the engineering work beforehand and the quality assurance afterward. Many companies buy printers, expect plug-and-play, and only then realize that design for AM, process windows, drying, build volume strategy, tolerance chains, and documentation are the real levers for cost and risk. Only a small fraction of 3D printing users actually have experience with AM-oriented design.

At the same time, many companies still work from older technical drawings with material specifications designed for maximum durability and injection molding. In 3D printing, this level of overengineering often leads to unnecessary cost. In many cases it becomes clear that standard plastics can deliver significant savings in terms of economics and processability. What is needed is material expertise and the willingness to rethink parts from a functional perspective – something I often have to moderate in my role as a materials engineer. Companies are frequently surprised when they see how much simplification and cost reduction is actually possible.

Which technological or material-related developments in recent years have been particularly important for your company and for additive manufacturing in general, and why?

A major factor has been the significantly improved reliability of AM systems, which reduces many classic production issues such as layer adhesion problems, surface quality, or calibration work. This gives my company more room to focus on the topics around the printing itself: consulting on how to increase economic efficiency by integrating 3D printing and tapping into unused potential in companies. Consulting on suitable materials for a given application is another key area that has been enabled by technological advances.

On the materials side, it is interesting to see how many new options have entered additive manufacturing. Development is moving quickly, although it is important to remember that a large share of 3D printing applications can be implemented successfully with a small set of plastics.

There is also a recurring pattern in both technology and materials: once a process or material has proven reliable, a whole wave of “me-too” products hits the market. Suddenly there are numerous “clones” of established machines. On the materials side, there is an almost unmanageable number of manufacturers, each offering many sub-variants and compounds, which makes the market increasingly opaque. You can see this particularly with the classic PLA, which almost every supplier offers – and each of them in countless color variants. These are noteworthy advances, but not necessarily revolutionary developments, and they sometimes create confusion rather than clarity.

In your view, how will additive manufacturing develop over the next five to ten years – technologically (processes, materials, software) and in terms of applications, business models, and interaction with conventional manufacturing?

I expect the bottleneck to shift from the “printer” to “accountability.” In regulated or safety-critical environments, traceability, process capability, and repeatability will matter more than pure machine hours. That strengthens service providers, because they pool expertise, documentation, and regular hands-on experience – including for companies that already run their own printers but need support with design, material selection, qualification, or series approval.

Regulation will be another important field. More and more designers, creatives, and companies are making their models available for 3D printing. This raises new questions around intellectual property and triggers new points of discussion.

Additional lines of development include digital inventories and on-demand production. These approaches reduce physical storage needs and align with the broader trend toward hyper-individualization: customer requirements become more granular, products more variable. The combination of AI-based model generation, direct handoff to manufacturing service providers, and automated print preparation will play a central role.

As a result, additive manufacturing will become less of a standalone production method and more an integral part of industrial hybrid manufacturing chains – complementing, accelerating, and increasingly shaping strategic decisions.

Further information about 3D Druck München is available on the company’s website.