Robotics Companies Rely Heavily on Rush 3D Printing and Custom Materials

Upside Parts reached these findings after analyzing more than 30,000 3D-printed parts to determine how the robotics industry utilizes on-demand manufacturing. The data shows a stark contrast in urgency between sectors; while 36.7% of robotics parts are produced on rush schedules, only 7.2% of orders from other hardware & other customers follow the same accelerated timeline.

Manufacturing speed as an engineering metric for robotics

The high volume of rush orders suggests that for robotics engineers, lead time is not merely a purchasing concern but a factor that dictates the pace of development. Roman Arkhangelskiy, Founder and Managing Partner of Upside Parts, stated that manufacturing speed directly affects the engineering schedule.

In a sense, lead time becomes more than a purchasing metric. It decides how quickly a team moves to the next physical iteration.

Roman Arkhangelskiy, Founder and Managing Partner of Upside Parts

This pattern is consistent with the ability of additive manufacturing to reduce lead times via on-demand production for spare parts management.

Urgency persists in large-scale production runs

The demand for fast turnaround does not decrease as order sizes grow. According to the Upside Parts dataset, orders exceeding 100 parts represented 89.0% of the total analyzed volume. Within those larger orders, 32.5% were produced on a rush schedule.

By comparison, only 23.8% of orders for 100 parts or fewer were rushed. This suggests that the demand for urgency does not fall as order sizes increase.

AMPOWER expects that end-use parts will account for 44% of polymer additive manufacturing applications by 2028. However, information from Upside Parts indicates that quick turnaround stays critical for clients even when they transition to larger production volumes.

Material diversity in routine robotics production

Robotics engineers frequently require materials beyond standard 3D-printing plastics. Upside Parts found that 49% of orders included at least one material outside standard PETG, PLA or ABS.

This need for material flexibility is especially prominent in mid-sized production runs. For orders of 101 to 500 parts, no single material accounted for more than 27.1% of volume.

Arkhangelskiy commented, “What stands out is how often engineers need to go beyond the most common plastics. This is not a niche requirement limited to unusual projects. It is part of routine material selection, and the same need shows up in production runs of hundreds of parts.”

Automation opportunities in repeatable production paths

Despite the custom nature of 3D-printed parts, the underlying production decisions are often repetitive. Nineteen recurring production combinations accounted for 97.4% of all parts in the dataset.

While the geometry may change from order to order, many of the underlying production decisions are familiar. This consistency creates an opportunity for automation.

Production paths that are repeatable can be accelerated and standardized, allowing engineers to concentrate on exceptions such as complex geometry and unusual materials. The subsequent hurdle for manufacturers will involve decreasing the interval between the approval of an order and the commencement of physical production.