Different 3d Printing Types Complete Beginner's Guide
The sheer types of 3D printers on offer can overwhelm even seasoned engineers, let alone a curious beginner. Choose one tool and you gain speed, affordability and friendly plastics; pick another and you unlock metal, colour, even living tissue. Yet the wrong choice risks wasting capital and warped parts. In the next minutes, we shall untangle every printing technology, show what each does best, and guide you confidently from concept to the first perfect layer.
FDM still powers the desktop scene—accounting for roughly 48 % of all 3D printers in use—yet global spending on metal additive manufacturing alone already tops US $4.9 billion (2023).
Choosing among the many types of 3D printers is less about memorising acronyms and more about matching a process to your goals. Each technology whether molten-filament FDM, light-cured resin, or laser-fused metal offers a unique trade-off between cost, speed and material freedom.
Hobbyists tend to favour extrusion for its low entry price, while aerospace firms stake entire programmes on powder-bed fusion for lightweight titanium parts. Meanwhile, hospitals now trial bioprinters that layer living cells to rebuild cartilage.
By the end of this guide, you will be able to:
-
recognise every major 3D-printing process at a glance,
-
understand the steps for 3D printing from a CAD file to a finished part,
-
Pick the right printing technology for budgets ranging from weekend tinkering to production lines.
FDM Fundamentals
The process of 3D printing most newcomers meet first is fused-filament fabrication—better known as FDM. A heated nozzle melts thermoplastic, tracing each layer in two axes while the build plate (or gantry) steps in the third. Thanks to inexpensive hardware and open-source firmware, FDM represents the single largest share of installed printers worldwide, with desktop units alone delivering nearly half of all printed parts in 2023 3Printr.com. Typical materials span PLA for quick prototypes, PET-G for weather-resistant jigs, and ABS for functional engineering components. Because extrusion runs at room pressure and modest power, it remains the most accessible printing technology for schools, makerspaces and start-ups exploring different types of 3D printers without heavy capital outlay.
Table of Contents
Not all filament machines share the same motion DNA. Cartesian “bedslingers” move a heated platform along the Y-axis; they’re affordable yet limited in speed once tall prints start swaying.
Enter Core-XY kinematics: twin belts position a lightweight tool-head so it sprints across the frame, cutting print times by up to 40 % compared with Cartesian rigs All3DP. Delta printers take a different route—three vertical towers drive parallelogram arms, allowing rapid diagonal motion ideal for tall vases and rocket bodies.
Finally, endless-belt units (sometimes dubbed “infinite-Z printers”) tilt the build plane at 45 °, advancing parts forward as layers accumulate; the result is a continuous production line for beams, cosplay swords or batch jobs.
Each variant still counts as FDM, yet their mechanical quirks influence accuracy, throughput and maintenance. When weighing different 3D printer types in extrusion, examine belt complexity, firmware support and community-tested slicer profiles—key 3D printer info that saves tuning hours later.
Image suggestion: high-resolution close-up of a brass nozzle laying a translucent PLA bead across a heated PEI sheet, with inset call-outs showing Core-XY belt paths and Delta arms.
Vat-photopolymer systems submerge each layer in liquid resin and then harden it with light. SLA (stereolithography) steers a pinpoint UV laser across the surface, curing voxels one at a time. Resolution is superb—down to 25 µm on professional rigs—making SLA the go-to choice for dental models, jewellery masters and fine figurines.
The trade-off is time: because the beam must trace every contour, layer exposure is inherently slower than mask-based systems. DLP, by contrast, projects an entire slice in one flash using a digital micromirror device.
That single exposure hardens hundreds of voxels simultaneously, so print speed scales with Z-height rather than XY complexity. Modern DLP units reach 60–140 mm h⁻¹, more than double the throughput of comparably priced laser machines, while retaining crisp edges
In practice, the choice between these 3D printing processes hinges on part size and surface quality. Tiny dental arches benefit from DLP’s batch efficiency; bespoke watch cases demand SLA’s silky finish.
Both remain light-based 3D print technologies and share identical post-processing steps: isopropyl wash, two-stage UV cure and a final support nip-off.
Quick Links
SLA
Masked SLA—better known as MSLA or LCD printing—drops a monochrome LCD between UV LEDs and the resin vat.
The screen acts as a digital mask, exposing a full layer in one shot like DLP, yet costs far less to manufacture.
Because mono-LCDs transmit more light than older RGB panels, layer times fall to 2–3 seconds; hobby printers now churn out 28-mm gaming minis in under two hours.
Most budget resin machines released since 2023 therefore use MSLA, accelerating consumer adoption of “desktop resin” faster than any other 3D printer technology
Who we have Teamed up With
SLS Fundamentals
Powder-bed fusion spreads a razor-thin layer of polymer powder, then fuses it with a scanning CO₂ or fibre laser.
The cycle repeats until the part is buried inside a warm “cake” of unfused powder, which doubles as free support material.
Because there are no support struts to clip away, SLS excels at lattices, living hinges and nested assemblies geometries impossible on extrusion machines.
Nylon PA12 remains the workhorse, yet carbon-filled, flame-retardant and TPU blends are now mainstream, giving engineers a palette once limited to injection moulding.
With build volumes reaching 340 × 340 × 600 mm, one job can nest hundreds of components, slashing unit cost and placing SLS among the most productive 3D printing processes for short-run production.
The powder-cake’s insulating blanket also evens out cooling, delivering isotropic strength that rivals moulded parts—a key advantage when you compare different 3D printer types for functional use.
“Up to 98 % of unused PA12 powder from an SLS build can be sieved, refreshed and re-used, dramatically lowering material cost and waste.” — EOS Sustainability White-paper (2024)
SLS Fundamentals
pushes scale further: a robotic arm feeds powder or wire into a laser or plasma focal point, stacking weld beads to repair turbine blades or add stiffening ribs to ship propellers.
Because the process of 3D printing occurs in open air (shielded by inert gas), envelope size is limited only by the motion system—building parts two metres long is routine.
Collectively, these metal-centric technologies define the cutting edge of 3D print technology, proving that “additive” now competes with casting and forging rather than replacing only plastics.
Image suggestion: cut-away render of a DMLS chamber showing laser tracks fusing metal powder, annotated with gas flow and recoater blade.
Multi Jet Fusion (MJF)
HP’s Multi Jet Fusion swaps the laser for inkjet arrays that deposit fusing and detailing agents before an infrared lamp sweeps across the bed. Every layer prints in a single pass, so MJF outpaces SLS by 10–15 %, and the detailing agent sharpens edges to within ±0.2 mm.
Built-in colour variants jet CMYK dyes, producing full-colour prototypes straight from the chamber—a capability rare among 3D printed technology options. Powders cool inside a docking station, freeing the printer for the next job and boosting throughput—a vital metric when evaluating the printing type for service-bureau work.
Image suggestion: high-resolution photo of an SLS technician brushing away nylon powder to reveal a lattice part, with a laser-sintering graphic inset.
When polymers reach their mechanical limit, engineers turn to the 3D-printing processes that fuse metal wire or powder into dense, load-bearing parts. The best-known is DMLS / SLM (Direct Metal Laser Sintering / Selective Laser Melting).
Here, a 400-W–1 kW fibre-laser scans stainless-steel, titanium or Inconel powder under an inert argon blanket, melting each 20-µm layer into a fully dense micro-weld. Finished densities exceed 99.5 %, matching wrought stock on tensile strength and fatigue life.
Binder Jetting takes a different 3D printer process: an inkjet head “prints” liquid binder onto a metal-powder bed, glueing particles together.
After printing, the green part is de-powdered, sintered in a furnace and infiltrated with bronze or left fully stainless. The benefit is speed—build rates up to ten times higher than laser systems—and lower heat input, allowing jigs to nest closer without warping.
For production volumes above 10,000 parts annually, Binder Jetting often undercuts CNC machining on unit cost.
Bioprinting: Printing with Living Cells
Beyond plastics and metals lies bioprinting, where hydrogel “bio-inks” laden with stem cells are patterned layer by layer to form cartilage, skin and, in research trials, miniature livers.
Inkjet or extrusion heads dispense cell droplets into a temperature-controlled chamber that mimics the body’s own chemistry, encouraging tissue to mature post-print.
Because viability depends on gentle handling and sterile flow, every 3D printer process parameter—nozzle shear, UV exposure, oxygen diffusion—must be tuned with surgical precision.
NHS-backed labs aim to transplant the first bioprinted corneal grafts within five years, proving how far 3D printing and technology have moved beyond simple prototypes.
Concrete & Large Scale
Swap millimetre nozzles for hoses and you get construction-scale 3D printing types.
Gantry or robotic-arm “cobots” extrude fast-setting concrete in 30 mm beads, erecting single-storey homes in as little as 48 hours. Layer-by-layer deposition eliminates formwork, slashes waste by 60 % and allows curved walls difficult to cast conventionally.
The process of 3D printing at this scale still wrestles with rebar integration and building codes, yet demonstration houses in Devon and the Netherlands already meet UK structural standards.
When evaluating different types of 3D printers, keep an eye on these giants—they redefine what printing technology means for civil engineering.
FAQs
Which 3-D printing process is cheapest per part?
For desktop‐scale projects the extrusion family (FDM / FFF) usually wins on cost: PLA or PET-G filament averages £18–£35 kg⁻¹, whereas entry-level SLA resins start around £45 kg⁻¹. Material, not machine time, dominates hobby budgets, so FDM remains the most economical printing technology for prototypes and student work. Formlabs
Can I print metal at home?
True industrial metal methods such as DMLS need inert gas and 400 W+ lasers, putting them out of reach for home users. However, hybrid “metal-filament” routes now exist: BASF Ultrafuse 316L can be printed on a standard FDM printer, then debound and sintered off-site to reach ~97 % density. Expect extra costs for furnace service and powder-handling precautions. MatterHackers
What are the basic steps for 3d printing from CAD to a finished part?
The standard process of 3D printing follows five stages: (1) model in CAD, (2) export STL/3MF, (3) slice to generate tool-paths, (4) print, and (5) post-process (support removal, cure, or polishing). Mastering this workflow—rather than just the machine—determines print quality across all different 3D printer types. Additive-X
Choosing the Right Printing Technology: A Step-by-Step Checklist
Selecting among the many types of 3D printers can feel like matching wine to cheese: there is no single correct answer, only the best fit for your taste, budget and deadline. Use the five-step framework below to turn bewildering 3D printer info into a clear purchase or outsourcing decision.
Step 1 — Define the job’s purpose
Ask what the part must do. Visual prototype? Functional bracket? Medical implant? Your application immediately narrows the field of different 3D printer types. For rough form checks, low-cost FDM wins; for jewellery masters, SLA rules; for load-bearing titanium, DMLS is unavoidable.
Step 2 — Rank mechanical demands
List target properties—strength, temperature resistance, surface finish. Cross-reference those with material tables for each 3D printing process. Nylon 12 from SLS exceeds 50 MPa tensile strength, while PET-G FDM offers only ~40 MPa; knowing numbers prevents over-engineering.
Step 3 — Budget for the whole lifecycle
Total cost of ownership involves more than sticker price. Filament at £22 kg⁻¹ looks cheap until you factor a £60 spool of support resin on an SLA workflow. Likewise, metal-binder-jetting parts need furnace time. Map every pound from CAD to post-processing before declaring a printing technology cost-effective.
Step 4 — Match throughput to schedule
If you must ship 1,000 widgets monthly, layer-at-a-time FDM may bottleneck, whereas MJF’s one-pass powder beds sprint ahead. Evaluate build volume, layer time and change-over speed—the practical 3D printer process metrics that trump brochure layer height.
Step 5 — Check compliance and safety
Regulated markets demand traceability. Medical devices call for ISO 13485, aerospace for AS9100 and powder-control documentation. A garage-based 3D printed printer setup may meet hobby needs but fail an audit. When in doubt, outsource to a certified bureau.
Work through these five checkpoints, and the bewildering universe of 3D printing and technology collapses into a shortlist of two or three candidate machines—or a single trusted service provider.
The mantra remains simple: job requirements first, printing type second, brand hype last.
