How Much Does 3D Printing Cost? Key Factors to Consider.

Exploring the multiple ways you can lower your part costs at all stages when developing parts

What Factors Impact 3D Printing Cost?

No one wants to spend more money than necessary on parts development. Customers often think their choice of material has the biggest effect on cost, but while material does have some influence, the main cost drivers for additive parts are build time and finishing time. There are several design factors that affect build time, finishing time, or both. By factoring these considerations into your design, you can minimize the cost of your parts and improve overall part quality.

📊 Process Flow Chart — A variety of factors can affect the cost of your parts and should be considered carefully in the design phase.

What is Build Time?

For all of Konlida's additive manufacturing technologies, build time is split into two categories: draw time and recoat time.

  • Draw time is the time it takes to sinter, melt, or cure the material. It covers how long the laser takes to draw the cross section of each layer and is driven by the total volume of the build, including supports if applicable.
  • Recoat time is the time for the recoater blade to travel across the build platform and distribute the next layer of raw material. This is typically a matter of seconds per layer, but adds up over hundreds or thousands of layers. Recoat time is directly related to the height of the part in its optimal orientation.
💡 Design mindset shift: For CNC machining, you avoid removing material. For 3D printing, you only add material where it is critical — more material means more cost.

Draw Time: Part Volume

Part volume is a common factor that can drive price up unnecessarily. Consider your overall part volume and how much of that volume is critical to fit, form, or function.

Example: A 5 in. x 2 in. x 3 in. (127mm x 50.8mm x 76.2mm) block where critical features are channels. The ends help align the part in assembly. The original design is high-volume, but not all of that volume is critical. In the revised version, channels and ends are retained while the surrounding material is removed, leaving only about 0.1 in. wall thickness. This reduces part volume by 80% and can cut cost by 50–60% depending on the technology.

🧩 Part Rendering — During the design phase, removing unnecessary material often maintains strength while speeding up build times.

Reducing Material Volume: Shelling and Hollowing

Another way to reduce material volume is to shell the part. This is best suited for Selective Laser Sintering (SLS) and Multi Jet Fusion (MJF), which do not require support structures. Additionally, these processes see higher heat, and reducing volume avoids dimensional inaccuracies caused by material shrinkage.

Example: A 4 in. x 4 in. x 2 in. organizer tray. Two optimization methods:

  • Ribs or honeycombs maintain rigidity while removing excess material → volume ↓30%, cost ↓20%.
  • Hollowing (if rigidity is less critical) → volume ↓36%, cost ↓26%.
⚠️ Important: Keep geometry open to allow removal of unsintered/unfused powder. Avoid sealed cavities.
🔄 Hollowing out your part can speed production and also allow removal of unused metal or plastic powder.

Recoat Time: Part Orientation

Recoat time is driven by the height of the build in its optimal orientation. Generally, if the part can be designed to build in a shorter orientation, it will be less expensive. This is especially true for SLA (Stereolithography) and DMLS (Direct Metal Laser Sintering), where support structures play a significant role in orientation choice.

Example: A metal part (DMLS) with channels too wide to build horizontally without internal trapped supports. By changing the channel cross-section to a self-supporting teardrop shape, the part can be built in a shorter orientation, reducing cost by 18%.

🖨️ Changes in print orientation and channel shape can significantly speed build times and lower cost.

Finishing Time and Strategies to Reduce It

For technologies requiring supports (SLA and DMLS), finishing time is all about reducing the number of supports. Fewer supports mean less draw time and less removal time.

SLA Supports

Easily removed by hand. Small bumps remain and are sanded down. Support removal is relatively simple, but for hundreds of parts, extra minutes per part add up.

DMLS Metal Supports

Robust, cannot be removed by hand. Cut off using rotary tools or manual mills, then ground and sanded. Reducing supports has the biggest cost impact for DMLS.

✂️ Designing self-supporting features (e.g., 45° overhangs) dramatically reduces post-processing time and cost.

Real-World Example: Flanged Pipe

A 5 in. (127mm) tall pipe with flanges originally required supports growing from the bottom flange all the way to the top flange, resulting in 3 hours of finishing time per part.

Redesign: Reduce unnecessary flange material and orient flanges to grow at a self-supporting 45° angle from the build plate.

Result: Finishing time reduced from 3 hours to just 30 minutes — a 50% cost reduction.

📐 Original vs. additive-optimized design — support volume comparison.

Final Thoughts

Additive manufacturing is a highly geometry‑dependent process. Strategies that work for one part or technology may not work for another. This article provides general guidelines for reducing cost, and the examples shown demonstrate these principles in action.

At Konlida Precision Technology, we combine deep additive manufacturing expertise with CNC machining, injection molding, and sheet metal capabilities. Whether you need a quick prototype or production-grade parts, our application engineering team is ready to help.

📞 Contact our engineering team at info@konlida.com or use the contact form on our website. We will review your specific project and provide part‑specific suggestions for reducing cost and improving manufacturability.