The banishment of CNC or injection molding to join flint knives, warp-weighted looms, and other archaic tools in a cobweb-strewn museum is not happening any time soon, if ever. Additive manufacturing progress is an evolution, not a revolution. Integration, not disruption. The days of AM sweeping aside all other manufacturing technology are in the rearview mirror.
I spoke with Yavuz Murtezaoglu, CEO of ModuleWorks, and Ben Weber, Head of Strategic Partnerships to find out what the 3D printing industry can learn from the CAD CAM sector, how the manufacturing landscape is changing, and to learn more about an innovation they believe could disrupt 3D printing at a magnitude similar to Bambu Labs.
When seeking to understand technology adoption, there is a tendency to point to the classic hype cycle. While Gartner’s model has merits, it is not without flaws. Not all technology follows a hype path, furthermore, progress can be non-linear. For example, 3D printing has seen gradual and steady adoption in several key vertical markets – it is not a coincidence that these markets are tightly regulated and safety-conscious. Learning from history is perhaps a better way to understand 3D printing’s trajectory.
ModuleWorks, a German software developer, has over two decades of experience pushing code that optimizes CAD/CAM and CNC software. “People say we’re the best kept secret in manufacturing,” Yavuz Murtezaoglu, Founder and CEO, tells me. The algorithms developed by some of the company’s 400 employees are now licensed by 90% of CAM companies.
Job Shops and Geopolitics
The adoption of additive manufacturing has been slow due to the conservatism of traditional manufacturers. “Most job shops and large-scale manufacturers operate on long planning cycles. They’ve optimized their processes over decades, and unless there’s a massive pain point, they have little incentive to change,” says Ben Weber.
Unlike software-driven industries, where disruption is rapid, manufacturing is slow-moving. A job shop may invest tens of millions in CNC machining, making change costly and risky. Smaller manufacturers, though more flexible, are often operator-driven and may be hesitant to experiment. ModuleWorks believes additive will integrate into conventional workflows rather than replace them. “Will job shops add 3D printers alongside CNC machines, or will dedicated additive job shops emerge?” asks the CEO.
Supply chain complexities and workforce training requirements compound manufacturing inertia. While more prominent manufacturers may invest in research, smaller firms often lack the resources to experiment with new technologies. The long-term challenge remains demonstrating that additive can enhance productivity without disrupting established workflows.
So, what does this mean for the future of additive manufacturing? It’s debatable whether early industry messaging aided adoption. The idea of a 3D printer in every home was never realistic, and what manufacturer wants to hear their industry is about to be disrupted? Additive must integrate into existing processes rather than stand alone.
The replicator concept, a machine that can make anything, may paradoxically have slowed adoption by offering up a vast number of potential applications. “In CAD/CAM, software evolved around specific industries: mold and die, turbine blades, and production parts. Each had a defined need and clear ROI,” explains Weber. Additive, by contrast, remains fragmented.
Bringing Multi-Axis 3D Printing to the Masses
3D printing is just one step in a chain. Something happens before you print, and something happens after you print. Unless additive fits into that workflow, adoption will remain limited. ModuleWorks’ five-axis ironing tool is one example of bridging this gap. The ability to print support-free structures is another critical milestone. ModuleWorks’ additive toolpath generation algorithms enable five-axis printing, reducing the need for material waste and post-processing. These approaches could make the technology more viable for industrial use, where precision and efficiency are critical.
The limitations of conventional fused deposition modeling (FDM) 3D printing are well known: parts with shallow curves expose layer lines, and complex geometries require support structures that add material waste and post-processing effort. ModuleWorks has developed algorithms to address both issues. “If we can bring this to market and democratize it, it could have an impact similar to what Bambu Lab has achieved in next-generation 3D printing,” says Yavuz Murtezaoglu.
The key lies in multi-axis control. Standard FDM 3D printers move in three linear axes, but ModuleWorks’ approach tilts the print bed, allowing for smoother surfaces and support-free printing. The innovation is embedded in an algorithm Murtezaoglu developed during his PhD research, which systematically decomposes complex geometries into optimally printable segments. “The PhD thesis explains how to eliminate support structures and improve the stair-stepping effect caused by layer-by-layer printing,” he explains.
Open Hardware, Proprietary Software
While the hardware modifications required to introduce tilt are open-source, the software remains proprietary. “The printers are open source, and the changes we apply will naturally be open too,” says Murtezaoglu. “But the software is not open source—it’s open to everyone under non-discriminatory licensing conditions.”
However, one of the most significant barriers to adoption is convincing printer manufacturers to integrate the technology. The 3D printing industry primarily focuses on selling high volumes of machines rather than developing complex multi-axis systems. “It’s like the COVID vaccine market—these companies are narrowly focused on shipping units rather than considering what’s possible,” says Weber. “The challenge was always convincing them that our algorithms could transform their machines.”
ModuleWorks engineered a workaround to bypass hardware inertia: modifying existing printers to introduce limited tilt. At Formnext 2024, the company showcased a RatRig printer with extended parts that allowed for up to 20 degrees of tilt, with future iterations targeting 30 degrees. “You don’t need to tilt 90 degrees to solve most problems,” Murtezaoglu explains. “Even a 20-degree tilt lets the algorithm adjust the toolpath to print around corners, reducing the need for supports.”
Lessons from the CAD / CAM world
The evolution of toolpath software in CNC machining offers a roadmap for additive manufacturing. Yet, the latter has yet to embrace the efficiencies that took decades to refine in subtractive manufacturing.
Over the past 40 years, CNC machining has driven demand for increasingly sophisticated toolpath software, accommodating developments such as five-axis milling and multi-tasking machines. Similarly, AM is now pushing software requirements forward with new processes like Wire Arc Additive Manufacturing (WAAM) and Directed Energy Deposition (DED), often integrating robotics. However, unlike CNC, where independent CAM software solutions dominate, AM machines typically ship with proprietary software. This fragmentation limits demand for cross-compatible CAM software.
Another stark contrast is in workforce expectations. In CNC, manufacturers have long accepted the necessity of trained CAM programmers who specialize in toolpath generation, with an estimated two million professionals working in the field. In AM, some expect to “push a button” and get a part printed, making adjustments only for process parameters such as heat management. While this may suffice for entry-level applications, industrial-scale AM requires more expertise; among specialists this is now acknowledged.
Software development in AM also follows a familiar but inefficient trajectory. In the CNC industry, companies eventually adopted shared software components for CAD design, data translation, and toolpath simulation, reducing redundant R&D efforts. In AM, many software vendors are still attempting to build everything in-house, slowing progress.
Whether AM will consolidate as the CNC market did remains uncertain. The CNC industry has seen major consolidations, with firms like Hexagon and Sandvik acquiring multiple CAM software companies. AM, by contrast, remains fragmented, with a hazy path toward similar mergers. Until AM software becomes as standardized as its CNC counterpart, its growth will likely remain constrained.
Manufacturing in a Shifting Geopolitical Landscape
Manufacturing is increasingly shaped by geopolitics as countries seek to localize production. “If products must now be produced domestically in high-wage countries, automation becomes essential,” says Murtezaoglu. “You can’t match low-cost labor”, so you must reduce costs through better algorithms.”
The push for domestic manufacturing may accelerate its adoption in industries requiring rapid, localized production as space and defense firms invest in on-demand production capability to reduce supply chain vulnerabilities.
While mass adoption remains uncertain, ModuleWorks is positioning itself for an eventual shift. “If job shops start adding robots and large-format 3D printers, they’ll want to use familiar software like Siemens NX or Mastercam,” says Murtezaoglu. “We already have 90% of those shops using our software for CNC machining. The moment they activate our additive component, they can run their new equipment immediately.”
Emerging markets for the technology include mobile, on-demand repair applications, such as railway maintenance and, in some minds, battlefield repairs. “If a customer needs a sophisticated additive solution and there’s no existing answer, we can deploy 20 developers, deliver in three months, and ship a fully operational system,” Murtezaoglu explains.
ModuleWorks is prepared for when the industry catches up. “We’re building up our muscles up in the gym,” Murtezaoglu quips. When the shift happens, the company intends to be at the forefront, providing the software infrastructure that will finally integrate additive manufacturing into mainstream production.
For ModuleWorks, the focus is on enabling manufacturers to adapt rather than forcing radical change. “It’s about making the transition as seamless as possible,” Weber says. “When the industry is ready, we’ll be right there.”
What 3D printing trends should you watch out for in 2025?
How is the future of 3D printing shaping up?
To stay up to date with the latest 3D printing news, don’t forget to subscribe to the 3D Printing Industry newsletter or follow us on Twitter, or like our page on Facebook.
While you’re here, why not subscribe to our Youtube channel? Featuring discussion, debriefs, video shorts, and webinar replays.
Featured image shows 3D printing complex overhangs. Photo via ModuleWorks.
