In the nearly 25 years since the first castings were made from QuickCast patterns, a number of additive manufacturing methods for creating IC patterns have come and gone and the use of printed patterns has become commonplace, especially for prototype castings. In North America, four technologies account for more than 98% of printed patterns used in industrial applications; QuickCast, Castform, ProJet Wax, and Voxeljet PMMA. While much has been published about the use of printed patterns in precision investment casting, to date there has been no detailed comparison of the capabilities of the four technologies. This paper attempts to do that.

A detailed comparison must necessarily consist of three components:

1. Printer performance – this component compares the performance of the printers in areas such as accuracy, surface finish and build volume, and build speed.

2. Cost of Ownership – Cost of ownership includes not only the purchase price of the machine but cost of materials and the cost to build a given volume of patterns. It is a major concern to those considering the purchase of a machine and is the primary factor in determining the price of patterns for those planning to purchase printed patterns. This component details costs.

3. Pattern performance – Having a great printer is worthless if the pattern it creates cannot be reliably converted to an acceptable casting. This component details the cost and difficulty of converting printed patterns to castings.

Comparisons are based on measured performance as well as data and prices provided by the manufacturers.