Sport is an industry that may benefit from the opportunities offered by additive manufacturing (AM), and the media has portrayed increasing adoption of the technology in sports products. This systematic review aimed to consolidate and interpret the available empirical evidence concerning applications of AM in sports following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015. Four databases were searched within the date range of January 1984 to May 2019, using 28 broad and specific search phrases. This search resulted in 26 articles for analysis, the first appearing in 2010. Twelve sports in total were identified across the literature, with running/walking the most popular sport with ten articles (38%) investigating AM, followed by cycling with four articles (15%) and badminton with three articles (12%). Ten articles (38%) observed improvements in performance of products developed via AM compared to conventionally manufactured products, eight articles (31%) found a similar performance, and five articles (19%) found a lower performance. From a technical perspective, powder bed fusion technologies were the most utilized with 50% of articles using either selective laser sintering (SLS) or selective laser melting (SLM), although 52% of articles did not name the 3D printer used and 36% did not name any software used to design or optimize products. 3D scanning technology was also utilized in 11 articles (42%). Results indicate that AM has been slow to permeate sports research, and while considered across a variety of potential applications, has largely resulted in singular studies with potentially limited opportunities or funding for follow-up investigations.
WohlersTCampbellIHuffR, et al. (2019). Wohlers report 2019: 3D printing and additive manufacturing state of the industry. Fort Collins, CO: Wohlers Associates, 2019.
3.
GibsonIRosenDStuckerB.Additive manufacturing technologies: 3D printing, rapid prototyping, and direct digital manufacturing. 2nd ed.New York: Springer, 2015.
4.
MurrayCJ.3D Systems going mainstream in heathcare: 3D printing is becoming a go-to for customized healthcare solutions. Des News2015; 70: 27–28.
5.
QuinlanHEHasanTJaddouJ, et al. Industrial and consumer uses of additive manufacturing: a discussion of capabilities, trajectories, and challenges. J Ind Ecol2017; 21: S15–S20.
6.
SandströmCG.The non-disruptive emergence of an ecosystem for 3D printing—insights from the hearing aid industry’s transition 1989–2008. Technol Forecast Soc Change2016; 102: 160–168.
7.
MurrLE.Additive manufacturing of biomedical devices: an overview. Mater Technol2018; 33: 57–70.
8.
KumarLJKrishnadas NairCG. Current trends of additive manufacturing in the aerospace industry. In:WimpennyDIPandeyPMKumarLJ (eds.) Advances in 3D printing & additive manufacturing technologies. Singapore: Springer, 2017, pp.39–54.
MeierMTanKLimM, et al. Unlocking innovation in the sport industry through additive manufacturing. Bus Process Manag J2019; 25: 456–475.
11.
D’AveniR.The 3-D printing revolution. Harv Bus Rev2015; 93(5): 40–48.
12.
NovakJIBardiniP. The popular culture of 3D printing: when the digital gets physical. In: OzgenO (ed.) Handbook of research on consumption, media, and popular culture in the global age. Hershey, PA: IGI Global, 2019, pp.188–211.
NovakJI.A study of bicycle frame customisation through the use of additive manufacturing technology. RAPID 2015. Long Beach, CA: SME, 2015.
19.
NovakJBurtonDCrouchT.Aerodynamic test results of bicycle helmets in different configurations: Towards a responsive design. Proc Inst Mech Eng Pt P J Sports Eng Technol2019; 233: 268–276.
LoyJ.ELearning and eMaking: 3D printing blurring the digital and the physical. Edu Sci2014; 4(1): 108–121.
26.
NovakJI. Re-educating the educators: collaborative 3D printing education. In: SantosIMAliNAreepattamannilS (eds.) Interdisciplinary and international perspectives on 3D printing in education. Hershey, PA, USA: IGI Global, 2019, pp.28–49.
27.
TrustTMaloyRW.Why 3D print? The 21st-century skills students develop while engaging in 3D printing projects. Comput Schools2017; 34: 253–266.
28.
MoherDShamseerLClarkeM, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Syst Rev2015; 4(1): 1.
29.
HulteenRMSmithJJMorganPJ, et al. Global participation in sport and leisure-time physical activities: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Prev Med2017; 95: 14–25.
30.
van BottenburgMRijnenBSterkenburgJ. Sports participation in the European Union: trends and differences. Nieuwegein/’s-Hertogenbosch: Arko Sports Media/W.J.H. Mulier Institute, 2005.
LinCSHCKChuaJH.YeoDesign of high performance badminton shuttlecocks: virtual and rapid prototyping approach. Virtual Phys Prototyp2013; 8: 165–171.
34.
LinCSHChuaCKYeoJH. Designing a badminton shuttlecock; validation of virtual design by 3D printed thin-walled functional prototype. In: 1st international conference on progress in additive manufacturing (Pro-AM) 2014, (eds CCKaiYWYeeTMJen, et al.). Singapore: Research Publishing Services, 26–28 May 2014, pp.339–345.
35.
LinCSHCKChuaJH.YeoAnalysis and simulation of badminton shuttlecock flight through parameter identification of a slow-speed serve shot. Proc Inst Mech Eng Pt P J Sports Eng Technol2015; 229: 213–221.
36.
SallesASGyiDE. The specification and evaluation of personalised footwear for additive manufacturing. In: KarwowskiWSalvendyG (eds.) Advances in human factors, ergonomics, and safety in manufacturing and service industries. Oxfordshire, UK: Taylor and Francis, 2010, pp.355–366.
37.
SallesASGyiDE.The specification of personalised insoles using additive manufacturing. Work2012; 41: 1771–1774.
38.
SallesASGyiDE.Delivering personalised insoles to the high street using additive manufacturing. Int J Comput Integr Manuf2013; 26: 386–400.
39.
SallesASGyiDE.An evaluation of personalised insoles developed using additive manufacturing. J Sports Sci2013; 31: 442–450.
40.
SallesASGyiDEForresterSE.Evaluation of the short and medium term use of insoles for personalised footwear. Footwear Sci2011; 3: S144–S145.
41.
ToonDVinetAPainMTG, et al. A methodology to investigate the relationship between lower-limb dynamics and shoe stiffness using custom-built footwear. Proc Inst Mech Eng Pt P J Sports Eng Technol2011; 225: 32–37.
42.
VinetACaineM. Development of traction features in sprint spikes using SLS nylon sole units. In: 8th conference of the international sports engineering association (ISEA)Vienna, Austria, 2010, pp.2769–2774. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
43.
VinetACaineM.Design, manufacture, and evaluation of traction features on sprint footwear using laser sintered nylon-12 sole units. Proc Inst Mech Eng Pt P J Sports Eng Technol2011; 225: 259–264.
44.
BrownlieLAiharaYCarboJ, et al. The use of vortex generators to reduce the aerodynamic drag of athletic apparel. In: 11th conference of the international sports engineering association (ISEA) 2016, Delft, The Netherlands, 11–14 July 2016, pp.20–25. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
45.
JooJ-YKimY-K.Effects of customized 3D-printed insoles on the kinematics of flat-footed walking and running. Korean Sport Biomech2018; 28: 237–244.
46.
LeeHRan-IELeeY.Development of ergonomic leg guard for baseball catchers through 3D modeling and printing. J Fash Bus2016; 20: 17–29.
47.
ChowdhuryHLoganathanBWangY, et al. A study of dimple characteristics on golf ball drag. In: 11th conference of the international sports engineering association (ISEA) 2016, Delft, The Netherlands, 11–14 July 2016, pp.87–91. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
48.
ReiterMMironMMajorZ. Design and simulation of a polymeric 3D printed fall arrest system for climbing. In: 6th international conference on mechanics and materials in design (M2d2015), (eds JFSGomesSAMeguid), Ponta Delgada/Azores, Portugal, 26–30 July 2015, pp.563–564.
49.
KajtazMWitherowBLearyM, et al. Design of a personalised faceguard for an elite cricketer. In: The 1st international design technology conference, DESTECH2015 (eds LittlefairGGibsonIUsmaC, et al.), Geelong, Australia, 29 June–1 July 2015, pp.199–205. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
50.
NickelsL.3D printing the world’s first metal bicycle frame. Met Powder Rep2014; 69: 38–40.
51.
CollinsPKLeenRGibsonI.Industry case study: rapid prototype of mountain bike frame section. Virtual Phys Prototyp2016; 11: 295–303.
52.
McEwenICooperDEWarnettJ, et al. Design & manufacture of a high-performance bicycle crank by additive manufacturing. Appl Sci2018; 8(8): 1360.
53.
Cazon-MartinAIturrizaga-CampeloMMatey-MunozL, et al. Design and manufacturing of shin pads with multi-material additive manufactured features for football players: a comparison with commercial shin pads. Proc Inst Mech Eng Pt P J Sports Eng Technol2019; 233: 160–169.
54.
HarteDPatersonA.The fastest field sport in the world: a case report on 3-dimensional printed hurling gloves to help prevent injury. J Hand Ther2018; 31: 398–410.
55.
NessiAStankovicT. Topology, shape, and size optimization of additively manufactured lattice structures based on the superformula. In: ASME 2018 international design engineering technical conferences & computers and information in engineering conference IDETC/CIE 2018, Quebec, Canada, 26–29 August 2018, New York: ASME.
56.
VieiraTBotterAGastaldiL, et al. Textured insoles affect the plantar pressure distribution while elite rowers perform on an indoor rowing machine. PLoS One2017; 12(11): e0187202.
57.
GatelyRDBeirneSLatimerG, et al. Additive manufacturing, modeling and performance evaluation of 3D printed fins for surfboards. MRS Adv2017; 2: 913–920.
58.
DepoorterB.Intellectual property infringements & 3d printing: decentralized piracy. Hastings Law J2014; 65(6): 1483–1503.
59.
PopescuDLaptoiuD.Rapid prototyping for patient-specific surgical orthopaedics guides: a systematic literature review. Proc IMechE, Part H: J Engineering in Medicine2016; 230: 495–515.
60.
TackPVictorJGemmelP, et al. 3D-printing techniques in a medical setting: a systematic literature review. Biomed Eng Online2016; 15: 115.
61.
MartelliNSerranoCVan den BrinkH, et al. Advantages and disadvantages of 3-dimensional printing in surgery: a systematic review. Surgery2016; 159: 1485–1500.
62.
BauermeisterAJZuriarrainANewmanMI.Three-dimensional printing in plastic and reconstructive surgery: a systematic review. Ann Plast Surg2016; 77: 569–576.
63.
AsfiaANovakJIMohammedMI, et al. A review of 3D printed patient specific immobilisation devices in radiotherapy. Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol2020; 13: 30–35.
64.
BensonCLTriulziGMageeCL.Is there a Moore’s Law for 3D printing?3D Print Addit Manuf2018; 5: 53–62.
65.
GaoWZhangYRamanujanD, et al. The status, challenges, and future of additive manufacturing in engineering. Comput Aided Des2015; 69: 65–89.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
