Consolidating a set into a single part: the savings that almost no one talks about properly

When people talk about the savings that additive manufacturing brings, they almost always talk about reducing material. And yet, in most successful projects, the money wasn't in the material: it was in the other thirteen parts and the forty screws.

Consolidation is the process of combining a set of parts that were manufactured separately and assembled into a single, complete part that comes off the machine. It's the least visually appealing aspect of this technology, and by far, the most profitable.

Why does he pay so much?

The cost of a manufactured part is not the cost of its material. Each part number in an assembly carries a trail of costs that do not appear on the drawing.

What disappears when consolidating	Why it costs today
Tooling and molds for each part	Each part number needs its own, and it has to be amortized
Purchase orders and suppliers	Each part number is an order, a lead time, a delivery note, and an invoice
Inventory	Fourteen part numbers in stock, each with its reorder point
Assembly hours	And the training of the assembler, and human error
Joints	Every screw, weld, or joint is a point of failure and an inspection
Leaks	A circuit made of joined tubes has as many potential leaks as joints. A fully printed one has none
Weight of flanges	Half the weight of many assemblies is the lugs, flanges, and screws that exist only to join them
Lead time	The lead time of an assembly is that of its slowest-running part

That last point is the most underestimated. A set of fourteen references is delivered when the last one arrives. Consolidating it turns fourteen deadlines into one.

How to identify a candidate set

An algorithm isn't necessary. These questions almost always detect it:

How many parts of the assembly exist solely to join others? Flanges, bushings, caps, screws. If there are many, it's a candidate.
Is there a fluid flowing through it? Circuits made of pipes, elbows, and fittings are the ideal candidate: they eliminate joints, prevent leaks, and allow for bending the routing as needed.
Is it ever assembled and disassembled in service? If it's never disassembled, there's no reason for them to be separate parts.
Are they manufactured from different materials for a genuine reason? If the only reason was the manufacturing process, then this no longer applies.
How many units per year? With low and medium volumes, consolidation almost always wins. With very high volumes, injection molding or casting again become the preferred method.

What you earn besides money

Performance. A one-part printed manifold can have ducts of varying cross-section and smooth bends where there were previously 90° elbows. Less pressure loss with the same enclosure.

Rigidity. Without joints, there is no play or tightness that can be lost with vibrations.

Reliability. Joints fail. Whole parts, much less.

Traceability. A single reference with a batch number and a report, instead of fourteen separate supply chains that need to be audited. In regulated sectors, this is worth more than the savings.

The four cases in which consolidation is a mistake

1. When a worn part needs replacing. If one of the assembly parts is a consumable, consolidating it turns a cheap replacement into a complete part that's useless. There's a reason why joining them is necessary.

2. When the resulting part doesn't fit. This is more common than you might think: the entire assembly may not fit in the vat, or it may fit in a position that requires impossible supports. It's advisable to check this before redesigning anything.

3. When the interior becomes inaccessible. If there is a cavity inside that cannot be emptied of powder, inspected, or cleaned, the problem has shifted from an assembly issue to a certification one. The same applies to lattices: the powder must be able to escape.

4. When the monolithic part becomes impossible to machine. If the functional dimensions are at the bottom of a closed cavity, no tool can reach them. During the redesign, it is necessary to decide which faces to machine and ensure access for doing so.

How it's done in practice

It's not about merging existing CAD files. A consolidated assembly is redrawed from the function, not from the parts. The sequence that works is:

Write down what the assembly needs to do, not what shape it has now.
Mark the surfaces that cannot be touched: interfaces with the rest of the machine, functional dimensions, attachment points.
Draw the volume that connects these interfaces along the most direct path.
Check manufacturability—overhangs, channels, hollowing, orientation—with the design rules.
Decide which faces will be machined and allow for excess material.
Simulate, manufacture one, and measure it.

Step 1 is what separates a good result from an expensive copy of the old set.

An honest order of magnitude

The examples circulating in the industry—assemblies of dozens of parts reduced to one, with significant weight reductions and much shorter deadlines—are real, and they are the ones that get published because they turned out well. The average project is more modest, but still worthwhile.

The check you should do before starting is always the same: add up the current cost of the entire package—materials, assembly, inventory, inspection, and lead time—and compare it to the cost of the single part. Don't compare the price of the printed part with the price of the machined part it replaces; that's the most common miscalculation in this industry and the one that causes profitable projects to be abandoned.

If you have a candidate assembly, the quote calculator will give you the cost and lead time for the consolidated version, and how much does a metal-printed part cost will give you a breakdown of where every euro goes. And if you want to see the part in person, you can bring it to an open day.

When to print and when to go to mold, in print, melt or sinter.