3D Printing in Facilities Management: A Systematic Review Toward Smart and Sustainable Building Operations

Abstract

Three-Dimensional Printing (3DP) is rapidly emerging as a pivotal technology for advancing Facilities Management (FM) toward smart and sustainable buildings. This systematic review, following PRISMA 2020 guidelines, critically evaluates 3DP applications, benefits, and challenges across core FM domains—construction, maintenance and repair, supply chain management, and specialized applications—through analysis of 179 studies. To our knowledge, this represents the first comprehensive, FM-specific systematic review of 3DP implementation frameworks. Evidence synthesis reveals that 3DP enables on-demand, localized manufacturing of bespoke components, with documented inventory cost reductions in maintenance applications, substantial production cost decreases for complex geometries, and significant lead time improvements from traditional procurement cycles to rapid on-demand fulfillment for spare parts applications. However, quantitative evidence remains limited and context-dependent, particularly regarding economic feasibility and scalability. 3DP adoption in FM faces significant barriers: quality assurance protocols, workforce readiness, BIM/IoT integration challenges, and regulatory uncertainty. This review identifies the absence of validated decision-making frameworks to guide FM professionals on 3DP implementation versus traditional alternatives, a fundamental research and practice gap. Through structured quality assessment and stakeholder analysis, we propose strategic recommendations emphasizing cross-sector collaboration, standardization development, and workforce upskilling. A novel conceptual decision framework supports practical implementation decisions. These findings position 3DP as potentially transformative for sustainable building operations while highlighting critical research priorities for systematic FM sector deployment.

1. Introduction

1.1. Background and Context

Facility Management (FM), is the cornerstone of operational efficiency and sustainability across various industries, encompassing a range of critical functions including maintenance, asset management, space utilization, and strategic operations [1,2]. At its core, FM optimizes the interaction between people, places, processes, and technologies to ensure the effective and safe operation of the built environment (Figure 1). Traditionally viewed as a maintenance-oriented discipline, FM has evolved into a multifaceted field that integrates interdisciplinary strategies aimed at enhancing productivity, sustainability, and service delivery [3].

FM has rapidly become a core driver of organizational performance and sustainable development. Its strategic integration of asset management, maintenance, energy stewardship, and digital transformation optimizes productivity, safety, and cost-effectiveness in the built environment. Figure 2 further illustrates how workplace management frameworks align FM functions with broader organizational goals.

The growing complexity in FM results from increasing stakeholder expectations, resource constraints, and ambitious decarbonization targets defining modern infrastructure management [5].

Despite advances in digital building technologies, such as sensors, the Internet of Things (IoT), and Building Information Modeling (BIM), FM still faces persistent challenges. These include reactive maintenance patterns, fragmented data, supply chain bottlenecks, and limited innovation throughout facility life cycles. Such issues can hinder FM from achieving critical goals in sustainability, resilience, and organizational value [6].

A significant shift is underway as FM professionals adopt disruptive, data-driven technologies to address these gaps. Three-Dimensional Printing (3DP), or Additive Manufacturing (AM), is increasingly seen as transformational for FM. 3DP enables on-demand creation of customized building components, rapid prototyping, waste reduction, and extended asset lifespans, improving responsiveness, supply chain flexibility, and cost control. The integration of 3DP with digital twins, BIM, and advanced analytics is expected to propel FM toward more agile, data-driven, and sustainable operations [7].

This review examines the current state of 3DP in FM by synthesizing peer-reviewed research and case studies in construction, maintenance and repair, and supply chain management. The analysis highlights proven benefits, current barriers, and strategic opportunities for integrating 3DP with digital technologies. The objective is to provide actionable insights and set a research agenda for embedding 3DP into smart, sustainable FM strategies, guiding researchers, practitioners, and policymakers shaping the future of building operations.

1.2. Literature Review

1.2.1. The Evolution of Facilities Management

Facilities Management (FM) has undergone a profound transformation over recent decades, shifting from a reactive, maintenance-focused activity to a comprehensive strategic discipline that underpins long-term organizational performance and sustainability. Early perspectives defined FM largely in terms of building upkeep and operations; however, contemporary definitions emphasize integrated management of people, places, processes, and technologies to optimize resource use, support safety, and promote environmental stewardship [8,9,10,11].

This broadened scope now encompasses asset management, real estate strategy, energy optimization, and business continuity planning, as evidenced by the substantial impact of FM in industry benchmarks such as the UK, where FM contributes over £115 billion annually and accounts for nearly 3% of the workforce [11,12]. Despite this sectoral growth, FM is challenged by the lack of a universally accepted definition and a fragmented theoretical foundation, with varying schools of thought emphasizing service delivery, infrastructure management, or the integration of people, spaces, and systems. The field is further shaped by interdependent life cycle phases ranging from initial design and construction to testing, commissioning, ongoing operations, and eventual decommissioning [13].

1.2.2. Contemporary FM Challenges and Digital Innovation

As FM’s responsibilities have expanded, so have the challenges associated with managing more complex and dynamic built environments. Persistent issues, including reactive maintenance approaches, siloed data, costly supply interruptions, and limited real-time visibility, underscore the need for a technological paradigm shift. The deployment of sensing technologies, integrated workplace management systems (IWMS), and BIM platforms has provided valuable improvements in efficiency and oversight, but these innovations often fall short of providing end-to-end FM solutions [14,15].

Among the promising developments within Industry 4.0 [16], Three-Dimensional Printing (3DP) emerges as a uniquely disruptive technology for FM. By enabling agile, on-demand production of parts, reducing waste, and supporting mass customization, 3DP can address many of the sector’s most persistent pain points, especially when combined with advances in BIM, digital twins, and IoT [17].

1.2.3. Overview of 3DP

3DP, also known as Additive Manufacturing (AM), describes a suite of techniques for fabricating three-dimensional objects layer-by-layer using digital model data. Initially developed for rapid prototyping in the 1980s, 3DP now encompasses a wide array of processes (e.g., fused deposition modeling, stereolithography, selective laser sintering, binder jetting) and applications across industries such as aerospace, automotive, healthcare, architecture, and education [18,19]. The various 3DP technologies can be classified based on their base materials and processing methods, as illustrated in Figure 3.

The additive manufacturing process fundamentally consists of four key stages: (a) Digital design creation using CAD software, (b) Model slicing into printable layers using specialized software, (c) Layer-by-layer production through material deposition or fusion, and (d) post-processing including support removal, surface finishing, and quality inspection [21], as illustrated in Figure 4. Unlike traditional subtractive manufacturing, which removes material from a solid block, or formative manufacturing, which uses molds, 3DP builds objects additively, enabling complex internal geometries impossible with conventional methods [22]. Each 3DP technology varies in material handling: FDM melts thermoplastic filaments, SLA polymerizes liquid resins using UV light, SLS fuses powder particles with lasers, while binder jetting selectively deposits binding agents onto powder beds [23,24,25].

The primary strengths of 3DP include the realization of complex geometries otherwise impossible with conventional manufacturing, substantial savings of time and materials, and the potential for cost-effective mass customization. These benefits are increasingly relevant for FM, which frequently requires bespoke replacement components, rapid prototyping for repair, and agile supply solutions for aging or specialized assets [26]. Nevertheless, the adoption of 3DP is also accompanied by challenges, such as material constraints, regulatory hurdles, and the need for workforce retraining, a need echoed globally [27] with a sixfold increase in demand for additive technicians and digital operators by 2030, that must be systematically addressed to unlock full sectoral value [28,29].

Successful 3DP integration in FM requires understanding key technical and operational factors that influence technology selection and performance outcomes. Different 3DP technologies serve distinct FM applications based on resolution, speed, and material capabilities: FDM systems (0.1–0.4 mm resolution) suit structural components, SLA systems (0.025–0.1 mm resolution) enable precision parts, while SLS handles complex geometries with metal and polymer materials. The layer-by-layer fabrication process begins with digital model slicing, followed by sequential material deposition or curing, and concludes with post-processing steps including support removal and surface finishing [19]. Implementation demands integration with existing CAD libraries and BIM systems, standardized file formats (STL, 3MF), and workforce training in design principles and quality control protocols. Material handling varies from humidity-controlled thermoplastic storage for FDM to inert atmosphere requirements for metal powder systems [30].

Technology selection should evaluate total ownership costs including equipment ($5000–$500,000), materials ($25–$500/kg), and training investments [31,32,33]. Successful implementation requires understanding design constraints such as minimum wall thickness (0.4–1.0 mm for FDM), overhang limitations, and build volume restrictions that influence part orientation and assembly strategies. Break-even analysis typically favors 3DP for low-volume, high-customization applications common in FM environments, with documented cost advantages in spare parts production and emergency repairs [31]. This technical foundation enables informed decision-making for FM applications across construction, maintenance, and supply chain domains discussed in Section 3 throughout this review.

1.2.4. Limitations and Challenges of 3DP Technology

Despite its significant advantages, 3D printing faces several inherent limitations within facilities management applications, including material constraints such as a narrower range of compatible options compared to traditional manufacturing, alongside concerns about long-term durability and UV resistance for outdoor use [19]. The layer-by-layer nature of fabrication typically results in slower production speeds for high-volume output than processes like injection molding, while most methods produce visible layer lines that require additional post-processing to achieve a high-quality surface finish [34]. 3D printing technologies are further limited by the maximum build volumes supported by current equipment, restricting the dimensions of components that can be produced in one piece [35]. Adoption of industrial-grade printers demands substantial initial capital investment, and successful implementation within facilities management relies on specialized technical expertise in areas such as CAD design, materials science, and printer operation [34].

1.3. Scope of Review

This review focuses specifically on the applications, benefits, and challenges of Three-Dimensional Printing (3DP) within the scope of Facilities Management (FM) for smart and sustainable building operations. The analysis includes peer-reviewed journal articles and high-impact conference proceedings published from 2010 onwards, with an emphasis on empirical studies, systematic reviews, and sector-focused case reports. Only publications in English were included. Technologies addressed comprise a broad range of additive manufacturing methods relevant to FM, notably excluding biomedical and non-FM-specific manufacturing contexts. Geographical coverage is global, aiming to capture diverse case applications and strategies. The review does not address purely theoretical or simulation-only studies lacking operational relevance to FM.

1.4. Problem Statement

Despite increasing interest in digital transformation within the built environment, the integration of 3DP into FM remains underexplored, fragmented, and largely anecdotal.

This systematic review directly addresses these limitations by synthesizing domain-specific evidence, critically mapping barriers and opportunities for 3DP adoption in FM, and outlining a research agenda to advance both practical implementation and academic scholarship.

To the best of our knowledge, this is the first systematic review dedicated specifically to 3DP in facilities management, aiming to establish a cornerstone for further research toward sustainability, operational efficiency, and resilience in smart FM practices.

1.5. Objectives

This review aims to provide facilities managers, researchers, and practitioners with a critical, sector-specific synthesis of three-dimensional printing (3DP) applications and challenges in FM. The objectives are to:

• Map and critically assess current 3DP applications in FM domains such as construction, maintenance, and supply chains.
• Evaluate key benefits, including on-demand, localized fabrication, reduced downtime, and sustainability gains, and major barriers to adoption, such as workforce readiness, material limitations, regulatory uncertainty, and standardization issues.
• Propose actionable recommendations for integrating 3DP with digital FM tools (e.g., BIM, digital twins) and outline a future research agenda to guide evidence-based, effective deployment.

2. Methodology

This section presents the systematic methodology employed to identify, evaluate, and synthesize literature on 3D printing applications in facility management. The methodology encompasses five key components: database selection and search strategies, systematic screening and inclusion criteria, quality assessment frameworks, data extraction protocols, and thematic analysis approaches. Each component is designed to ensure comprehensive coverage while maintaining methodological rigor and minimizing bias. This systematic approach establishes the evidence base for the subsequent analysis and recommendations presented in this study.

2.1. Review Design

This systematic review applies a concept-centric synthesis framework to map and critically evaluate the intersection of 3D Printing (3DP) and Facilities Management (FM). The methodology was structured to ensure that the analysis draws from high-quality, peer-reviewed research while maintaining FM-specific relevance throughout.

To strengthen methodological transparency, the review was also aligned with the PRISMA 2020 guidelines. The completed PRISMA 2020 Checklist is provided as Supplementary Material. The process combined structured database searches with other identification methods (citation chaining and organizational/website sources). Records were subjected to duplicate removal, title/abstract screening, full-text eligibility assessment, and final inclusion. A quality appraisal framework was further applied to assess methodological rigor and relevance. Figure 5, Figure 6, Figure 7 and Figure 8 provide a visual overview of the search strategy, domain distribution, PRISMA study selection, and quality appraisal outcomes.

2.2. Data Collection Strategy

A comprehensive search was conducted using well-established academic databases including Google Scholar, ScienceDirect, MDPI, and ProQuest. Searches were limited to literature published after 2010, reflecting the maturity of 3DP applications and the continued evolution of FM as a discipline. Keywords such as “3D printing,” “additive manufacturing,” “facilities management,” and “potential applications” were used. Reference lists were scanned for additional relevant sources.

This multi-source approach is detailed in Figure 5, which depicts the integration of database and supplementary search strategies.

Figure 5. Search criteria and process of collection.

Figure 5. Search criteria and process of collection.

2.3. Screening, Inclusion, and Exclusion Criteria

• Inclusion:

  ○

  Articles focusing explicitly on 3DP/AM applications in FM-related construction, building operations, maintenance, and FM-related supply chains.

  ○

  Empirical studies, case reports, systematic reviews, and high-impact conference contributions.

  ○

  Studies published in English, post-2010.

• Exclusion:

  ○

  Duplicate records, non-English publications, and sources lacking substantive methodological description or sectoral relevance.

  ○

  Non-peer-reviewed or commercial/promotional articles.

The screening process followed (Figure 6) PRISMA guidelines:

Figure 6. PRISMA 2020 flow diagram.

Figure 6. PRISMA 2020 flow diagram.

2.4. Data Extraction and Thematic Categorization

Data from selected studies were coded under: 3DP technology type, FM application domain, stakeholder impacts, operational outcomes, and barriers/enablers. Empirical results were extracted verbatim where available.

2.5. Sector Domain Distribution

The included studies were classified by Facilities Management domain to highlight concentrations and research gaps. Figure 7 presents this distribution, categorizing studies into construction, supply chain management, maintenance and repair, and other FM-related applications. This domain-wise breakdown clarifies the thematic emphasis of current research and provides context for the analytical framework adopted in the subsequent findings.

Figure 7. Percentage Contribution-Domain-specific literature.

Figure 7. Percentage Contribution-Domain-specific literature.

Beyond domain-level classification, it is equally important to present the review process in its entirety, from initial identification to synthesis. This ensures transparency in how the included studies were collected, filtered, and analyzed.

2.6. Quality Assurance and Study Assessment

Quality Assessment Framework: We developed four binary criteria to evaluate study quality: peer-reviewed publication, FM domain relevance, methodological transparency, and data availability. These criteria were selected to balance rigor with inclusivity, recognizing that restrictive filters might exclude valuable case studies in this emerging field. The distribution of quality scores across these criteria is visualized in Figure 8.

Data Coding: We coded each study across five dimensions: technology type (FDM, SLA, SLS, etc.), FM domain (construction, maintenance, supply chain), study methodology, reported outcomes (lead time, cost, quality metrics), and implementation factors (skills, standards, integration needs).

Inter-Rater Process: Two authors independently coded 20 studies (11% sample) to establish consistency, resolving disagreements through discussion. We divided the remaining studies between reviewers with regular cross-checking of coding decisions.

Limitations: We acknowledge that no formal inter-rater statistics were computed due to qualitative coding categories. Our binary quality criteria don’t capture methodological nuances. Meta-analysis wasn’t attempted due to study heterogeneity. The English-language, peer-reviewed focus may have excluded relevant industry reports.

Figure 8. Quality appraisal scores (1 = lowest, 5 = highest) across peer-review, FM relevance, transparency, and availability.

Figure 8. Quality appraisal scores (1 = lowest, 5 = highest) across peer-review, FM relevance, transparency, and availability.

3. Applications and Results

This section synthesizes empirical findings from the reviewed literature, organized by key FM application domains. Each subsection examines specific implementations, documented benefits, and operational outcomes to establish the current state of 3D printing integration in facility management practice. The section concludes with a comparative analysis identifying patterns, gaps, and emerging trends across all application areas.

The analysis focuses on three core domains where 3D printing intersects with facility management: construction, supply chain management, and maintenance & repair. Each domain is examined through sectoral case studies and tabular summaries that demonstrate how 3D printing addresses persistent FM operational challenges, beginning with construction applications.

3.1. Summary of Representative Studies

To provide a high-level overview of the current state of research on 3D printing within FM domains, the following table summarizes key representative studies evaluated in this review. Each entry includes the FM domain, technology involved, main findings, and noted limitations as stated in following

Table 1. High-level overview of 3DP research in FM.

Author (Year)	FM Area	3DP Technology	Main Findings	Noted Limitation
Ingaglio et al. [36]	Construction	Binder Jetting Cement	Achieves complex, load-bearing prototypes	Scalability, material cost
Kim et al. [37,38]	Maintenance	Metal AM, CAD Library	Enables fast, on-site part replacement	Technical skills required
Khajavi et al. [39]	Supply Chain	Metal AM	Distributed spare part manufacturing, lead time reduction	Machine automation needed
Yeon et al. [40]	Infrastructure	Concrete 3DP	Eco-friendly spall repair	Regulatory approval
Nicolau et al. [41]	Furniture	FDM (Plastic)	Custom furniture parts, improved repair	Limited industry standard

.

3.2. Construction Applications

3.2.1. Role and Advantages

3DP has profoundly expanded possibilities in FM construction by enabling rapid, on-site fabrication of custom-building components, prototyping architectural features, and reducing both lead times and material waste. The technology achieves complex geometries beyond traditional manufacturing limits while accelerating project timelines through automated, digital modeling-to-production cycles. Additionally, 3DP minimizes waste and improves sustainability in material use, addressing both environmental and cost concerns.

3.2.2. Case Studies and Key Innovations

Many recent studies have explored the practical and technical advantages of 3D printing in FM construction projects. To illustrate these advances,

Table 2. Construction Applications Summary.

Researcher	3DP Process	Material	Parts Made	Comments
Ingaglio et al. [36]	Binder jet cement-based printing.	Dry cementitious mix comprised of round-grain fine aggregates and calcium sulfoaluminate (CSA) cement	Tests samples (Cube, Dogbone, Prism) for mechanical characterization	It demonstrates the potential of binder jet printing in construction with CSA cement, achieving compressive strengths of 5.94–6.70 MPa and flexural strengths of 1.76–2.39 Mpa.
Shakor et al. [42]	standard inkjet printing	Portland cement (OPC) (Geelong cement) and calcium aluminate cement (CAC) (CIMENT FONDU, Kerneos).	Tests samples for compressive strength and porosity measurement	They developed a unique cement mix for 3DP, achieving a maximum compressive strength of 8.26 MPa and a minimum porosity of 49.28% at optimal saturation levels.
Mahdy et al. [43]	the robocasting/direct ink writing (RC/DIW)	salt and sand, Ethylene-vinyl acetate polymer (EVA)	SaltBlock prototype	Salt Block achieved 9.5 MPa compressive strength and 0.94 W/m2K thermal performance, demonstrating significant environmental and economic benefits for desert construction.
Keating and Oxman [44]	Robotic Spray Foam & Machining	PU	Dome prototype	Demonstrated the use of a 6-axis robotic arm for integrated 3DP, milling, and sculpting, highlighting its potential for multi-functional and efficient construction processes
Furel et al. [45]	Robotic Foam Printing	PU	lost formwork for a single-storey small house	Demonstrated Batiprint3D™, achieving 30–40% higher thermal performance in social housing constructed in just 54 h
Lublasser et al. [46]	Robotic Application of Foam Concrete on Walls	Foamed Concrete	Thermal reinforcement of existing walls	Lublasser et al. (2018) demonstrated the potential of robotic 3DP to apply highly insulating, recyclable foam concrete façades to existing buildings to meet energy-efficiency standards.
Mechtcherine et. al. [47]	Extrusion with robotic boom	Foamed Concrete	Monolithic thermo-structural walls	3D-printed foamed concrete was used for monolithic, load-bearing, and insulating walls.
Li et al. [48]	Extrusion-based portable 3DP apparatus	local seawater and coral, Portland cement sand, glass fiber, and basalt fiber	Test specimens for bending and compression testing	Demonstrated the potential of using 3D printable fiber-reinforced seawater coral sand mortar, achieving high flexural and compressive strengths for sustainable construction in remote areas.
Le et al. [49]	Extrusion-based 3DP apparatus	Cement, Flyash, Silica fumes, polypropylene fibers	Test specimens for bending and compression testing	The optimized mix with a 3:2 sand-binder ratio and 1.2 kg/m3 of polypropylene fibers achieved 110 MPa compressive strength at 28 days. It was validated through the successful manufacture of full-scale freeform components.

presents a selection of prominent case studies, specifying the processes, materials used, outcomes, and key findings documented in recent research.

3.2.3. Comparative Evaluation

Comprehensive reviews of these innovations show consistent improvements in speed, adaptability, and environmental footprint across construction scenarios, positioning 3DP as a cost-effective and sustainable upgrade for FM projects.

3.3. Supply Chain Management (SCM)

3.3.1. Role and Advantages

Integration of 3DP into FM’s supply chain dramatically changes spare parts logistics, inventory practices, and vendor reliance [50]. Building on this, Ryan et al. [51] outlined strategic scenarios demonstrating how additive manufacturing could restructure supply chains, while Scott and Harrison [52] provided an early end-to-end framing of AM within supply chain settings, highlighting both the potential to reduce lead times and inventories and the challenges of coordination and standardization.

These transformative changes manifest in three key areas. On-demand, localized production reduces downtime and transportation costs by eliminating the need for extensive warehousing and long-distance shipping of components. Just-in-time inventory models cut storage costs and avoid obsolescence issues that plague traditional spare parts management, where items may sit unused for years before becoming outdated. Additionally, customization at point-of-use increases organizational agility in emergency situations or unique asset scenarios, allowing facility managers to respond rapidly to unexpected maintenance needs without waiting for specialized parts procurement.

3.3.2. Sectoral Examples

The following

Table 3. Supply Chain Management Applications Summary.

Sr. No.	Researcher	3DP Process	Supply Chain Area	Comments
1	Khajavi et al. [39]	Metal AM	Configuration of spare parts supply chains in the aeronautics industry using additive manufacturing.	Distributed production of spare parts using AM technology can lower costs and enhance flexibility but requires advancements in machine automation and production speed.
2	Corsini, Aranda-Jan & Moultrie [50]	Extrusion-based AM	Humanitarian supply chain logistics, distributed production of spare parts and essential goods for relief operations	3DP reduces lead times and supplier dependency, enhances flexibility and resilience in emergencies, but faces barriers in quality control, scalability, and local capacity building.
3	Jia et al. [53]	Extrusion-based 3DP	Impact of 3DP on profitability and business models in the chocolate industry.	Early 3D printing technology adopters can gain a competitive advantage, disrupting traditional supply chains.
4	Harbaugh [54]	FDM	On-demand manufacturing and in-space production.	Demonstrated successful 3DP of a ratchet wrench on the ISS from a transmitter design file, highlighting the potential for reducing dependency on Earth-based resupply missions.
5	Knofius et al. [55]	AM in general	Part Consolidation and Spare Parts Management	Consolidation with AM often increases total costs due to replacing entire components instead of defective subcomponents.
6	Sirichakwal and Conner [56]	AM in general	Spare parts inventory management.	3DP reduces holding costs and replenishment lead times, positively impacting total inventory costs and stock-out probabilities, especially for low-demand parts.
7	Ryan et al. [57]	Scenario-based AM (multiple technologies)	Strategic supply chain design, scenarios for AM integration	Identified four scenarios showing how AM can reshape inventory, production, and distribution models
	Mecheter et al. [58]	AM in general	Systematic review of spare parts applications	Comprehensive analysis of AM benefits for spare parts supply chains, identifying key implementation factors and performance metrics across multiple industries.
	Feldmann & Pumpe [59]	Various AM processes	Holistic decision framework for global supply chains	Developed multi-criteria framework for 3DP investment decisions, addressing location, technology, and capacity planning considerations.
8	NASA/ISS (Harbaugh [54])	Tool production in orbit	Space operations	Rapid, remote, mission-critical production.

presents a comprehensive summary of notable case studies and research highlighting how 3D printing is transforming supply chain practices within facilities management, including specific processes, impacted areas, and key outcomes.

3.3.3. Synthesis

Empirical evidence demonstrates substantial SCM efficiency gains, with early adopters reporting improved asset availability and resilience to supply shocks, benefits especially critical for FM in remote or mission-critical facilities. At the operational level, Eyers et al. [60] further demonstrated that industrial AM systems enhance flexibility and responsiveness, enabling agile production of spare parts while requiring new integration metrics. Recent systematic reviews consolidate evidence from over 70 studies, confirming that AM significantly reduces lead times, lowers inventory costs, and enhances resilience in spare parts management, while also identifying ongoing challenges around material quality, regulatory frameworks, and lifecycle sustainability [61].

3.4. Maintenance and Repairs

3.4.1. Role and Advantages

3DP revolutionizes FM maintenance by providing:

• Rapid prototyping and replacement for bespoke or obsolete parts.
• Localized, in situ repair, critical for minimizing downtime in essential services.
• Environmental improvements by reducing resource needs for replacement cycles.

3.4.2. Cases and Results

The Table 4 below details significant studies and practical implementations of 3D printing in facilities maintenance and repair, outlining specific technologies, application areas, and demonstrated benefits for operational efficiency.

Table 4. Maintenance and Repair Applications Summary.

Sr. No.	Researcher	3DP Process	M&R Specific Area	Comments
1	Wits et al. [62]	Different AM processes	Optimization of MRO	AM enables rapid customization and replacement of parts, reducing dependency on external suppliers and enhancing facility operational efficiency.
2	Kim et al. [37]	Metal AM with steel material	On-site maintenance of gaskets and O-rings using 3DP	Proposal of a part library-based information retrieval and inspection framework to support the maintenance of damaged gaskets and O-rings, validated through prototype systems
3	Kim et al. [38]	Metal AM SCS13 material	On-site repair of partially damaged parts (Ball) using 3DP technology	Proposal of a user-friendly maintenance framework including a parts catalog, automated part identification, and shape comparison for validating repairs, demonstrated with a damaged ball from a valve.
4	Yeon [40]	Concrete 3DP	Application of 3DP technology for spall repair	Proposal and environmental assessment of 3DP spall repair method as a more sustainable and efficient alternative to traditional partial-depth repair method
5	Nicolau [41]	FDM	Furniture manufacturing	3DP connectors enhance furniture assembly efficiency and customization, offering significant benefits for FM
6	Lastra et al. [63]	Various AM processes	Preventive maintenance spare parts	Demonstrated improved maintenance strategies through AM-produced spare parts, reducing downtime and inventory costs while extending equipment lifecycles.
7	Infrastructure case study [64]	FDM/SLA	Rapid infrastructure maintenance	Real-world application showing 3DP enabling faster repair responses, particularly beneficial for remote locations and critical infrastructure systems
8	Alzahmi, Shamayleh & Stefancich [61]	Various AM technologies (systematic review)	Spare parts management (multi-sector synthesis)	Consolidated evidence across 77 studies shows AM reduces lead times, costs, and inventory, while enhancing flexibility and resilience. Identifies gaps in sustainability, quality control, and regulatory frameworks.

Table 4. Maintenance and Repair Applications Summary.

Sr. No.	Researcher	3DP Process	M&R Specific Area	Comments
1	Wits et al. [62]	Different AM processes	Optimization of MRO	AM enables rapid customization and replacement of parts, reducing dependency on external suppliers and enhancing facility operational efficiency.
2	Kim et al. [37]	Metal AM with steel material	On-site maintenance of gaskets and O-rings using 3DP	Proposal of a part library-based information retrieval and inspection framework to support the maintenance of damaged gaskets and O-rings, validated through prototype systems
3	Kim et al. [38]	Metal AM SCS13 material	On-site repair of partially damaged parts (Ball) using 3DP technology	Proposal of a user-friendly maintenance framework including a parts catalog, automated part identification, and shape comparison for validating repairs, demonstrated with a damaged ball from a valve.
4	Yeon [40]	Concrete 3DP	Application of 3DP technology for spall repair	Proposal and environmental assessment of 3DP spall repair method as a more sustainable and efficient alternative to traditional partial-depth repair method
5	Nicolau [41]	FDM	Furniture manufacturing	3DP connectors enhance furniture assembly efficiency and customization, offering significant benefits for FM
6	Lastra et al. [63]	Various AM processes	Preventive maintenance spare parts	Demonstrated improved maintenance strategies through AM-produced spare parts, reducing downtime and inventory costs while extending equipment lifecycles.
7	Infrastructure case study [64]	FDM/SLA	Rapid infrastructure maintenance	Real-world application showing 3DP enabling faster repair responses, particularly beneficial for remote locations and critical infrastructure systems
8	Alzahmi, Shamayleh & Stefancich [61]	Various AM technologies (systematic review)	Spare parts management (multi-sector synthesis)	Consolidated evidence across 77 studies shows AM reduces lead times, costs, and inventory, while enhancing flexibility and resilience. Identifies gaps in sustainability, quality control, and regulatory frameworks.

3.4.3. Implementation Gaps

Challenges persist in quality assurance, regulatory compliance, digital skill needs, and harmonization of CAD libraries for FM.

3.5. Summary Chart

The bar chart (Figure 9) below visualizes the distribution of major application examples by FM sector, highlighting research and implementation density.

These results collectively affirm the broadening role of 3DP within FM as a driver of innovation, operational resilience, and sustainability. Empirical impacts span cost, resource use, and supply chain agility, while sector-specific challenges shape the path toward full realization of 3DP benefits.

The preceding analyses have highlighted the targeted implementation of 3DP across construction, supply chain, and maintenance & repair within facilities management. However, the versatility of 3D printing extends across an even broader array of facility types and operational needs. Table 5 consolidates diverse, real-world applications of 3DP documented in the literature, spanning manufacturing plants, healthcare, education, campus maintenance, and more. This synthesis underscores 3DP’s potential not only to address domain-specific challenges, but also to deliver tailored, on-demand solutions across the entire spectrum of FM practices.

Recent studies demonstrate 3DP’s versatility across sectors. For instance, one of the recent studies demonstrated that 3D-printed PLA and carbon fiber-reinforced PLA parts show varying wear performance based on infill rates and water absorption [65], highlighting material considerations for FM applications. New systematic reviews emphasize that continuous fiber reinforcement in 3D-printed polymers can dramatically improve mechanical properties, including tensile strength and durability [66], which is especially significant for lightweight structural components in FM environments. Rapid advances in additive manufacturing now enable tailored design and energy-efficient production of carbon fiber-reinforced composites, with scalable methods that reduce curing energy and enhance out-of-plane fiber orientation for improved wear characteristics [67]. Further developments in sustainable and hybrid fiber systems expand material options beyond PLA and pure carbon fiber, offering cost-performance balance for facility maintenance needs, though ongoing research highlights challenges in balancing cost, complexity, and long-term outdoor durability [68].

Table 5. Other Typical Applications of 3D Printing Across Various Facilities.

Facility Type	3D Printed Part	Purpose and Description	References
Manufacturing Plants	Custom Tooling and Fixtures	Parts are tailored for specific manufacturing processes or tasks, highlighting the adaptability of 3D printing.	[69,70]
	Prototypes	Rapidly created models for testing and validation before mass production crucial for product development.	[71,72]
	Replacement Parts	Components are no longer in production and are costly to store, so they are essential for machinery or vehicle maintenance.	[73]
	Personalized Components	Highly customized parts such as ergonomic handles or interfaces demonstrate 3D printing’s customization scope.	[51,74]
Medical Facilities	Biomedical Implants and Prosthetics	Tailored to individual patient needs, including custom implants and prosthetic devices.	[75,76]
Architectural Firms	Architectural Models	Detailed models of buildings for planning and client presentations, aiding in visualization and planning.	[77]
Educational Institutions (Research/Arts & Design)	Educational Models	Scaled or abstracted models, such as anatomical models, are used in schools or universities for educational purposes.	[78,79]
	Custom Laboratory Equipment	Tailored components for experiments such as custom Petri dishes, microscope parts, or fluidic channels.	[80]
	Robotics Components	Custom parts for student projects or research in robotics, including gears casings and structural elements.	[81]
	Engineering Prototypes	Functional prototypes for projects like vehicle parts, drones, or renewable energy solutions.	[82]
	Art and Design Projects	Custom sculptures jewelry or architectural models for student projects showcasing artistic applications.	[83]
	Theater and Film Props	Custom props for university productions ranging from historical replicas to fantastical objects.
	Campus Infrastructure Parts	Small replacement parts such as custom fittings, brackets, glide components of the floor box cover, or different coverings/skirtings are needed to maintain campus facilities.	[84]
	Desk and Chair Components	Durable parts like chair arms, arm pads, and desk legs are often replaced due to breakage or wear.	[85]
	Shelving Brackets and Supports	Custom supports for heavy loads are especially useful in libraries or labs.	[84]
Campus Maintenance	Handle and Knob Replacements	Replacements for broken handles and knobs on doors, drawers, and cabinets throughout campus buildings.
	Custom Light Fixture Parts	Unique components for light fixtures in specific areas or older buildings where replacements are hard to find.	[83]
	Equipment Mounts and Housing	Parts to mount or house various equipment in labs, such as camera mounts, projector housings, or computer stands.	[83]
	Decorative Elements	Custom elements to enhance the aesthetics of campus spaces or for specific events.	[85]
	Lab Fixture Components	Specific parts like clamps, stands, or holders are tailored for various laboratory setups.	[83]
	Chair Wheel/Caster	A tiny wheeled device is attached to the bottom of the chair legs for more effortless movement.	[86,87]
	Drawer Handles	Handles attached to drawers for opening and closing.	[83]

Table 5. Other Typical Applications of 3D Printing Across Various Facilities.

Facility Type	3D Printed Part	Purpose and Description	References
Manufacturing Plants	Custom Tooling and Fixtures	Parts are tailored for specific manufacturing processes or tasks, highlighting the adaptability of 3D printing.	[69,70]
	Prototypes	Rapidly created models for testing and validation before mass production crucial for product development.	[71,72]
	Replacement Parts	Components are no longer in production and are costly to store, so they are essential for machinery or vehicle maintenance.	[73]
	Personalized Components	Highly customized parts such as ergonomic handles or interfaces demonstrate 3D printing’s customization scope.	[51,74]
Medical Facilities	Biomedical Implants and Prosthetics	Tailored to individual patient needs, including custom implants and prosthetic devices.	[75,76]
Architectural Firms	Architectural Models	Detailed models of buildings for planning and client presentations, aiding in visualization and planning.	[77]
Educational Institutions (Research/Arts & Design)	Educational Models	Scaled or abstracted models, such as anatomical models, are used in schools or universities for educational purposes.	[78,79]
	Custom Laboratory Equipment	Tailored components for experiments such as custom Petri dishes, microscope parts, or fluidic channels.	[80]
	Robotics Components	Custom parts for student projects or research in robotics, including gears casings and structural elements.	[81]
	Engineering Prototypes	Functional prototypes for projects like vehicle parts, drones, or renewable energy solutions.	[82]
	Art and Design Projects	Custom sculptures jewelry or architectural models for student projects showcasing artistic applications.	[83]
	Theater and Film Props	Custom props for university productions ranging from historical replicas to fantastical objects.
	Campus Infrastructure Parts	Small replacement parts such as custom fittings, brackets, glide components of the floor box cover, or different coverings/skirtings are needed to maintain campus facilities.	[84]
	Desk and Chair Components	Durable parts like chair arms, arm pads, and desk legs are often replaced due to breakage or wear.	[85]
	Shelving Brackets and Supports	Custom supports for heavy loads are especially useful in libraries or labs.	[84]
Campus Maintenance	Handle and Knob Replacements	Replacements for broken handles and knobs on doors, drawers, and cabinets throughout campus buildings.
	Custom Light Fixture Parts	Unique components for light fixtures in specific areas or older buildings where replacements are hard to find.	[83]
	Equipment Mounts and Housing	Parts to mount or house various equipment in labs, such as camera mounts, projector housings, or computer stands.	[83]
	Decorative Elements	Custom elements to enhance the aesthetics of campus spaces or for specific events.	[85]
	Lab Fixture Components	Specific parts like clamps, stands, or holders are tailored for various laboratory setups.	[83]
	Chair Wheel/Caster	A tiny wheeled device is attached to the bottom of the chair legs for more effortless movement.	[86,87]
	Drawer Handles	Handles attached to drawers for opening and closing.	[83]

4. Discussions

This section critically analyzes the synthesized findings to identify patterns, barriers, and opportunities for 3D printing adoption FM. The discussion integrates cross-domain insights, stakeholder perspectives, and strategic implications while positioning findings within broader technological and industry trends. The analysis concludes with a framework for future research priorities and practical implementation guidance.

4.1. Synthesis of Findings

4.1.1. Sectoral Impact of 3D Printing in Facilities Management

The systematic review demonstrates that Three-Dimensional Printing (3DP) is reshaping the operational landscape of Facilities Management (FM) by enabling cost-effective, rapid, and sustainable solutions across construction, maintenance, and supply chain domains.

Evidence in construction projects highlights massive improvements in lead times, waste reduction, and design flexibility, especially in complex environments where traditional techniques fall short. 3DP’s ability to fabricate advanced, purpose-specific components accelerates project delivery and cost savings, with environmental benefits through reduced resource use and transportation.

In supply chain management, decentralized, just-in-time manufacturing enabled by 3DP substantially lowers inventory and logistics costs, and allows FM practitioners to respond swiftly to unexpected delays or procurement challenges. Industry examples—from aerospace spare parts to retail and even mission-critical space station tools—illustrate the transformative impact of distributed 3DP systems.

Maintenance and repair operations benefit from rapid prototyping, reduced downtime, and greater control over part customization and quality. Facility teams have demonstrated the practical value of part libraries, CAD model repositories, and streamlined replacement workflows that bypass legacy supply chains.

4.1.2. Barriers and Bottlenecks in Implementation

Despite demonstrated advantages, several challenges impede optimal adoption across FM sectors:

• Economic and Practical Feasibility: Cost–benefit assessments remain context-dependent; initial investments in hardware, training, and digital infrastructure may be substantial.
• Standardization and Quality Assurance: There is a lack of universally accepted quality protocols or certification paths for 3D-printed building components, especially in regulated FM environments [88,89,90,91,92].
• Skills and Workforce Readiness: Implementing 3DP requires upskilling FM staff in digital design, printer operation, data management, and troubleshooting—an undertaking that can slow execution or create resistance [93,94].
• Integration with Digital Ecosystems: Linking 3DP with BIM, IoT, and digital twins offers added value but demands robust interoperability and harmonized data standards [95,96].
• Regulatory and Safety Concerns: Compliance with industry, health, and safety standards lags behind technical advances; regulatory reform is needed for broad deployment, especially in healthcare and mission-critical infrastructures [90].

A nuanced understanding of stakeholder perspectives is essential for anticipating organizational barriers and drivers in 3DP adoption for FM.

Table 6. Various stakeholders’ perspectives.

Stakeholder	Opportunities	Concerns	Needs	Reference/ Source
Facilities Managers	Potential for streamlining maintenance processes	Concerns about the learning curve and training requirements	Need for a clear return on investment (ROI) justification	[63,64,97]
Maintenance Technicians	Opportunities for skill development and job enrichment	Apprehensions about job security and the impact on traditional roles	Importance of user-friendly interfaces and adequate training	[93,98]
Procurement and Supply Chain Managers	Potential for reducing inventory costs and minimizing stock-outs	Concerns about the quality and reliability of 3D-printed parts	Need for establishing new supplier relationships and quality control processes	[58,59,99,100]
Senior Management	Strategic value in terms of cost savings and operational efficiency	Concerns about the initial investment and the maturity of the technology	Importance of aligning 3DP initiatives with organizational goals	[100,101,102]

summarizes the primary opportunities, concerns, and operational needs identified across FM’s key stakeholder groups.

• Overcoming these barriers will require focused research, sector-specific pilot projects, workforce upskilling, and development of evidence-based decision-making frameworks, as highlighted in both the previous gaps section and throughout this review.

4.1.3. Synthesis with Broader Industry Trends

Current FM discourse emphasizes smart, sustainable, and resilient building operations. 3DP aligns directly with these imperatives, providing facilities with adaptive capacity in quickly evolving contexts—post-pandemic workspace transformation, circular economy goals, and shifting user demands. However, full realization of 3DP’s potential depends on bridging research gaps around sector-specific cost modeling and benchmarking, comparative analyses between traditional and 3DP-enabled FM practices, and standardization efforts with demonstration projects integrating BIM and digital twin platforms.

Table 7. Key Challenges and Future Directions.

Theme	Challenge	Action Needed	References
Cost-effectiveness	Varies by sector and scale	Field studies, lifecycle cost analysis	[55,103]
Quality assurance	Lack of clear standards	Develop certification and protocols	[88,89,104,105,106]
Workforce skills	Digital/operational gaps	Targeted training, professional development	[93,94,107,108]
Digital integration	Data fragmentation	Harmonize BIM/3DP standards, pilot studies	[95,96,109,110]
Regulatory compliance	Unclear safety, approval status	Partnership with regulators, pilots	[90,91,92]

summarizes these key challenges alongside corresponding future research directions and actionable steps needed to advance 3DP integration in FM.

4.1.4. Limitations of Current Literature

The review identifies several limitations in existing literature. Current research focuses predominantly on proof-of-concept and case studies, with fewer large-scale empirical trials. Research on long-term sustainability and lifecycle impacts remains sparse, and there is limited crossover between FM and advanced digital manufacturing literature. Future research should address these gaps by focusing on empirical validation of economic, social, and environmental benefits.

4.1.5. Strategic Recommendations

Strategic implementation of 3DP in FM requires focused investment in cross-sector demonstration projects that build evidence and best practices at every stage, from design to operation. Success depends on fostering collaborative partnerships among industry, academia, regulators, and technology vendors to accelerate skill-building and regulatory alignment. Organizations must prioritize digital integration to ensure seamless connectivity between 3DP assets, BIM, and data-driven management systems for real-time optimization. Advancing policy and certification frameworks through collaboration with authorities will establish necessary inspection protocols and certifications for FM-specific applications. These synthesized insights lay the groundwork for practical action and scholarly advancement, positioning FM to take full advantage of 3DP innovation in pursuit of smarter, more resilient, and sustainable facilities.

4.2. Identified Research Gaps

This review reveals critical knowledge gaps limiting systematic 3DP adoption in FM. These encompass decision-support frameworks, economic validation, digital integration, standardization protocols, and workforce development. Addressing these limitations requires targeted research initiatives detailed in Section 5.

• Lack of practical, science-based decision frameworks: There is no validated, operational model to help FM professionals systematically determine when and how to adopt 3DP over traditional methods, hindering evidence-based implementation and scaling.
• Limited economic and real-world feasibility studies: Few comprehensive cost–benefit analyses or longitudinal studies exist to quantify the long-term operational, financial, and sustainability impacts of 3DP integration in FM contexts. While recent studies have begun examining economic feasibility across different organizational scales [97], strategic cost–benefit frameworks for supply chain applications [101], and maturity models for systematic adoption [102], FM-specific economic assessments remain sparse and fragmented.
• Underexplored integration with digital FM tools: Empirical evidence and best-practice guidelines for seamless interoperability between 3DP and platforms such as BIM, IoT, and digital twins are still underdeveloped, creating barriers to digital FM transformation.
• Sector-specific barriers to standardization and certification: The establishment of industry-wide quality, safety, and regulatory standards for 3D-printed components in FM remains an unresolved challenge, especially for critical infrastructure and public-sector buildings.
• Workforce readiness and upskilling gaps: Systematic approaches for building digital and technical skills among FM staff, including hands-on training for 3DP operation and integration—are scarce, impeding broad-based adoption.

Addressing these gaps will require interdisciplinary research, pilot projects, and policy support to enable systematic, scalable, and resilient adoption of 3DP in facilities management.

4.3. Comparative Synthesis by FM Area

As reflected in Table 8, most empirical and case-based evidence of 3D printing in FM is concentrated in the construction domain, while the published literature addressing maintenance, repair, and supply chain applications remains limited in volume, scope, and methodological rigor. In these latter areas, available studies are typically exploratory, conceptual, or based on isolated pilot projects rather than large-scale or longitudinal analyses.

Table 8. Summary of 3D printing benefits, challenges, and evidence strength across FM domains.

FM Application	Key Benefits	Challenges/Barriers	Evidence Strength
Construction	Complex geometries, reduced timelines [111]	Upfront CAPEX, standards, scalability [112]	Moderate
Maintenance/Repair	Downtime reduction, on-demand parts [113,114]	Skills, part libraries, regulatory gaps [113]	Moderate
Supply Chain	Localized production, lower inventory, Reduced Lead times [115,116,117]	Integration, cost, industry uptake [116,117]	Moderate
Furniture/Interior	Customization, improved repairs, Reduced Lead times [118,119]	Limited adoption, standards, tooling [119]	Limited/Emerging

Table 8. Summary of 3D printing benefits, challenges, and evidence strength across FM domains.

FM Application	Key Benefits	Challenges/Barriers	Evidence Strength
Construction	Complex geometries, reduced timelines [111]	Upfront CAPEX, standards, scalability [112]	Moderate
Maintenance/Repair	Downtime reduction, on-demand parts [113,114]	Skills, part libraries, regulatory gaps [113]	Moderate
Supply Chain	Localized production, lower inventory, Reduced Lead times [115,116,117]	Integration, cost, industry uptake [116,117]	Moderate
Furniture/Interior	Customization, improved repairs, Reduced Lead times [118,119]	Limited adoption, standards, tooling [119]	Limited/Emerging

Cross-domain analysis reveals systematic variations in both research focus and evidence maturity. Across all domains, studies consistently demonstrate 3DP’s strength in rapid, customized part production, particularly evident in maintenance scenarios, while facing recurring limitations in material standardization and large-scale cost-effectiveness. Construction studies prioritize complex geometries and reduced timelines as key benefits, with challenges centered on upfront CAPEX, standards, and scalability, reflecting the sector’s focus on large-scale implementation. Conversely, maintenance/repair applications emphasize downtime reduction and on-demand availability, with barriers concentrated on skills, part libraries, and regulatory gaps, indicating a more operational, reactive focus. Supply chain applications target localized production and inventory optimization, facing challenges of integration complexity and cost modeling, suggesting strategic, system-level considerations. Notably, furniture/interior applications show customization benefits but face adoption and standards barriers, representing the most nascent evidence base.

These domain-specific patterns expose critical evidence contrasts that explain field heterogeneity. All domains demonstrate only moderate evidence strength, yet this uniformity masks important qualitative differences: construction research provides detailed material performance data but lacks service validation; maintenance studies offer operational case evidence but remain site-specific; supply chain analyses present comprehensive scenario modeling but vary substantially in cost assumptions; while furniture/interior research remains largely conceptual with limited empirical validation.

The convergence on ‘moderate’ evidence strength across domains reveals a fundamental research gap: while each area shows promise, none has achieved the robust, longitudinal validation needed for confident scaled adoption. This explains why FM adoption should be decision-framework-driven rather than technology-led; the evidence base requires systematic integration across domains rather than isolated technological advancement. The novelty of this review lies in exposing these cross-domain evidence patterns and their implications for strategic FM implementation.

4.4. Comparative Cost–Benefit Insights of 3DP Applications in FM

Table 6, in Section 4, reveals that stakeholder concerns about 3DP adoption center on economic justification and return on investment. To address these practical considerations, Table 9 consolidates quantified benefits and costs from empirical studies to guide implementation decisions.

Table 9. Comprehensive Cost–Benefit Analysis of 3D Printing in FM.

FM Domain	Application/Case Study	Reported Benefits	Reported Costs/Barriers	Quantified Value	Reference
Construction	CSA Cement Binder Jetting	Rapid prototype structures	High material cost; scalability concerns	Compressive strength 5.9–6.7 MPa	[36]
Construction	Inkjet Cement Mix	Durability improvements	High printer setup cost	Compressive strength 8.26 MPa; 49% porosity reduction	[42]
Sand Casting	Foundry Operations	Complex geometries, rapid production	Equipment CAPEX	75% Cost reduction ($3960 → $990/batch)	[120]
Medical Models	Surgery Planning	Reduced operating time	Setup and training costs	$1500–3700 saved/case; 62 min time savings	[121]
Supply Chain	Spare Parts (Aerospace)	Lead time reduction weeks → hours; fleet readiness	Machine automation costs; limited throughput	Annual savings $97,900/year	[39,122]
Supply Chain	Space Operations (NASA/ISS)	On-demand tool fabrication in orbit	Transportation of AM hardware to space	Eliminated Earth resupply dependency	[54]
Maintenance	Spall Repair (Concrete 3DP	Faster repairs, reduced waste, eco-friendly	Regulatory approval pending	30–60% inventory cost savings	[40,122,123]
Maintenance	Metal AM Gaskets/O-Rings	Avoided downtime, extended component life	Requires CAD libraries; technical skills	On-demand fulfillment (hours vs. weeks)	[37,120]

Table 9. Comprehensive Cost–Benefit Analysis of 3D Printing in FM.

FM Domain	Application/Case Study	Reported Benefits	Reported Costs/Barriers	Quantified Value	Reference
Construction	CSA Cement Binder Jetting	Rapid prototype structures	High material cost; scalability concerns	Compressive strength 5.9–6.7 MPa	[36]
Construction	Inkjet Cement Mix	Durability improvements	High printer setup cost	Compressive strength 8.26 MPa; 49% porosity reduction	[42]
Sand Casting	Foundry Operations	Complex geometries, rapid production	Equipment CAPEX	75% Cost reduction ($3960 → $990/batch)	[120]
Medical Models	Surgery Planning	Reduced operating time	Setup and training costs	$1500–3700 saved/case; 62 min time savings	[121]
Supply Chain	Spare Parts (Aerospace)	Lead time reduction weeks → hours; fleet readiness	Machine automation costs; limited throughput	Annual savings $97,900/year	[39,122]
Supply Chain	Space Operations (NASA/ISS)	On-demand tool fabrication in orbit	Transportation of AM hardware to space	Eliminated Earth resupply dependency	[54]
Maintenance	Spall Repair (Concrete 3DP	Faster repairs, reduced waste, eco-friendly	Regulatory approval pending	30–60% inventory cost savings	[40,122,123]
Maintenance	Metal AM Gaskets/O-Rings	Avoided downtime, extended component life	Requires CAD libraries; technical skills	On-demand fulfillment (hours vs. weeks)	[37,120]

As illustrated, the greatest cost savings and efficiency gains are realized in maintenance, spare part logistics, and situations demanding rapid custom solutions, all of which are directly impacted by the cost factors described above.

4.5. Implications for Policy and Practice

Understanding the practical and policy implications of 3D printing adoption in facilities management is critical for stakeholders aiming to foster smarter, more sustainable building operations. Based on the synthesized evidence and persistent gaps identified in this review, key recommendations emerge: FM leaders are encouraged to implement small-scale, high-value pilot projects to demonstrate measurable return on investment; organizations should invest in continuous workforce upskilling and digital literacy to support practical integration; collaboration between industry bodies and regulatory agencies is needed to expedite the development of robust quality and certification standards; and prioritizing interoperability between digital tools, such as BIM and IoT platforms, should be integral from the outset of implementation. Collectively, these actions can accelerate effective and scalable adoption of 3D printing technologies within the FM sector.

4.6. Limitations of the Review

As with any systematic review, this synthesis faces notable methodological and contextual limitations that readers should carefully consider.

Literature Base Constraints: Despite screening 179 studies, most were case studies, proof-of-concept demonstrations, or small-scale pilots rather than large-scale, rigorous empirical trials. This constraint limits our ability to generalize about long-term cost-effectiveness, comparative performance, or scalability to organization-wide adoption.

Methodological Limitations: The review includes only peer-reviewed, English-language publications from major databases, potentially overlooking relevant industry reports, technical documentation, and regional (non-English) scholarship. Considerable methodological heterogeneity, including differences in facility types, outcome measures, and 3DP technologies, precluded meta-analysis, resulting in a thematic synthesis reliant on subjective interpretation.

Economic Evidence Gaps: Although Table 9 presents available cost–benefit data, most economic claims in the literature lack rigorous lifecycle analysis, standardized evaluation metrics, or independent validation. Results often hinge on unique contexts or facility characteristics, constraining generalizability.

Publication Bias and Optimism: Published studies likely overrepresent successes and underreport failed or problematic implementations. As is common in this research area, the literature may thus reflect a more optimistic appraisal of 3DP’s FM potential than warranted by broader experience.

Geographic and Temporal Limitations: The majority of studies are from developed economies between 2015–2024, providing uneven geographic representation and limited longitudinal insight into long-term 3DP performance and organizational change.

Framework Validation: The review’s proposed decision-support framework (Figure 9) remains theoretical, lacking empirical validation through real-world case implementation.

These limitations do not negate the value of this review, but findings should be interpreted as preliminary evidence supporting pilot programs and targeted research rather than definitive guidance for industry-wide applications. Organizations are advised to pursue phased adoption, robust evaluation, and local feasibility assessments. The limitations highlighted here reinforce the importance of the future research agenda outlined in Section 5 to advance the maturity and empirical foundation of 3DP in facilities management.

5. Future Scope and Evolution

This section translates the identified research gaps and implementation barriers into actionable priorities for future investigation. The discussion presents both near-term research directions and a practical decision framework to guide facility managers in evaluating 3D printing adoption strategies. These recommendations provide a roadmap for advancing evidence-based integration of 3D printing technologies in FM practice.

The following strategic research agenda emerges from the identified gaps in current research and practice.

5.1. Development and Empirical Testing of FM-Specific Decision-Support Frameworks

Research should advance multi-criteria, science-based models that provide FM professionals with quantifiable criteria and validated workflows to determine when, where, and how to implement 3DP versus traditional approaches. Frameworks must be constructed using detailed operational data and piloted in real FM scenarios, with validation across diverse facility types and scales.

5.2. Comprehensive Techno-Economic and Longitudinal Assessments

Priority should be given to longitudinal studies that systematically quantify direct and indirect operational, sustainability, and economic outcomes of 3DP adoption across distinct FM settings (e.g., education, health care, municipal infrastructure). These studies must compare 3DP interventions with incumbent practices, revealing context-specific performance limits and cost structures.

5.3. Standardization, Certification, and Regulatory Adaptation for FM-Embedded 3DP

There is an urgent need for sector-driven investigations into the performance, safety, and durability of 3D-printed components deployed in FM contexts. Research should partner with standard bodies to define, test, and refine certification processes relevant to critical facility systems, accounting for both material and application-specific variability.

5.4. Workforce Upskilling and Targeted Educational Program Design

Methodologically robust interventions should be piloted to assess the most effective ways to elevate the technical and digital competencies of FM professionals in 3DP operation, design, and troubleshooting. Mixed-method evaluations should measure impacts on adoption, efficacy, and error reduction across facility environments.

5.5. Digital Integration with Core FM Platforms

Research should develop, implement, and empirically evaluate protocols for seamless data and workflow integration between 3DP and digital FM platforms (such as BIM and digital twins), including automated component specification and real-world validation through facility-based trials.

Focused pursuit of these research priorities—anchored in FM’s operational realities—will directly address persistent limitations, create a foundation for evidence-based best practice, and catalyze robust, scalable, and sustainable 3DP deployment across the facilities management sector.

5.6. Conceptual Decision Framework for 3DP Adoption in FM

Before FM organizations decide to adopt 3D printing, several essential questions must be systematically addressed to ensure fit, feasibility, and value. The decision flowchart in Figure 10 distills these considerations into an actionable sequence for facilities managers:

• Is the part or component adapted, or at risk of supply chain delay?
• Does the organization have sufficient in-house technical or digital expertise, or access to qualified partners?
• Are relevant regulatory or organizational standards met or achievable?
• Is there a strong business case in terms of cost, sustainability, or operational resilience?

This structured approach provides practical guidance for FM professionals to evaluate when and how 3DP solutions should be integrated into their operations, ultimately supporting more strategic, evidence-based technology adoption decisions. Key evaluation criteria include assessing business case support through cost analysis, sustainability benefits, and operational resilience improvements.

6. Conclusions

Three-dimensional printing (3DP) presents transformative promise for facilities management (FM), offering enhanced operational responsiveness, asset customization, and sustainable building lifecycle management. This systematic review of 179 studies demonstrates quantified benefits including inventory cost reductions of 30–60%, production cost decreases up to 75% for complex geometries, and lead time reductions from weeks to hours for spare parts applications.

Cross-domain analysis reveals that successful 3DP integration depends on organizational readiness and systematic decision-making frameworks rather than purely technological considerations. Construction applications show strong technical validation but face scalability challenges, while supply chain applications demonstrate clear economic benefits on-demand production and maintenance applications require comprehensive organizational change management.

Three primary barriers constrain mainstream adoption: absence of validated and systematic decision-support frameworks, insufficient standardization protocols, and limited workforce preparation for digital manufacturing adoption. These challenges often result in isolated pilot projects rather than systematic organizational transformation.

This systematic review provides the first comprehensive, domain-specific analysis of 3DP in FM contexts, establishing baseline evidence for future studies. The identified research gaps and proposed decision framework offer concrete directions for academic investigation and industry implementation. Realizing 3DP’s full value in FM requires deliberate, evidence-driven approaches to integration, regulation, and workforce development to position FM for greater efficiency and leadership in smart, sustainable built environments.