REVIEW ARTICLE

3D food printingAn innovative way of mass

customization in food fabrication
Jie Sun1,2*, Zhuo Peng3,4, Liangkun Yan3, Jerry Y. H. Fuh4 and Geok Soon Hong4
1

Industrial Design Department, Xian Jiaotong-Liverpool University, Suzhou 215123, China

National University of Singapore (Suzhou) Research Institute, Suzhou Industrial Park, Suzhou 215123, China
3
Keio-NUS CUTE Center, National University of Singapore, Singapore
4
Department of Mechanical Engineering, National University of Singapore, Singapore
2

Abstract: About 15%25% of the aging population suffers from swallowing difficulties, and this creates an increasing market need for mass customization of food. The food industry is investigating mass customization techniques to meet the individual needs of taste, nutrition, and mouthfeel. Three dimensional (3D) food printing is a
potential solution to overcome drawbacks of current food customization techniques, such as lower production efficiency and high manufacturing cost. This study introduces the first-generation food printer concept designs and
functional prototypes targeted to revolutionize customized food fabrication by 3D printing (3DP). Unlike the robotics-based food manufacturing technologies designed to automate manual processes for mass production, 3D
food printing integrates 3DP and digital gastronomy technique to customize food products. This introduces artistic
capabilities into domestic cooking and extends customization capabilities to the industrial culinary sector. Its application in domestic cooking or catering services can not only provide an engineering solution for customized
food design and personalized nutrition control, but also has the potential to reconfigure customized food supply
chains.
In this paper, the selected prototypes are reviewed based on fabrication platforms and printing materials. A detailed discussion on specific 3DP technologies and the associated dispensing/printing process for 3D customized
food fabrication with single and multi-material applications is reported. Lastly, impacts of food printing on customized food fabrication, personalized nutrition, food supply chain, and food processing technologies are discussed.
Keywords: customized food fabrication, mass customization, 3D printing, platform design, multi-material
*Correspondence to: Jie Sun, Industrial Design Department, Xian Jiaotong-Liverpool University, China; Email: jie.sun@xjtlu.edu.cn

Received: May 30, 2015; Accepted: June 21, 2015; Published Online: July 2, 2015
Citation: Sun J, Peng Z, Yan L K, et al. 2015, 3D food printingAn innovative way of mass customization in food fabrication. International Journal of Bioprinting, vol.1(1): 2738. http://dx.doi.org/10.18063/IJB.2015.01.006.

1. Introduction

bout 15 to 25 percent of people over the age

of 50 years old suffer from difficulties in
swallowing. Pureed foods can provide the
necessary nutrition to them, but most of these foods
are unappealing and unappetizing[1]. The Netherlands
Organisation for Applied Scientific Research (TNO)
has proposed printing of pureed food to help the el-

derly cope with their chewing and swallowing problems[2]. TNO has also suggested printing customized
meals for seniors, athletes, and expectant mothers by
varying nutrient components levels, like proteins and
fats. An increasing market need for mass customization on shapes, colors, flavors, textures, and nutrition
covers most of the food products, including personalized hamburgers, coffees, ice creams, cakes, and biscuits.

3D food printingAn innovative way of mass customization in food fabrication. 2015 Jie Sun, et al. This is an Open Access article distributed
under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/),
permitting all non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

27

3D food printingAn innovative way of mass customization in food fabrication

Many food forming or food structuring techniques

are optimized for mass production. Customized foods
are currently designed and made by specially-trained
artisans using techniques, which may involve assembling the various prefabricated components to meet
customers preferences. In general, the cost for producing a limited number of customized pieces is significantly high. To achieve mass customization in an
economic way, we need an innovative method to design and fabricate customized foods. With the rapid
development of online shopping and information
technologies, food customization techniques are experiencing a great revolution. Sloan[3] has listed three
ways to customize food design: (i) create online
virtual customized food by interactive interfaces and
invite customers to share their design and personal
experiences, such as donut design with varied shapes,
dough, filling, frosting, and topping, (ii) configure
online visual products for self-service and online order,
such as building your own pizza by Dominos pizzas
visual product configurator, and (iii) provide food
co-creation sites for gift giving with highly unique
food products, such as choosing a chocolate base and
adding exotic toppings to customize chocolate bars.
Three-dimensional (3D) food printing, also known
as Food Layered Manufacture (FLM) [4], can be one of
the potential alternatives to fabricate customized food
products. It integrates additive manufacturing and digital gastronomy techniques to produce 3D custom-designed food objects without object-specific
tooling, molding or human intervention. Thus, this
technique can increase production efficiency and reduce manufacturing costs for mass customization in
food fabrication.
1.1 Food Printing and Robotics-based Food Manufacturing
Cooking is one of the most important activities in our
life. A robotic chef capable of following recipes would
have many applications in both household and industrial environments. For example, cookie-baking robots
can locate ingredients, mix them in the correct order,
and place the resultant dough in a baking tray[5]. These
robots, equipped with operation/recipe libraries, can
perform basic tasks such as picking up an object,
putting it down or pouring[6]. Such robotics-based
techniques are generally designed to replace manual
processes in mass customization of food so as to reduce workload, save labor cost, and improve the efficiency of food manufacturing. Food manufacturers are
satisfied with such progress, and they are not aware of
28

the unique features of food printing[7].

3D printing (3DP) is a digitally-controlled robotic
construction process, which can build up complex
solid forms layer by layer and apply phase transitions
or chemical reactions to bind the layers together. Food
printing integrates 3DP and digital gastronomy techniques to manufacture food pieces with mass customization in shape, color, flavor, texture, and even nutritional value. As a result, a digital 3D model of customized food designs can be directly transformed to a
finished product in a layered structure[8]. Digital
gastronomy brings in cooking knowledge into food
fabrication so that our eating experiences can go
beyond merely taste and cover all the aspects of gastronomy[9]. 3D printing is not only a novel approach
to food fabrication, but also an economical and powerful technique for mass customization.
1.2 Overview
A number of articles and papers pertaining to food
printing have been published over the past few years.
Most of them have focused on fabricated, novel food
items. Recently, some researchers have started investigating fundamental-level issues, such as converting
alternative ingredients into tasty products for health
and environmental reasons. However, such information is scattered in various publications with different
technical focuses. The objective of this paper is to
gather, analyze, categorize and summarize the available information pertaining to the technology and its
impact on food processing. The rest of the paper is
organized as follows: Section 2 discusses food printer
concepts and platform designs, as well as diverse
printing materials. Section 3 investigates the 3DP
technologies for food printing from an engineering
perspective, including dispensing and printing technologies, multi-material and multi-printhead, and
mixing techniques. Section 4 discusses the impact of
food printing on customized food designs, personalized nutrition, food supply chain, and food processing
technologies. Finally, a conclusion is presented in
Section 5.

2. Food Printer Concepts and Platform

Designs
Food synthesizer, a very primary food printer
concept, is described in the movie Star Trek: The
Original Series in the 1960s, a replicating machine
that could synthesize meals based on user
requirements. The concept reveals peoples desire of

International Journal of Bioprinting (2015)Volume 1, Issue 1

Jie Sun, Zhuo Peng, Liangkun Yan, et al

instantly making personalized meals and replicating

exciting food designs. The first generation of food
printer concept designs and prototypes, designed 10
years ago, are now emerging into the public domain.
With a short history, a few research projects were
conducted from concept designs to an in-depth research on material extrusion and deposition.
2.1 Conceptual Ideas
Nanotek Instruments Inc. patented a rapid prototyping
and fabrication method for 3D food objects in 2001,
such as a custom-designed birthday cake[10]. However,
no physical prototype was built. Nico Klber[11] proposed a Molculaire concept design in Electrolux Design Lab competition, which incorporated molecular
gastronomy into the food printer design. This concept
aimed to print multiple materials using a small robotic

arm and created a fully-customized meal using normal

food. Philips Food Creation Printer introduced food
cartridges to create custom-designed food products[12].
An interactive graphical user interface was proposed
to select ingredients, quantities, shapes, textures, and
other food properties. This idea is applicable to customize any 3D food product. However, all of these
concept designs seem vastly unrealistic with no potential of implementation.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) introduced a digital gastronomy concept into food printer design and presented three conceptual designs as
shown in Table 1[13]. Each conceptual design focused
on different aspects of gastronomy right from mixing,
modelling, to transformation. These concepts seem
more realistic compared to the previous conceptual
designs, but are still far away to be technically feasible.

Table 1. Summary of conceptual designs on food printer

Concept Focus

Design Platform

Virtuoso Mixer To combine and mix diverse

ingredients, to control their
quantities, types, and source

Digital
Fabricator

Model and cook a combination of

ingredients into specific shapes
and dimensions

Robotic Chef

Transform existing ingredients

into new flavors and design
patterns

Top layer: storage containers to monitor

temperature, humidity, and weight
2nd layer: processing chambers dedicated to
mixing, whisking, and crushing
Bottom layer: extrusion unit with thermal control
A set of refrigerated canisters
A three-axis mixing/printing head onto the
printing surface
A fabricator chamber
Two robotic arms with five-degree freedom
A tool head to localize transformations such as
drilling, cutting, and dispensing
A heating bed for cutting/cooking/sintering

2.2 Platform for Food Printing

The recent expansion of low-cost desktop 3D printers
has led to food printing development since they utilize
very similar printing platforms. Food printer platform
consists of an XYZ three-axis stage (Cartesian coordinate system), dispensing/sintering units, and user interface. With computer-controlled, three-axis motorized stage and material feeding system, these platforms can manipulate food fabrication process
real-time. A food design model, after being translated
into machine path planning language (G-code, M-code,
etc.), can be easily defined in terms of printing speed,
deposition speed, and other geometric parameters.
Food composition can be deposited/sintered essentially point-by-point and layer-by-layer according to
computer design model and path planning. At least
four functions are proposed in order to invent and
personalize new recipes rather than simply automate
traditional food fabrication process. The proposed

Difficulties
Distribution and metering
between the layers
Machine cleaning
Waste minimization
Refilling canisters
Machine cleaning
Material supply to mixing
head and storage system
Fabricate diverse food
shapes
Complicated manipulation

functions are: metering, mixing, dispensing, and

cooking (heating or cooling)[13]. Only the dispensing
and cooking functions are available in the current
commercial or self-developed food printing platforms.
(1) Food printers based on commercial platforms: To
simplify development process and shorten development time, researchers modified commercially available, open source 3DP platforms for the purpose of
food printing. Common modifications are to replace
the original printhead with a specially-designed dispensing unit having an additional valve to control material feed rate, or replacing the standard inkjet binder
with food grade materials like starch mixtures.
The Fab@Home system, although not specifically
designed for food applications, was one of the universal desktop fabricators compatible with food materials[14]. Millen from Massey University[15] integrated
Frostruder MK2 on MakerBot platform to extrude
frost, where two solenoid valves were used to control
the flow rate of creamy peanut butter, jelly, and Nu-

International Journal of Bioprinting (2015)Volume 1, Issue 1

29

3D food printingAn innovative way of mass customization in food fabrication

tella. Figure 1 shows a food printing platform with a

printhead developed at the National University of
Singapore. The platform is built based on a modified
Prusa i3 platform with a self-developed extrusion
printhead. A cookie dough consisting of flour, sugar,
egg and butter, and food additives is used for this
printing experiment.
(A)

(B)

solidation of these layers until the completion of a 3D

object.
(3) User control interface design: User control means
full control of shape, ingredients, and materials, which
may significantly impact the creative design of food.
Thus, the user control interface design involves three
functions: (i) providing tools for shape, design, and
material selection for customized designing of food
pieces; (ii) transforming this design into a digital 3D
model; and (iii) planning dispensing pathway and
processingrelated parameters. It is essential to link
this user interface with an open-access, web-based
template library[19]. With this link, customers can design their own personalized food pieces, as well as
obtain or share design files online through a technology service provider.
2.3 Available Printing Materials

Figure 1. (A) Food printing platform and (B) Printhead

With the modified commercial platform, researchers can quickly create complex food shapes, and
compare the properties and fabrication processes of
various food materials. However, these platforms are
not flexible for further improvement and are only applicable for a limited range of materials, and therefore
they cannot support in-depth research.
(2) Food printers based on self-developed platform:
Self-developed platforms are built based on specific
requirements, such as creating 3D sugar structures
with a computer-controlled laser machine[16], building
cheese and chocolate 3D objects from edible
ingredients[17], or reducing the costs associated with
freeform fabrication of sugar products using
open-source hardware[18]. Self-developed platforms
have a wide range of material choices, and printheads
can be appropriately designed and implemented
among a few candidates, and dispensing parameters.
Therefore, fabrication process can be more flexible
and optimized.
In both commercial and self-developed platforms,
mechanical movements of substrate and dispensing
head(s) are achieved through computer control. First,
a digital 3D model is converted into multiple layer
data (STL files), and then this data is interpreted into
driving signals to stage driver motors through the regulated controller. The printhead moves and dispenses
one layer at a time according to its own characteristic
shape and dimensions, followed by binding and con30

Raw materials and unprocessed ingredients usually

have longer shelf life than the final food products. If
food products can be quickly printed on the spot based
on users requirements, people can have fresh meals
all the time. Substantial efforts have been made to
pre-process materials suitable for 3D printing and increase their thermal stability during post-processing.
NASA[20] has funded a project to determine the capabilities of 3D food printing technology to ensure nutrient stability for a variety of foods from shelf stable
ingredients, while minimizing waste. Generally, the
available printing materials can be classified into three
categories based on their printability.
(1) Natively printable materials: Natively printable
materials like hydrogel, cake frosting, cheese, hummus, and chocolate can be extruded smoothly from a
syringe[21]. The mixture of sugars, starch, and mashed
potato were tested as powder materials in Z Corporation powder/binder 3D printer[22]. A number of sugar
teeth were fabricated for demonstration. However,
none of them is the main course of meals. Some traditional foods were tested for printability study using
Fabaroni[23]. Judging by the printing viscosity, product
consistency, and solidifying properties, the most successful material was pasta dough. Food products made
by natively printable materials can be fully customized for taste, nutritional value, and texture. Some of
the natively printable materials are stable enough to
hold the shape after deposition and do not require further post processing. Thus, they can be reserved for
medical and space applications. Other composite formulations such as batters and protein pastes may re-

International Journal of Bioprinting (2015)Volume 1, Issue 1

Jie Sun, Zhuo Peng, Liangkun Yan, et al

quire post-processing to improve taste and nutrition

absorption. This will make it more difficult for food
product structures to retain their shapes[19].
(2) Non-printable traditional food material: Food
like rice, meat, fruit, and vegetables, largely consumed
by people daily, are not printable by nature. To enable
their capability of extrusion, adding hydrocolloids in
these solid materials has been approved and utilized in
culinary fields. Lipton et al.[19] used simple additives
to modify traditional food recipes and created complex geometries and novel formulations. Although
solid foods and semi-solid liquids have already been
manipulated to become printable by gastronomic
tricks, it is difficult to test and modify the whole list of
traditional food materials. One solution is to use a
small group of ingredients to create a platform with
extensive degrees of freedom of texture and flavor. By
fine-tuning hydrocolloids concentrations, a very wide
range of textures (i.e., mouthfeels) can be achieved
such as cooked spaghetti, cake icing, tomato, etc. The
flavors can be altered by adjusting the amount of flavor additives being added. Cohen et al.[21] experimented food texture using two hydrocolloid systems,
and explored structural requirements for postprocessing materials such as protein pastes and cake
mixtures.
(3) Alternative ingredients: Introducing alternative
ingredients in food products can be one of the solutions to deal with the global crisis of food shortage. In
the Insects Au Gratin project, Susanna Soares
et al.[24] mixed insect powders with extrudable icing
and soft cheese to shape food structures and make
tasty pieces with 3D printing. When compared with
traditional meat products, the protein concentration in
insect powder, an alternative source for protein intake,
is slightly higher. Food printing can greatly contribute
to make unpleasant aesthetics and cultural background
of insects more appealing to consumers.
(4) Post-processing: A majority of traditional edibles
need post-processing, such as baking, steaming, or
frying after shapes are constructed. This involves different levels of heat penetration and results in a
non-homogenous texture. Lipton et al. successfully
used a modified recipe with cocoa material to print
cookies with complex internal geometries, which
could retain their shape after the baking process[19].
Basically, the food printing process does not require
a high energy source to completely remove liquid
contents from food composition. But the fabricated
layer should be sufficiently rigid and strong to support

its own weight and the weight of subsequent layers,

without a significant deformation or change in shape.

3. 3D Food Printing Technologies

3D food printing has significant advantages in
high-value, low volume food fabrication, particularly
for customized items in mass food service. Some
printers used thermal energy from laser/hot air/heating
element to sinter or melt powder, and others used
inkjet-type printing heads to accurately spray binder
or solvent. A summary of the applicable 3DP technologies can be found below.
3.1 Current 3D Food Printing Technologies
(1) Selective Sintering technology: Sugars and sugar-rich powders can be selectively sintered to form
complex shapes. After a layer of fresh powder is
spread, a sintering source (hot air in Figure 2(A) or
laser in Figure 2(B)) moves along x- and y-axes to
fuse powder particles so that they can bind together
and form a solid layer. This process is repeated by
continuously covering the fused surface with a new
layer of material until the 3D object is completed[25].
TNOs Food Jetting Printer[2] applied laser to sinter
sugars and Nesquik powders. The sintered material
formed the part whilst the un-sintered powder remained in place to support the structure. The CandyFab[18] applied a selective low-velocity stream of hot
air to sinter and melt a bed of sugar. The fabrication
powder bed is heated to just below the material melting point to minimize thermal distortion and facilitate
fusion among layers. Selective sintering offers more
freedom to build complex food items in a short time
without post-processing. It is suitable for sugar and
fat-based materials with relatively low melting points.
However, the fabrication operation is complicated as
many variables are involved.
(2) Hot melt extrusion: Hot-melt extrusion, also
called fused deposition modeling (FDM), was first
described in Crumps work[26]. In Figure 3, melted
semi-solid thermoplastic material is extruded from a
movable FDM head and deposited onto a substrate.
The material is heated slightly above its melting point
so that it solidifies almost immediately after extrusion
and fuses to the previous layer.
This technology is widely applied to create personalized 3D chocolate products[10,17,27]. Using FDM-based
extrusion system, Hao et al.[17] compared the material
properties among various food items and printed 3D

International Journal of Bioprinting (2015)Volume 1, Issue 1

31

3D food printingAn innovative way of mass customization in food fabrication

chocolate products with different shapes and sizes.

MIT Researchers used hot melt chocolate as a dispensing liquid and developed a functional prototype
named digital chocolatier to fabricate customized
chocolate candy[13,28]. In this research, the compressed

air was applied to melt chocolate and force it out of

the chambers. A 3D Food-Inks Printer which dispenses 3D color images on extruded base material may
also fall into this category[29], while a post-processing
step was applied to fuse the layers together.

Figure 2. (A) Selective hot air sintering and (B) Selective laser sintering

The advantages of food printer designed based on

FDM include compact size and low cost of maintenance. However, shortcomings such as a seam line between layers, long fabrication time, and delamination
caused by temperature fluctuation, can be further improved.

platform. Sugar Lab[31] used sugar and different flavor

binders to fabricate complex sculptural cakes for weddings and other special events. This fabrication
adopted 3D Systems Color Jet Printing technology,
and the material and fabrication process met all the
requirements of food safety. Binder Jetting offers advantages such as faster fabrication, ability to build
complex structures, and low ingredients cost. But the
fabricated products suffer from rough surface finish
and high sugar content, and the machine cost is high.
Post-processing may be required, such as curing at
higher temperature to strengthen the bonding among
layers.
(4) Inkjet printing: As shown in Figure 5, inkjet food
printing dispenses multi-material streams/droplets
from a syringe-type multi-channel printhead in a
drop-on-demand way and creates 3D edible food
products such as cookies, cakes, or pastries. It involves

Figure 3. Hot-melt extrusion (FDM)

(3) Powder bed binder jetting: In standard binder jetting technology, each powder layer is distributed
evenly across the fabrication platform, and liquid
binder sprays to bind two consecutive layers of powder[30]. As shown in Figure 4, the powder material is
usually stabilized by spraying water mist to minimize
the disturbance caused by binder dispensing. In edible
3D printing project, Southerland et al.[22] utilized sugars and starch mixtures as a powder material and a Z
Corporation powder/binder 3D printer as a fabrication
32

Figure 4. Powder bed binder jetting

International Journal of Bioprinting (2015)Volume 1, Issue 1

Jie Sun, Zhuo Peng, Liangkun Yan, et al

pre-patterning food items at multiple layers of

processing. The De Grood InnovationsFoodJet Printer[32] used pneumatic membrane nozzle-jets to drop
on-demand materials onto pizza bases, biscuits, and
cupcakes. The ejected stream/droplets fall under gravity, impact on the substrate, and dry through solvent
evaporation. The drops can form a two and half dimensional digital image as a decoration or surface fill.

Figure 5. Inkjet Printing

Compared with other methods, 3DP is an economical and innovative way for mass customization in food
fabrication. The quality of fabricated food items depends on the process and planning rather than peoples
skill. This technology can easily and accurately perform fabrication based on customer demands. Table 2

is a summary of current commercial 3DP applications

in food printing, in terms of materials, fabrication
platforms, and products.
3.2 Multi-material and Multi-printhead
Applying multiple materials is quite common in Customized food, including traditional food materials,
additives, and ingredients extracted from algae, beet,
or even insects. However, most of the food printers[24,33] use a single printhead to extrude a mixture of
multiple materials. Thus, they are not capable of controlling material distribution or composition within a
layer or a structure. To achieve controlled material
deposition and distribution in a drop-on-demand way,
more printheads are proposed. For multiple-printhead,
the data of individual layer is sent to a platform controller (either in a commercial or a DIY platform),
which activates a corresponding printhead and controls its feeding rate. Hence, food printers may perform multi-material object fabrication with higher
geometric complexity and self-supporting structure.
Researchers tried multiple-printhead using
Fab@Home 3D printer and tested with frosting, chocolate, processed cheese, muffin mix, hydrocolloid
mixtures, caramel, and cookie dough[19]. Dual-material
printing was only achieved for a limited material set.

Table 2. Comparison of 3DP technologies in food printing

Hot-melt extrusion

Sintering technology

Materials

Food polymers such as

chocolate

Low melting powder such as

sugar, NesQuik, or fat

Viscosity

103 ~ 105 cP

Not applicable

Platform

Motorized stage
Heating unit
Extrusion device

Motorized stage
Sintering source (laser or hot
air)
Powder bed
powder size:100 m

Printing
Resolution*
Fabricated
Products

Nozzle diameter: 0.5 ~

1.5 mm
Customized chocolates

Food-grade art objects, toffee

shapes

Inkjet powder printing

Inkjet printing

Powder such as sugars, starch,

corn flour, flavours, and liquid
binder
1 ~ 10 cP (Binder)

Low viscosity materials

such as paste or puree

Motorized stage
Powder bed
Inkjet printhead for binder
printing
nozzle diameter 50 m
Powder particle 100 m
Sugar cube in full color

Motorized stage
Inkjet printhead
Thermal control unit

More material choices

Better printing quality
Full color potential
Complex design
Slow fabrication
Expensive platform

5102 ~ 5103 cP

nozzle diameter50 m
Customized cookies,
Bench-top food paste shaping
Better printing quality

Pros

Cost effective
Fast fabrication

Better printing quality

Complex design

Cons

Low printing quality

Expensive platform
High power consumption
Limited materials

Machine

Choc Creator[33]

Food Jetting Printer[2]

Chefjet[34]

Slow fabrication
Expensive printhead
Expensive platform
Limited materials
Foodjet[32]

Company

Choc Edge

TNO

3D Systems

De Grood Innovations

* The printing resolution is determined by nozzle diameter and/or powder size.

International Journal of Bioprinting (2015)Volume 1, Issue 1

33

3D food printingAn innovative way of mass customization in food fabrication

A secondary material was utilized to support the fabrication[35] and was removed after fabrication. Figure
6 shows two examples of multi-printhead food printing samples fabricated by our group at the National
University of Singapore. The basic materials in this
biscuit recipe consist of flour, butter, sugar and egg
white. Food dyes are used to color the same recipe for
different layers and patterns.
One challenge in multiple material printing is that
multi-material may generate multi-scale ingredients
after processing. Gray[2] proposed using electrospinning to produce multiple food sub-components at a
micro-scale and further assemble them into multi-component composite structures. This is a new solution to shape non-traditional food materials under
multi-scale into appealing edible structures.

The agitated mixing can adjust mixing ratios dynamically so that the extruded food materials can continuously change color or composition. Millen[15] designed two rigs for agitated mixing: oscillating mixing
from periodic motion in a linear way, and conical surface mixing with a large contact area and friction
force. The former achieved an acceptable result in two
color mixing experiments. With further improvement,
they can be more appropriate for discontinuous food
flow mixing.

4. 3D Food Printing Impacts on Mass Customization

Figure 6. (A) Multi-material food design (B) Fabricated food

samples

Food printers introduce artistic capabilities to fine

dining and extend mass customization capabilities to
the industrial culinary sector. They also provide a research tool to manipulate food structure at multiple
scales. Many players are active in food printing area
such as 3D Systems, Choc Edge, and they are
competing with each other using different technologies and focuses for potential market opportunities[2,3234]. From a research perspective, TNO is a
leading organization on nutritional customization[2].
3D Systems is making a great effort to commercialize
the powder bed food printer (Chefjet) and an extrusion
base chocolate printer with Hershey[34]. Even though
these food printing technologies are still under development, it is important to understand their core value,
market applications, and potential impact on peoples
lifestyle.

3.3 Mixing Techniques

4.1 Professional Culinary in Daily Life

Even with multiple printheads, it is not possible to

develop a platform compatible with all food material
printing. An alternative solution is to combine and mix
a small group of ingredients to produce a relatively
large material matrix. Two types of mixing techniques
are explored to vary material composition and create
more combinations of flour-based semi-solid viscoelastic materials. They are, namely, the static and agitated mixing techniques.
The static mixing fully relies on the driving force
from material feeding and friction force between materials and the mixers built-in structure. It comes as a
static mixer concept for two-part epoxy adhesive resin
mixing and dispensing. This technique is suitable for a
continuous food flow mixing. However, a few technical issues need to be overcome like consistency of
food flow inside a helical structure, and the associated
cleaning process for food residue within the structure.

With a 3D food printing platform, designs from culinary professionals can be fabricated at any place by
downloading the original data files. Users can reproduce an original work by importing the corresponding
fabrication files that carry culinary knowledge and
artistic skills from chefs, nutrition experts, and food
designers. After downloading design files, the products can then be built in front of the customers using
their personal 3D food printer. It is a new context of
household product making, which would be impossible to achieve using the existing methods.

34

4.2 Customized Food Design

Most of the food manufacturing techniques are developed for mass production, while food creativity and
customization on shapes, structures, and flavors are
usually sacrificed. Food printing provides a platform
for consumer experimentation with food forms and

International Journal of Bioprinting (2015)Volume 1, Issue 1

Jie Sun, Zhuo Peng, Liangkun Yan, et al

flavors[31]. It could offer more freedom for home users

and designers to customize chocolate shaping[13,17,27]
and personalize full-color images onto solid food formats[23]. Figure 7 shows some customized food piece
samples fabricated by our group.
4.3 Personalized Nutrition
Besides general nutritional preferences, in the recent
years there has been a lot of emphasis on personalized
nutrition corresponding to individuals health status
and body-type requirements[36]. When food printing is
integrated with a nutrition model, users can calculate
the exact data of calories and other ingredients of fabricated products, and provide a precise understanding
of nutritional distribution. They can control their diet
by selecting ingredients and corresponding fabrication
parameters via a user interface. Hence, food printing
provides a convenient way to digitize peoples nutrition and energy intake and offer a better control of individual dietary. Personalized nutrition in food products can be determined according to online information on nutritional content, personal, and social preferences. Of course, there is a need for tailoring food
ingredients, even with well-known material properties,
to specific formulations under each fabrication.
Figure 8 shows a schematic diagram on how to
personalize nutrition in food printing.
First, a nutrition profile for various contents is suggested based on the requirements from different user

groups. Then, a fabrication planning is developed

based on recipe design, printing volume, 3D model
design, and flavor selection. A key factor here is to
adjust recipe design and printing volume control to
achieve the listed contents on the nutrition profile.
Thus, personalized nutrition can be realized in food
printing.
4.4 Customized Food Supply Chain
Food printing targets a build-to-order strategy with
higher production efficiency and lower overriding cost.
Under an e-commerce platform, consumers may configure or transact food designs and fabricate physical
products using a nearby production facility. To
achieve zero lead-time from design to market, plenty
of innovative food design websites and mobile apps
can assist users on design and order customized food
products. All of them will result in a great change in
customized food supply chains, reduce the distribution
costs, simplify customized food service, and bring
products to consumers in a shorter time. A description
of this new, customized food supply chain is shown
in Figure 9. It starts with customers searching for an
online food design platform based on their needs, and
selecting a food design. The corresponding design
data is transferred to a neighborhood Printing Service
Bureau. The selected food designs are fabricated at
this Bureau and are eventually delivered to the customers.

Figure 7. Customized food design and fabrication samples

Figure 8. Customized food with personalized nutrition

International Journal of Bioprinting (2015)Volume 1, Issue 1

35

3D food printingAn innovative way of mass customization in food fabrication

Figure 9. Customized food supply chain

4.5 Food Processing Technologies

Most of the food processing technologies associated
with chemical and physical changes may not match
the 3D printing process. This applies to composition
(ingredients and their interactions), structure, texture,
and taste. Ingredient formulations with varied combinations and fabrication conditions can generate various textures in products, which may go beyond a manageable level. Also, printing material property should
be rigid and strong enough to support the weight of
subsequently deposited layers. In other words,
conventional food processing technologies are
unlikely to fit into such a complicated scenario, and
they should be reformulated, such as pre-conducting
some processes (e.g., gluten formation and leavening)
and replacing remaining processes (e.g., shaping and
baking).

materials for cooking meat analogue or mock meat

dishes for vegetarians and Buddhists, which taste very
similar to meat. The research from Lipton[21] also
proved the concept of creating a wider range of textures and tastes by mixing small group of hydrocolloids and flavor additives. In other words, it is feasible
to create a wide range of food items with very similar
taste and shape by using a limited number of raw materials/ingredients. If such knowledge is embedded
into the food printing process, more innovative food
products and unique dining experiences can be
created.

5. Future Work and Conclusion

To model the relationship between inputs and outputs,

data quantification for each process (ingredients
metering, mixing, printing, baking, etc.) and communication protocols between different functions or processes should be established. Key process parameters
such as temperature, moisture, and food properties
(such as density, thermal, electrical conductivity, printing viscosity, and permeability) are often coupled. It
is crucial to digitalize a comprehensive fabrication
into steps and combine them together to formulate
a simulation model for manipulation. The data on
food properties can be obtained from measurement,
computerized database, handbook and theoretical
calculations. Since food properties often vary from
batch to batch, this simulation model should be able to
predict the result of a particular for a range of properties. It can also calculate the total amount of materials
required to construct the final products, the construction time, as well as calorie intake.

3D food printing has demonstrated its capability of

making personalized chocolates and producing simple
homogenous snacks. However, these applications
are still primitive with limited internal structures or
monotonous textures. To achieve consistency in food
fabrication, it is necessary to systematically investigate
printing materials, platform designs, printing technologies, and their influences on food fabrication. A
process model is expected to link design, fabrication,
and nutrient control together. With the development of
an interactive user interface, food printers may
become a part of an ecology system where networked
machines can order new ingredients, prepare favorite
food on demand, promote user's creativity, and even
collaborate with doctors to promote healthier diets.
Food printing may exert a significant influence on
various types of food processing. It provides designers/users with enhanced and unprecedented capability
to manipulate forms and materials. This versatility,
applied to domestic cooking or catering service, can
improve the efficiency to deliver high quality and
freshly-prepared food products to consumers with
personalized nutrition. It is also capable of creating
new flavors, textures and shapes to provide entirely
new and unique eating experiences.

4.7 Innovative Food Products

Conflict of Interest and Funding

Buddhist cuisine applies soy-based or gluten-based

No conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

4.6 Process Model and Digitalization

36

International Journal of Bioprinting (2015)Volume 1, Issue 1

Jie Sun, Zhuo Peng, Liangkun Yan, et al

This research is supported by the Singapore National

Research Foundation under its International Research
Center Keio-NUS CUTE Center @ Singapore Funding Initiative and administered by the IDM Program
Office. It is also partially sponsored by the Jiangsu
Province Science and Technology Support Program,
China under Grant No. BE2013057.

12.

References

13.

Luimstra J, 2014, EU Works on Food Printer to Create

Personalized Meals for the Elderly, 3Dprinting.com,
viewed May 11, 2015,
<http://3dprinting.com/news/eufoodprinter/>.
2. Gray N, 2010, Looking to the future: Creating novel
foods using 3D printing, FoodNavigator.com, viewed
May 1, 2015,
<http://www.foodnavigator.com/Science-Nutrition/Looking
-to-the-future-Creating-novel-foods-using-3D-printing >.
3. Sloan D, 2011, 3 Ways to Customize Your Food Online,
Mashable, viewed May 1, 2015,
<http://mashable.com/2011/01/24/customize-food-online/ >.
4. Wegrzyn T F, Golding M and Archer RH, 2012, Food
Layered Manufacture: A new process for constructing
solid foods. Trends in Food Science & Technology, vol.
27(2): 6672.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2012.04.006.
5. Bollini M, Barry J and Rus D, 2011, Bakebot: Baking
cookies with the pr2, in The PR2 Workshop: Results,
Challenges and Lessons Learned in Advancing Robots
with a Common Platform, IROS.
6. Beetz M, Klank U and Kresse I, 2011, Robotic roommates making pancakes, in 11th IEEE-RAS International Conference on Humanoid Robots.
7. Winger R and Wall G, 2006, Food product innovation:
A back ground paper, viewed May 29, 2015,
<http://www.fao.org/docrep/016/j7193e/j7193e.pdf >.
8. Levy G, Schindel R and Kruth J, 2003, Rapid manufacturing and rapid tooling with layer manufacturing (LM)
technologies: state of the art and future perspectives.
CIRP Annals-Manufacturing Technology, vol.52(2):
589609.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0007-8506(07)60206-6.
9. Van Bommel K and Spicer A, 2011, Hail the snail: hegemonic struggles in the slow food movement. Organization Studies, vol.32(12): 17171744.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0170840611425722.
10. Yang J, Wu L and Liu J, 2001, Rapid prototyping and
fabrication method for 3-D food objects, US Patent
6280785 B1.
11. Klber N, 2009, Interview with Nico Klber (Molculaire) Electrolux Design Lab finalist, viewed December
1.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

24.
25.

1, 2014,
<http://group.electrolux.com/en/interview-with-nico-kla
ber-moleculaire-electrolux-design-lab-finalist-2040/ >.
Philips Design Probes, image downloads FOOD,
2008, viewed May 1, 2015,
<http://www.design.philips.com/philips/sites/philipsdesi
gn/about/design/designportfolio/design_futures/design_
probes/downloads/food.page >.
Zoran A and Coelho M, 2011, Cornucopia: the concept
of
digital
gastronomy.
Leonardo,
vol.44(5):
425431. http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/LEON_a_00243.
Malone E and Lipson H, 2007, Fab@ Home: the personal desktop fabricator kit. Rapid Prototyping Journal,
vol.13(4): 245255.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/13552540710776197.
Millen C I, 2012, The development of colour 3D food
printing system, Master thesis, Massey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand.
Oskay W H, 2007, Solid Freeform Fabrication: DIY, on
the cheap, and made of pure sugar, viewed May 1, 2015,
<http://www.evilmadscientist.com/2007/solid-freeformfabrication-diy-on-the-cheap-and-made-of-pure-sugar/>.
Hao L, Mellor S, Seaman O, et al. 2010, Material
characterisation and process development for chocolate
additive layer manufacturing. Virtual and Physical Prototyping, vol.5(2): 5764.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17452751003753212.
The CandyFab Project, 2007, viewed December 14,
2014,
<http://wiki.candyfab.org/Main_Page>.
Lipton J I, Arnold D, Nigl F, et al. 2010, Multi-material
food printing with complex internal structure suitable
for conventional post-processing, in Solid Freeform Fabrication Symposium, Austin TX, USA.
2013, 3D Printing: Food in Space, NASA, n.d., viewed
May 27, 2015,
<http://www.nasa.gov/directorates/spacetech/home/featu
re_3d_food.html#.VWfTnc-qpBc>.
Cohen D L, Lipton J I, Cutler M, et al. 2009,
Hydrocolloid Printing: A Novel Platform for
Customized Food Production, in Solid Freeform
Fabrication Symposium (SFF09), Austin, TX, USA.
Southerland D, Walters P and Huson D, 2011, Edible 3D
Printing, in NIP & Digital Fabrication Conference,
Minnesota, USA.
MIT, Fabaroni: A homemade 3D printer, n.d., viewed
December 29, 2014,
<http://fab.cba.mit.edu/classes/MIT/863.07/11.05/fabaro
ni/>.
Soares S, 2011, Insects au gratin, viewed May 11, 2015,
<http://www.susanasoares.com/index.php?id=79>.
Deckard C and Beaman J, 1988, Process and control is-

International Journal of Bioprinting (2015)Volume 1, Issue 1

37

3D food printingAn innovative way of mass customization in food fabrication

26.
27.

28.

29.

30.

38

sues in selective laser sintering, American Society of

Mechanical Engineers, Production Engineering Division
(Publication) PED, vol.33: 191197.
Crump S S, 1991, Fast, Precise, Safe Prototypes with
FDM in ASME Annual Winter Conference, Atlanta.
Causer C, 2009, Theyve got a golden ticket, Potential,IEEE, vol.28(4): 4244.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1109.MPOT.2009.933608.
Coelho M, Zoran A, Nelson Z, et al. 2011, Cornucopia Digital Chocolatier Prototype, Marcelo Coelho Studio,
viewed May 22, 2015,
<http://www.cmarcelo.com/#/cornucopia/>.
Golding M, Archer R, Gupta G, et al. 2011, Design and
development of a 3-D food printer, in In Proceedings of
NZIFST 2011 Conference, Rotorua, New Zealand.
Sachs E, Cima M and Cornie J, 1990, Three
dimensional printing: rapid tooling and prototypes directly from a CAD model. CIRP Annals-Manufacturing

31.

32.
33.
34.
35.

36.

Technology, vol.39(1): 201204.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0007-8506(07)61035-X.
3D Systems Acquires The Sugar Lab, 3D Systems, 2013,
viewed December 22, 2014,
<http://www.3dsystems.com/de/press-releases/3d-syste
ms-acquires-sugar-lab>.
Foodjet n.d., viewed December 1, 2014,
<http://foodjet.nl/>.
Choc Edge n.d., 2014, viewed December 2014,
<http://chocedge.com/>.
3D Systems, ChelfJet,2014, viewed May 1, 2015,
<http://www.3dsystems.com/chefjet >.
Periard D, Schaal N and Schaal M, 2007, Printing Food,
in In Proceedings of the 18th Solid Freeform. Austin TX,
USA.
Watzke H and German J, 2010, Personalizing foods, in
An integrated approach to new food product development. Boca Raton, US, 133173.

International Journal of Bioprinting (2015)Volume 1, Issue 1