Paper ID #18024

Climbing to Cruising Altitude: Promoting an Academic Library’s 3D Print-ing Service

Mr. Daniel P Zuberbier, East Carolina University

Dan Zuberbier is the Education & Instructional Technology Librarian at East Carolina University (ECU).He planned for, launched, and currently manages the J.Y. Joyner Library 3D printing service which makes3D printing accessible to all students, faculty and staff at ECU, and teaches a course on 3D printing anddesign for the North Carolina Summer Ventures in Science & Mathematics Program. He previouslyworked as a high school Social Studies teacher in Arizona and Michigan, and holds an M.L.I.S. from theUniversity of Wisconsin-Milwaukee. His professional interests include teachers’ perceptions of schoollibrary programs and school librarians as a resource and assisting educators with integrating emergingtechnologies into the classroom.

Dr. Ranjeet Agarwala, East Carolina University

Dr. Ranjeet Agarwala serves as an Assistant Professor in the Department of Technology Systems at EastCarolina University. He holds a PhD in Mechanical Engineering from the North Carolina State University.Since 2001 he has taught courses in Engineering Design, Digital Manufacturing, and 3D printing, GD&T,Electro-Mechanical Systems, Statics and Dynamics. His research interests are in the areas on Advanceand Digital Manufacturing and its integration with the renewable energy sector.

Dr. Robert A. Chin, East Carolina University

Robert A. ”Bob” Chin is a member of the Department of Technology Systems faculty, College of Engi-neering and Technology, East Carolina University, where he has taught since 1986. He is the EngineeringDesign Graphics Division’s vice chair and in 2015, he completed his second term as the director of publi-cations for the Engineering Design Graphics Division and the Engineering Design Graphics Journal editor.Chin has also served as the Engineering Design Graphics Division’s annual and mid-year conference pro-gram chair, and he has served as a review board member for several journals including the EDGJ. Hehas been a program chair for the Southeastern Section and has served as the Engineering Design Graph-ics Division’s vice chair and chair and as the Instructional Unit’s secretary, vice chair, and chair. Hisongoing involvement with ASEE has focused on annual conference paper presentation themes associatedwith the Engineering Design Graphics, Engineering Libraries, Engineering Technology, New EngineeringEducators, and the Two-Year College Divisions and their education and instructional agendas.

Mr. Mark McKinley Sanders

Mark Sanders is the Assistant Director for Public Services at East Carolina University’s (ECU) JoynerLibrary. Previously he worked as a Reference and Outreach Librarian at ECU and Louisiana State Uni-versity. He holds an M.S. in Library Science from UNC-Chapel Hill and an M.A. in Spanish literaturefrom Penn State University. His professional interests include student centered learning spaces, innovativeservices, and new technologies.

c©American Society for Engineering Education, 2017

Climbing to Cruising Altitude:

Promoting an Academic Library’s 3D Printing Service

Abstract

Since the main campus library at a regional, public doctoral university implemented a 3D

printing service in the fall of 2015, the service has struggled to take off. The campus community

has shown tremendous interest in 3D printing technology in the service’s first full year, but

relatively few patrons have submitted print requests. In response to this turbulence, additional

resources for educating and training patrons have been created in an attempt improve access and

lower barriers to entry. Library staff have also conducted a broader, campus-wide marketing

campaign, began offering additional workshops to further educate the campus community, and

worked directly with faculty who may be interested in incorporating 3D printing into course

assignments. This paper reports on the various marketing campaigns, methods, and educational

programming that have led to the 3D printing service getting up off the ground, and leveraging

its 3D printing service to directly support students from the College of Engineering and

Technology. Even though the number of print requests have decreased, faculty in the College of

Engineering and Technology have used the library as a focal point as their students participated

in new projects and have collaborated with the College of Business and the Brody School of

Medicine on many experiential learning projects.

Introduction

Since 2012, the library literature has been inundated with arguments stating 3D printers1,2,3,4,5,6,7

and the broader makerspace movement8,9,10,11,12,13 fit within the scope of an academic library’s

mission. Five years later, arguments against 3D printing and makerspaces are rare,14 and, as a

crowdsourced “Map of 3D Printers in Libraries” shows, at least 153 academic libraries in the

United States now have 3D printers available for patron use.15 This is an approximately 31%

self-reported increase from April 2016 to April 2017, but it is not a comprehensive list. This type

of growth is arguably unsustainable, but, as Kurt and Colegrove16 observed, “The library is in a

unique position to be able to leverage the wealth of learning and opportunities for

knowledge creation that access to such technology can provide in a way that most individual

departments are not,” and the “Map of 3D Printers in Libraries” confirms the presence of 3D

printing in academic libraries is only going to expand in the near term.

As the integration of 3D printing in academic libraries continues to grow, additional articles

have been published to share tips on operational processes.17,18,19 Generally, the literature

gives a positive, almost idyllic, view of implementing 3D printing services similar to that

seen at the University of Alabama Libraries,18 Miami University’s Business, Engineering,

Science and Technology Library,20 Southern New Hampshire University’s Shapiro

Library,21 and the University of La Verne.22 These libraries experienced high participation

rates among the campus community with very little advertising and afforded the luxury of

allowing the technology to market itself. Other libraries have been able to rely on traditional

promotional methods such as word of mouth,16,23 offering training and workshops,4,17,19,24

and library signage and tours,23,25 but also special events5,26,27 and social media.16,27

Not all libraries can be so fortunate, and must put in extra effort to make their 3D printing

service a successful initiative. Pryor28 described the University of Southern Illinois-

Edwardsville Lovejoy Library’s 3D printing service as a “mixed bag” because of the

expressed excitement from both students and faculty, but relatively low usage numbers. He

posited the reasons could have included a lack of access to 3D modeling software or familiarity

with the creation of 3D models, patrons simply being unaware of 3D model repositories with

ready to print objects on the web, or the campus community had yet to grasp how 3D printing

technology can be useful in scholarship, research and other creative activities. Zuberbier, et al7

shared a similar story of high interest in the technology by the campus community at a

regional public doctoral university, but, despite the educational resources published to

improve access to 3D printing resources, additional workshops and class demonstrations,

and traditional marketing and outreach efforts, the service garnered disproportionately low

usage statistics. Bharti29 may have provided some insight on this quandary by identifying the

campus community’s overall lack of familiarity with 3D printing technology when the Marston

Science Library at the University of Florida started their 3D printing service. She noticed the

most common challenge was, “stress[ing] to patrons, especially ones new to 3D printing, is that

not all 3D models are suitable for printing.”

This begs the question, “What is the most effective way an academic library can market their 3D

printing services?” There seems to be a consensus that collaboration with faculty is paramount.

Engineering professors Agarwala and Chin30, 31 reported on engaging the campus library with 3D

printing technology in order to collaborate on the development of a 3D printing service which

included the facilitation of short and long versions of 3D printing workshops. The Stetson

University DuPont-Ball Library’s 3D printing service also began with a nudge from Chemistry

faculty members, and the initial collaboration was a contributing factor in the library’s decision

to appropriate a dedicated 3D printing space in the library.32 Others have also mentioned not only

the need to engage faculty members to make the 3D printing service successful,16,19,21,33 but the

necessity of working with faculty members to incorporate the technology into class projects and

assignments.6,11,19,21,22,28,32,34,35

The next section of the paper covers the background, initial collaborative efforts and

development of a 3D printing service in the main campus library of a regional public doctoral

university. This is followed by the latest expansion of 3D printing facilities at the library, and a

description of additional marketing and outreach efforts. Workshops and new collaborations are

covered next and are followed by a discussion and conclusions and future work.

Background

During the spring 2014 semester, the College of Engineering and Technology’s (CET)

Department of Technology Systems approached the University’s main campus library with an

initiative to make 3D printing more accessible to the campus community. The partnership came

to fruition in the fall of 2014 when a ZPrinter® 310 Plus36, an entry-level, powder based

300x450 dpi resolution 3D printer, was placed in a converted study room (see Figure 1), and

library personnel were trained on the system.7,30,31 The technology sat largely unused because of

the ZPrinter’s high operating costs (approximately $4/cu in to print), but, a year later, the Library

felt providing greater access to 3D printing technology for the campus community would be a

value added service worth a small, additional investment. In July 2015, the library expanded its

3D printing services by acquiring two entry level fused deposition modeling (FDM) 3D printers

for its Teaching Resource Center (TRC).37 The 3D printers were placed in the TRC because the

department directly supports the College of Education, and 3D printers were rapidly becoming

commonplace in K-12 school libraries across the state and the rest of the United States.

(a) Signage above study room (b) ZPrinter® 310 Plus

Figure 1. Collaborative 3D printer lab and equipment.7, 30, 31

One of the new 3D printers, a FlashForge Creator Pro38 (see Figure 2), is an FDM style 3D

printer with a dual extrusion print head. The FlashForge’s dual extrusion head allows interlaced

color objects to be printed, and the printer can extrude acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS),

polylactic acid (PLA), nylon, and even composite materials such as wood and metal filaments.

The build envelope is around 225 x 145 x 150 mm. The FlashForge was chosen because of these

attributes, and because the machine boasted an active online user community the library’s staff

could turn to for advice and troubleshooting tips. The printer was stationed in the TRC’s

Production Center because the low-tech makerspace received 4,599 visitors from July 1, 2014 to

June 30, 2015, 1500 of which were first time users. Because of this traffic, the Library expected

the technology to market itself, and the machine to be used on a consistent basis.

Figure 2. FlashForge Creator Pro.38

Figure 3 shows the initial computer and FlashForge Creator Pro setup within the TRC’s

Production Center and one of the authors, who is affiliated with the TRC, delivering 3D printing

instruction to students from CET.

Figure 3. FlashForge Creator Pro setup in the Production Center and snapshots of an instruction

session.7

The second new printer was a Lulzbot TAZ 539 single extrusion, FDM machine (see Figure 4).

The Lulzbot was chosen for similar reasons as the FlashForge Creator Pro as it provided the

same versatility in the types of filaments that can be used. The build volume is also about two

times larger than the FlashForge’s at 298 x 275 x 250 mm, and the Lulzbot online user

community has proven to be just as active and helpful to Library staff.

Figure 4. Lulzbot TAZ 5.39

In preparation for the official launch of the Library’s 3D printing service, one of the authors, who

works in the TRC, created a libguide40 as a reference resource to be published on the Library’s

webpage (see Figure 5). The purpose of this resource was to inform the campus community of

the types of 3D printers the library has, and the entire suite of services offered.

Figure 5. Front page of Joyner Library’s 3D printing libguide.

The libguide serves as the main conduit to both the web-based consultation request (see Figure

6) and print request forms (see Figure 7) to centralize and streamline the workflow for both

services.

Figure 6. Joyner Library’s online 3D Printing Consultation Form.

Figure 7. Joyner Library’s online 3D Print request page.

Preparing for Takeoff and Getting off the Ground

The 3D printing service officially debuted on October 1, 2015 with one full-time librarian

dedicating approximately 5-10 hours a week to supervise one student employee, develop

educational resources and coordinate marketing and outreach efforts. The student employee, a

senior CET design student, worked 20-25 hours per week. During the first three months of the

3D printing service’s operation, the Library’s staff conducted a rather traditional marketing

campaign. Signs were hung within the Library, announcements were posted on the library’s

website, and a libguide dedicated to the new 3D printing service went live a few days before the

official start date. Because the authors were affiliated with the TRC, which directly supports the

College of Education, and CET, newsletters and email announcements were sent to students,

faculty and staff in those two specific target audiences. The library expected lots of excitement

and enthusiasm for the new service, and chose these traditional methods and a targeted audience

in an attempt to control the growth of the service while library staff fine-tuned policies,

procedures and workflows, and become more familiar with the technology. Throughout October,

November and December, library staff facilitated six one-hour workshops which covered the

basic concepts and processes of 3D printing, provided hands-on experience with the entry level

3D design software Tinkercad, and shared potential applications of the technology in a variety of

disciplines. These workshops were attended by 83 students, faculty and staff. As a result, one

faculty member, a professor of Special Education, scheduled 3D printing demonstrations for all

three sections of her course which reached 87 undergraduate students. By the end of 2015, the

front page of the 3D printing libguide had received 1813 page views (see Figure 8), the fifth

most out of nearly 300 of Joyner Library’s libguides, and accepted 14 print requests from nine

unique patrons with eight print requests from engineering students printing personal projects.

Figure 8. Month by month page views for the 3D printing libguide.

After this initial “soft” opening, Library staff gradually began to conduct a broader, campus-wide

marketing campaign, but focused their efforts on patrons who visited the library. In February

2016, library staff hosted two special events in the main lobby during the busiest time of the

week, Sunday evenings. Both events were simple, and each featured the FlashForge Creator Pro

set up on a table printing a school related model with other pre-printed models surrounding it to

showcase its capabilities. The Library’s 3D printing specialists were also available to answer any

questions related to the technology, promote the service, and steer patrons to the 3D printing

research guide to submit a print request or schedule a consultation to learn more. Each event

averaged 10 patron visits to the table per hour for a total of 42 visitors. While the library was

happy with the number of students who visited the table, overall attendance could have been

affected by the first event inadvertently being held on Valentine’s Day, and the outside

temperature was below freezing the day the second event was held.

Throughout the 2016 spring semester, other instruction librarians in the Department of Research

and Instructional Services began mentioning the 3D printing service to students in ENGL 1100,

ENGL 2200, and COAD classes. These general education classes are required for most freshman

and sophomores, and provide a brief overview of the library’s resources, how to conduct college

level research, and discuss services offered by each department in the library. The Learning

Technologies Librarian, who taught many of these instruction sessions, went so far as to show

students how to find the 3D printing libguide by showing classes that a basic search for “3D

printing” in the OneSearch box on the library’s home page would position the libguide as the top

search result.

Library staff continued to offer “Introduction to 3D Printing” workshops and class

demonstrations throughout the semester, but also expanded workshop offerings to specifically

engage faculty from various departments across campus. The “Intro” workshops were well

attended averaging 10 attendees over the four sessions reaching a total of 40 students, faculty and

staff. Seven class demonstrations were requested by faculty in Special Education, Business and

Graphic Design, and reached a total of 175 undergraduate and graduate students. Four additional

workshops designed specifically for faculty in the Arts & Humanities (6 attendees), Math &

Sciences (4), Health Professions (14) and Social Sciences (cancelled due to lack of registrants)

were also offered. Each session provided examples of how 3D printing technology was being

used in these disciplines, and provided advice on how to plan for and effectively integrate 3D

printing into a course. Both the “Intro” and discipline specific workshops gave library staff

dozens of face-to-face opportunities to speak with faculty about incorporating 3D printing

technologies into their classes. Unfortunately, these conversations resulted in only a single

faculty member integrating 3D printing into their course. This faculty member, a professor of

Science Education, had a prior relationship with TRC staff and prior experience using 3D

printing in courses taught at another university. The 3D prints from the Science Education class

accounted for approximately 20% (n=19) of all print requests in the spring 2016 semester.

In March 2016, the Library’s Exhibit Committee notified the TRC about a vacant exhibit case on

the first floor of the library in a high traffic area, and asked if the TRC would be interested in

showcasing 3D printed models of varying shapes, sizes and complexities (see Figure 9). An

additional “Guide to 3D Printing” was created for the display and additional copies of the

handout were left on top of the exhibit case for patrons to take as they walk by (see Appendix A).

Shortly after the exhibit was set up, to two student organizations, the Gaming Club and Board

Game & Table Top Society, to ask if a 3D printed object could be raffled off at the end of the

Library’s Game Night festivities.

The Library’s Game Night was first held in 2008 to highlight the library as a fun, recreational

center of campus. One evening each semester, video game consoles and board games were

placed across the first floor of the library for students to enjoy. The event routinely attracted

approximately a hundred people before taking a hiatus for several years. In fall 2015 it was

revived and attended by 58 students. The spring 2016 event attracted 141 students, a 143%

increase. The spring 2016 event featured a 3D printed version of the Settlers of Catan41 board

game, which was randomly raffled off to those who filled out a survey assessing the evening’s

activities. The fall 2016 semester featured a 3D printed Pokémon chess set42 raffled off to a

randomly selected winner from the 115 student attendees, and the TRC again provided 3D

printed prizes for the spring 2017 event. It is unclear if this promotion has resulted in any print

requests, but it inspired library staff to reach out and engage other campus student groups to

promote the service. Unfortunately, the library has only had limited success reaching out to

student organizations. The only student organization to invite library staff to speak to them about

the 3D printing service has been the Science Education Association.

Figure 9. 3D Printing exhibit on the first floor of Joyner Library.

Combined, the expanded marketing and outreach efforts drove the number of visits to the 3D

printing libguide up to 2170 views by the end of the spring 2016 semester (see Figure 10). This

pushed the 3D printing libguide to third in the libguide rankings behind the “Evidence Based

Practice for Nursing” and “Library 101: Introduction to Research” libguides with 2896 and 2607

views, respectively. This also resulted in an additional 96 print requests from 56 unique patrons

over the course of the semester.

Figure 10. 3D printing libguide page views during the spring 2016 semester.

Expanding and Promoting the Makerspace and Climbing to Cruising Altitude

Naturally, because most classes were not in session, the Library took the summer of 2016 off

from actively marketing the 3D printing service. It must be noted that the libguide still garnered

an additional 521 page views throughout June, July and August, and received another 25 print

requests which brought the total number of print requests to 135. Still believing the service

would be inundated with print requests, the library even acquired a third 3D printer through a

partnership with the Summer Ventures in Science and Mathematics (SVSM) Program and is

administered by the University’s College of Education and its Center for Science, Technology

Engineering and Math Education (C-STEM). One of the authors began teaching an “Introduction

to 3D Printing & Design” class in the summer of 2016, and the C-STEM purchased three

Fusion3 F-400S’s, an FDM machine, specifically for the class (see Figure 11). The C-STEM has

allowed the Library to keep one of the machines on loan. The F400-S was chosen because it

allows the use of a wide range of printing materials such as PLA, ABS, ASA, PETG,

Polycarbonate, PC-ABS, Flexible, Polyesters, Acrylic, Soluble, and more.43 Its build volume of

14.0 in x 14.0 in x 12.60 in (355 x 355 x 320 mm) is also more than two times larger than the

Lulzbot TAZ 5 and five times larger than the FlashForge. Between the three printers, the 3D

Print Studio can print almost any model patrons submitted.

Figure 11. Fusion F400-S.43

The summer months also gave library staff time to reflect on the first semester and a half of

offering the 3D printing service. After careful consideration, the library believed it could do

more marketing and expand the different types of workshops offered. The marketing expansion

was planned to take place in two phases. The first phase, during the fall 2016 semester, would

include developing, printing and posting flyers (see Appendix B) around campus and offering

additional workshops on new topics. The second phase, which began in the spring 2017 semester

included using social media to promote the service, promoting the service by telling the personal

stories behind patrons’ motivations to print their models, and giving the campus community the

opportunity to undergo safety training so they could operate the 3D printers themselves. These

decisions were again made to control the growth of the service so library staff would not be

overwhelmed.

The flyers advertising the expanded workshop schedule were posted in all 16 of the University’s

residence halls in September 2016. Additional flyers were posted in the seven classroom

buildings where the majority of classes were held, the student center, and throughout the library.

This totaled approximately 300 flyers. The popular “Introduction to 3D Printing” workshops

were still offered once a month, and the lesson plans were adjusted to allow attendees more free

time to create 3D models in Tinkercad. Two additional workshops were also offered on basic

design concepts for 3D printing (e.g., overhangs, bridges, watertight models, etc.) and preparing

models for 3D printing by using Meshmixer to check for non-manifold and intersecting

geometries. All three workshops were offered once a month and gave the campus community the

opportunity to dive deeper into 3D printing technologies with each successive session. The

“Intro” workshops were well attended and averaged 14 participants for each of the three

sessions. The “Basic Design” sessions saw an average of approximately seven attendees while

the “Preparing to Print” sessions averaged four people per session. The dip in attendance from

the “Intro” to the “Basic Design” and “Preparing Your Model” sessions was expected, as the

Library believed many patrons may not be interested in learning more than the basic processes

and concepts of the technology.

In addition to the TRC’s expanded marketing efforts, the Library also began promoting the 3D

printing service to not only the campus community, but the entire region of Eastern North

Carolina by dedicating space in both its biannual electronic newsletter and its annual report (see

Figures 12 and 13). The most recent newsletter stated, “Offering a 3D printing service is an

effective engagement and outreach tool which shows the academic library is constantly and

actively engaged with its community and willing to meet the changing needs of its patrons. 3D

printing provides the potential for breaking down artificial barriers erected between

disciplines.”44 The 2016 annual report shared a similar theme by stating the 3D printing service’s

main objectives, “initiating cross-disciplinary collaboration, sharing knowledge, and promoting

innovation.”45

Figure 12. 3D printing promoted in the Library newsletter in April 2016.44

Figure 13. 2016 Library Annual Report.45

These efforts were rewarded when the Office of Admissions offered the 3D printing service a

table at its Fall Open House in November 2016. While this event was specifically for prospective

students interested in attending the University, the authors hope it will pay off with an increase in

usage statistics in future semesters. It was also a learning experience as, out of the roughly 300

prospective students and family members stopped by the table and display, approximately 75%

of those stated they had used a 3D printer or their high school had one on campus. This is in

stark contrast to the current patrons library staff have helped. While the data are incomplete, it is

the perception of the authors that only 25% of current students who have used the Library’s 3D

printing service had a prior experience with 3D printer. But, despite the additional marketing,

outreach and educational programming, the number of print requests fell from 96 print requests

in the spring of 2016 to 65 throughout the entire fall 2016 semester, and the number of libguide

views fell to 1806 (see Figure 14).

Figure 14. 3D printing libguide page views during the fall 2016 semester.

Phase two began with a surprise in the spring 2017 semester. Unexpectedly, arrangements were

made to move the 3D printers into a new space which brought, for the first time, all the Library’s

3D printers into one space (see Figure 15). This new space, dubbed the 3D Print Studio, was just

big enough to accommodate tables for up to eight patrons at one time. Gaining this extra work

space was critical before the TRC would have the capacity to provide safety training to patrons

so they could operate the 3D printers themselves. In doing so, library staff hope students begin to

gain a sense of ownership over the technology, and alleviate some of the staff time dedicated to

operating the printers. An email was sent to all 32 patrons who had submitted multiple print

requests to make them aware of the new safety training workshops. The training would be short,

only 30-45 minutes, and would cover common safety hazards associated with 3D printers, how

to prepare models for printing using slicing software, and how to keep accurate print logs. As of

April 2017, there has been little interest with only three students who have completed the

training. Two of the three have visited the 3D Print Studio to print at least three additional

models each.

Figure 15. The 3D Print Studio in the Teaching Resources Center.

The use of social media, Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter, began in March 2017. The delay was

a result of the 3D printing services manager’s lack of familiarity with the Library’s policies

regarding the use of social media: its official channels, needing to obtain the “thumbs up” from

the Library’s Social Media Committee to use the Library’s social media accounts, and working

with the Library’s Social Media Committee to craft a distribution schedule. In addition, only four

patrons have given the library permission to use the personal story behind their printed object.

Fortunately, this was enough to sustain the social media marketing blasts, “3D Thursdays”, for

the remainder of the spring 2017 semester. Because the use of social media had only just begun,

it is difficult to determine how effective the use of social media has been in promoting the

service.

Current Collaborations with Faculty

A major development occurred in the fall of 2016, and was implemented in the spring 2017

semester, when two departments began collaborating with the Library to initiate an atmosphere

of invention, innovation and entrepreneurship among undergraduate students at the University.

The goal of the project is to focus on the synergistic integration and expansion of two existing

cross-disciplinary courses offered separately by CET and the College of Business’s (COB)

Miller School of Entrepreneurship. The first course, “Rapid Prototyping,” is a required course for

CET design students, where the focus is on engineering design skills related to product

innovation and development in teams exclusively comprised of CET students. The second

course, “Entrepreneurship,” is a requirement for small business and entrepreneurship students in

the College of Business. These business students focus on creativity, opportunity assessment,

and venture creation. The collaboration will combine the experiential engineering design and

entrepreneurial skill of both these courses via real world hands-on projects focused on

technology innovation related to sustainable energy. This project will bring together

approximately 50 CET and COB students each semester who are then paired in teams of four,

two CET students and two COB students. Their goal is to successfully integrate product

innovation and entrepreneurship knowledge to innovate, design, and develop real-world products

and commercialize them through entrepreneurship activities.

Discussion

Even with the additional marketing, outreach and educational programming, the number of print

requests fell from 96 print requests in the spring of 2016 to 65 throughout the entire fall 2016

semester. The number of visits to the 3D printing libguide also fell from 2170 to 1806, and the

spring 2017 semester is projected to match the fall 2016 numbers. It has been difficult to

determine the reasons why this decrease has occurred. Despite the Library’s best efforts, the

campus community may still not be familiar with how to create 3D models, and may not fully

understand the limitations of the Library’s FDM 3D printers. While it is not an official statistic

the 3D Print Studio keeps track of, there have been at least two dozen print requests submitted

that were either unfit to print, or the possibility of a print failure was deemed very high. After

alerting patrons of this fact, and making suggested revisions to their models, the majority of

patrons do not resubmit a revised model.

Over the course of the first semester and a half after the 3D printing service debuted in the fall of

2015, the library heavily relied on its workshops to engage the broader campus community, and

assist students, faculty and staff in becoming aware of the possibilities 3D printing can provide.

In hindsight, the Library seems to have overestimated the campus community’s interest in

offering a 3D printing service. Instead of slowly expanding the reach of the services’ marketing

and outreach efforts the Library could have been more effective by using flyers, social media,

and obtaining patrons’ personal stories for using the 3D printing service from the beginning

rather than after the fact.

Staffing levels directly contributed to the Library’s approach to marketing and outreach. Only

one library staff member was dedicated to the service and was only able to devote 5-10 hours per

week to supervise one student employee, develop and facilitate educational resources and

programming, and coordinate marketing and outreach efforts. The student employee worked 20-

25 hours per week, and performed most administrative functions such as responding to emails

and keeping the print queue up-to-date, preparing models for printing, operating the 3D printers,

and conducting consultations. This full-service model was manageable until the student

employee graduated in December 2016, and a new student needed to be hired and trained.

Funding for the student position was cut, and the new student, a sophomore engineering student,

could only work 15 hours per week. The library staff member who managed the 3D printing

service was forced to pick up the slack, and began devoting approximately 10-15 hours a week to

the service. While the number of print requests decreased in the spring 2017 semester, the

complexity of print requests increased. As a result, the time spent checking and repairing models

for manifold errors and intersecting geometries, determining proper print orientation and

communicating with patrons went up. If the 3D printing service in Joyner Library is to grow and

expand, the full-service model cannot be maintained by the current staffing level, and additional

library staff need to assist with the initiative or another student employee needs to be hired. An

alternative would be to begin to transition Joyner Library’s 3D printing service to a self-serve

model where students will be able to print their own models with library staff available for help

and support.

Finally, the location of the 3D printers in the library have never been in the most visible or easy

to find places. The FlashForge Creator Pro was originally placed in the TRC’s Production Center

located behind the TRC service desk. While the space is open to anyone on campus to use, and

thousands of students pass through its door every year, the number of unique visitors to the

Production Center represents only a small portion of the campus community. In addition, the

location and setup of the space made it unlikely patrons would serendipitously walk by and

notice the 3D printers. The 3D Print Studio’s current space is still within the TRC, but is in the

back corner of the department situated behind rows of shelved books. This location also makes it

unlikely patrons would walk by and encounter the 3D printers by chance. Patrons would need to

know what they are looking for in order to find it.

Conclusions

The decrease in print requests parallels the changing nature of services academic libraries

provide and the user community it serves. A decade ago, library services were simple, limited to

the immediate campus community, and focused on providing access to resources. Today, those

services have grown in number, and have become increasingly complex. Reference librarians are

rarely asked trivia questions that require a simple answer, but are answering fewer, more

complex questions that require in-depth analysis. In addition, circulation and interlibrary loan

departments now have to analyze the logistics of shipping resources to students around the world

while also extending access to the local community. These examples show how Joyner Library’s

user community has become more complex with a larger number of distance education students,

military veterans and international students. Each of these groups have their own specific needs.

Thus, the 3D printing service’s assessment strategy needs to be revisited and modified so the

Library can gain a better understanding of the potential user community. Once complete, all

marketing, outreach and promotional tools need to be adapted to reflect the user community’s

varied interests.

The authors still believe the Library’s 3D printing service has been a success and is slowly

climbing to cruising altitude. Despite what seems to be little to show for all the effort that has

gone into making the 3D printing service as successful as it is, the students who use the service

have been satisfied with the results. Even though the number of print requests have decreased

from the spring 2016 to the fall 2016 semester, the service has seen an increase in the complexity

of models submitted. This fact shows that patrons who use the 3D printing service view 3D

printers as a tool that can be used to solve a problem and prototype a solution rather than a

novelty that prints novelties. A comprehensive review of patrons who have used the 3D printing

service, and why they use it, is needed to identify the service’s main user characteristics. Once

identified, the 3D printing service can strategically reach out to current campus projects and

initiatives that will engage students and departments and position Joyner Library as a

collaborator. The Library has already been a key partner in the execution of projects between the

College of Engineering and Technology and the College of Business and the Brody School of

Medicine. The success of these initiatives needs to be leveraged to approach other potential

partners on campus while nurturing current relationships.

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank Hayden Holleman and Jessica Brush. Mr. Holleman is a recent

graduate of East Carolina University’ College of Engineering and Technology. Miss Brush is a

current student in the College of Engineering and Technology at the authors’ University and

helps run the 3D printer at the Joyner Library in support of this initiative.

References 1. Griffey, J. (2012). Absolutely fab-ulous. Library Technology Reports, 48(3), 21-24.

2. Lankes, R. (2013). Beyond the bullet points: missing the point and 3D printing. [Web log]. Retrieved

from http://quartz.syr.edu/blog/?p=2538

3. Hoy, M. B. (2013). "3D printing: Making things at the library.” Medical reference services quarterly. Retrieved

from http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02763869.2013.749139#.VM059C6gxdM

4. Groenendyk, M. & Gallant, R. (2013). 3D printing and scanning at the Dalhousie university libraries: A pilot

project. Library Hi Tech, 31(1), 34-41.

5. Brown, D. & Vecchione, A. (2014). How to pack a room: 3D printing at albertsons library. Idaho Librarian,

64(2), 1.

6. Colegrove, P. (2014). Making It Real: 3D Printing as a Library Service. Educause Review Online. Retrieved

from http://www.educause.edu/ero/article/making-it-real-3d-printing-library-service

7. Zuberbier, D.P., Agarwala, R., Chin, R. A., Sanders, M., & Dickerson, D. (2016, June). An Academic Library’s

Role in Improving Accessibility to 3D Printing. ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition. New Orleans, LA.

8. Fisher, E. (2012, November 28). Makerspaces move into academic libraries. ACRL TechConnect Blog.

Retrieved from http://acrl.ala.org/techconnect/post/makerspaces-move-into-academic-libraries

9. Phetteplace, E., Brooks, M., & Heller, M. (2013). Library Labs. Reference & User Services Quarterly, 52(3),

186-190.

10. Abram, S. & Dysart, J. (2014). The maker movement and the library movement: Understanding the

makerspaces opportunity. Feliciter, 60(1), 11-13.

11. Moorefield-Lang, H.M. (2014). Makers in the library: Case studies of 3D printers and maker spaces in library

settings. Library Hi Tech, 32(4), 583-593.

12. Lee, R.A. (2015). Library-land boldly explores new frontiers. Tennessee Libraries, 65(2) Retrieved from

http://www.tnla.org/?page=TL65_2_frontiers

13. Luthy, C. (2015). Making makers: Educating librarians about makerspaces. Computers in Libraries, 35(9), 4-8.

14. Farkas, M. (2013). Spare me the hype cycle: Focus on what works rather than what’s hot. American Libraries

Magazine. Retrieve from https://americanlibrariesmagazine.org/2013/05/20/spare-me-the-hype-cycle/

15. Goodman, A. (n.d.) Map of 3D printers in libraries. [Data File]. Retrieved from

http://www.amandagoodman.com/3D/

16. Kurt, L. and Colegrove, P. (2012), “3D printers in the library: toward a Fablab in the academic library.”

ACRL TechConnect [Web log]. Retrieved from http://acrl.ala.org/techconnect/post/3d-printers-in-the-

library-toward-a-fablab-in-the-academic-library

17. Nowlan, G.A. (2015). Developing and implementing 3D printing services in an academic library. Library Hi

Tech, 33(4), 472-479.

18. Scalfani, V. F. and Sahib, J. (2013), A model for managing 3D printing services in academic libraries. Issues in

Science and Technology Librarianship. Retrieved from http://www.istl.org/13-spring/refereed1.html

19. Gonzalez, S.R. & Bennett, D.B. (2014). Planning and implementing a 3D printing service in an academic

library. Issues in Science and Technology Librarianship, 78, 1 – 14. doi: 10.5062/F4M043CC

20. Messner, K. R. (2015). Library as collaboratory: Partnerships, knowledge transfer and dialogue in library-based

3D services. Bulletin of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 42(1), 21–25.

doi:10.1002/bul2.2015.1720420108

21. Harris, J. & Cooper, C. (2015). Make room for a makerspace. Computers in Libraries, 35(2), 5-9.

22. Jiang, A., Beavers, K., Esteron, J., & Liberty McCoy, C. (2015). Re-positioning library technology support on

campus. Library Hi Tech News, 32(9), 14-16.

23. Van Epps, A., Huston, D., Sherrill, J., Alvar, A. & Bowen, A. (2015). How 3D printers support teaching in

engineering, technology and beyond. Bulletin of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 42(1),

16–20. doi:10.1002/bul2.2015.1720420107

24. Gutsche, B. (2013). Makerspaces in libraries: Patron's delight, staff's dread? Alki, 29(1), 28-30.

25. Burke, J. J. (2014). Makerspaces: A practical guide for librarians. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers: Lanham,

MD.

26. Bogdanov, S. & Isaac-Menard, R. (2016). Hack the library: Organizing Adelphi university libraries’ first

hackathon. College & Research Libraries News, 77(4), 180-183.

27. Lotts, M. (2016). On the road, playing with legos®, and learning about the library: The rutgers university art

library lego playing station, part two. Journal of Library Administration, 56(5), 499-525.

28. Pryor, S. (2014). Implementing a 3D printing service in an academic library. Journal of Library Administration.

54(1), 1-10.

29. Bharti, N., Gonzalez, S., & Buhler, A. (2015, January). 3D technology in libraries: Applications for teaching

and research. In Emerging Trends and Technologies in Libraries and Information Services (ETTLIS), 2015 4th

International Symposium on (pp. 161-166). IEEE.

30. Agarwala R., Chin R. A; Improving Accessibility to 3D Printing; Engineering Design Graphics Division,

American Society of Engineering Education, IL, October 2014.

31. Agarwala, R., & Chin, R. A. (2015, June). Facilitating Additive Manufacturing Engagement and Outreach.

ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition. Seattle, WA. doi:10.18260/p.24086

32. Ryan, S.M & Grubbs, W.T. (2014). Collaboration in support of 3D printing as an emerging technology in

academic libraries. Florida Libraries, 57(2), 11-16.

33. Elrod, R.E. (2016). Classroom innovation through 3D printing. Library Hi Tech News, 33(3), 5-7. doi:

10.1108/lhtn-12-2015-0085

34. Rogers, A., LeDuc-Mills, B., O’Connell, B.C. & Huang, B. (2015). Lending a hand: Supporting the maker

movement in academic libraries. ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition. Seattle, WA. doi:

10.18260/p.24418

35. Moorefield-Lang, H.M. (2015). When makerspaces go mobile: Case studies of transportable maker locations.

Library Hi Tech, 33(4), 462-471.

36. 3D Systems. (2005). Z corporation raises 3D printing quality and affordability standard with zprinter 310 plus.

Retrieved from http://www.3dsystems.com/press-releases/z-corporationraises-3d-printing.

37. Teaching Resources Center. (n.d.). TRC ann rhem schwarzmann production center. Retrieved from

http://www.ecu.edu/cs-lib/trc/productioncenter.cfm

38. FlashForge USA. (n.d.). FlashForge creator pro dual extrusion 3D printer. Retrieved from

http://www.ff3dp.com/creator-pro-3d-printer.html

39. Lulzbot. (n.d.). Lulzbot TAZ 5. Retrieved from https://www.lulzbot.com/store/printers/lulzbot-taz-5

40. Joyner Library. (n.d.). 3D Printing. Retrieved from http://libguides.ecu.edu/3dprinting

41. JAWong. (2012, July) 3D catan terrain pieces. Thingiverse. Retrieved from

http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:26979

42. roshandp1. (2016, April). Pokemon chess. Thingiverse. Retrieved from

http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:1482617

43. Fusion3 Design. (n.d.) Fusion F400-S. Retrieved from https://www.fusion3design.com/f400-enclosed-3d-

printer/

44. Joyner Library. (2016, April). National library week special edition news. Retrieved from

http://www.ecu.edu/cs-lib/about/newsletters.cfm

45. Joyner Library. (2017, January). Joyner library annual report. Retrieved from http://www.ecu.edu/cs-

lib/publications/2016annualreport.cfm

Appendix A

3D Printing Guide Handout

Appendix B

3D Printing Workshop Flyer