From Printer Capability to Qualified Factory Route

Additive-manufacturing (AM) technology selection is often reduced to a comparison of printer categories, nominal resolution, material labels or deposition rate. That shortcut fails when a factory must deliver accepted components rather than merely produce an as-built object. The relevant decision unit is a complete route: feedstock receipt and conditioning, shaping, support or powder recovery, washing or depowdering, curing, debinding, sintering, infiltration, heat treatment, machining, inspection and release. This review converts that principle into a state-resolved factory decision matrix. It compares vat photopolymerisation, material extrusion, powder-bed fusion, material jetting, direct ink writing, binder jetting, bound-powder routes, lithography-based metal or ceramic manufacturing, directed-energy deposition and indirect tooling routes. The matrix does not rank technologies universally. It applies non-compensatory feasibility gates before any weighted comparison, identifies evidence gaps and factory constraints, and records the comparator required for each claimed advantage. A worked screening example shows how the same complex ceramic component can eliminate apparently attractive routes before expensive trials. The output is a documented decision with an uncertainty record, not a universal score.