## 1 Introduction  
In the last few years, Additive Manufacturing (AM) has become an actual manufacturing option and many industrial applications clearly show it is able to overcome and substitute traditional processes such as machining or various forms of forming technologies [1]. Even if the AM process is usually more expensive compared to other traditional technologies and suffers from thermal stresses and deformations, it can be advantageous when the design of the components can benefit when highly optimized performances are required, such as light weight, complex shapes, parts number reduction, first-class structural or thermo-fluid dynamic performances [2].  
Traditional technologies, i.e., milling, casting and forging, are employed following consolidated and well-known Design for Manufacture and Assemblies (DFMA) principles aimed at guiding engineers and designers to develop product shapes that facilitate the manufacturing and assembly processes, thus reducing production costs and times [3]. Focusing on products' geometry and characteristics, AM allows a strong customization of shapes at different measurement scales (i.e., lattice structures) and the possibility to obtain custom graded and composite materials by depositing different type of materials in different patterns, thus optimizing the part characteristics. Design objectives stress the minimization of the overall product volume, thus reducing material consumption, production times and costs. Additional issues are related to the part orientation in order to minimize the support volumes. Additional problems that must be faced are the development of optimal designs combining some novel CAD modelling functionalities with process simulation tools [4], the application of proper post treatments, and the estimation of realization times and costs. Therefore, the designer must cope with a wide set of information and knowledge to approach AM in an optimal way, considering that the full leverage of given possibilities is often reached with a complete rethinking of the existing solution, possibly starting from its functional structure [5; 6].  
The evaluation of the opportunity to design a part for AM could be time consuming and finally lead to the conclusion that it is impractical. Conversely, some opportunities could be missed since the advantages of a different manufacturing process are not considered. In this context, the main contribution of this paper is to provide a holistic approach composed of four main evaluation phases of increasing complexity: Preliminary Analysis, Potential Analysis, In-depth Analysis and Cost Assessment. These phases are aimed to support the designer throughout the product development in a structured and efficient way, starting from selecting parts which are suitable to this production type, required material, up to the steps to obtain a final geometry compliant with the chosen technology.  
The paper is structured as follows: Section 2 presents a revision of constraints and opportunities provided by AM in the literature for the early assessment of related design opportunities, as well as related background; Section 3 presents an approach to support decision-making for the development of new products and for the redesign of existing parts; in Section 4 the approach is then applied on a test case; finally, conclusions and future works are outlined in Section 5.