Implementing Industrial Adoption of 3D Printing in Non-Traditional Sectors
From automation to structural 3D printing, some sectors are redefining their production approach thanks to targeted and concrete implementation plans.
Industrial adoption of additive manufacturing in non-traditional sectors is accelerating thanks to structured operational playbooks that integrate digital design, engineering simulations, and rapid production. Companies like Boston Dynamics and Siemens demonstrate how 3D printing can become an integral part of development flows, generating measurable advantages in terms of part reduction, cycle acceleration, and operational scalability.
Definition of Non-Traditional Sectors for 3D Printing
Non-traditional sectors include automation, robotics, energy infrastructure, and digital twin, where 3D printing enables concrete applications beyond prototyping.
Non-traditional sectors refer to industrial areas that historically have not been part of the initial core of AM adoption (aerospace, medical, automotive). These include industrial automation, mobile robotics, energy infrastructure (oil, gas, energy), data centers, and systems based on digital twin. In these sectors, additive manufacturing does not simply replace existing processes, but enables new product architectures and more flexible operating models.
Automation and robotics represent a clear example: companies like ABB use 3D printing to produce end-effectors, customized grippers, and application-specific tooling, optimizing weight and integrating pneumatic or sensory channels directly into the printed structures. This approach reduces the number of components, simplifies assembly, and improves the overall reliability of systems.
Key Elements of an Operational Playbook
An effective implementation plan integrates design for additive manufacturing, engineering simulations, and insertion into the production cycle, with a focus on measurable economies and repeatability.
Industrial adoption requires a methodological approach articulated on three pillars. The first is design for additive manufacturing (DfAM): designing components by exploiting the geometric freedoms of AM, such as lattice structures, complex internal channels, and consolidation of multiple parts. The second pillar is engineering simulation: virtually validating mechanical, thermal, and durability performance before physical production, reducing costly iterations. The third is integration into the production cycle: inserting 3D printing as a piece of standardized process, with qualification procedures, quality control, and data traceability.
HP Additive Manufacturing Solutions has focused its efforts on reducing the cost per part by up to 20% by 2026, acting on three levers: improving Multi Jet Fusion flow productivity, material innovation for greater powder efficiency, and optimizing printing processes to maximize throughput while reducing waste. These interventions transform applications that were previously stuck in the prototyping phase into economically sustainable serial productions.
Case Study: Boston Dynamics – Mechanical Optimization via Additive Manufacturing
Boston Dynamics uses 3D printing for structural components, protective covers, and test parts in the development programs of humanoid and mobile robots, balancing strength, flexibility, and weight.
Boston Dynamics, now part of Hyundai, represents a concrete example of AM integration into advanced robotic development flows. In recent humanoid and mobile robot programs, additive manufacturing has been extensively used for structural components, protective enclosures, and test parts. The ability to rapidly redesign and print components accelerates development, enabling geometries that balance strength, flexibility, and weight in ways impracticable with conventional machining.
This approach reduces the number of parts, simplifies assembly, and improves overall reliability. As automation systems become more intelligent and mobile, additive manufacturing becomes essential to make them practical, scalable, and economically sustainable. The integration of AM is not an experimental addition, but a structural component of the engineering process.
Case Study: Siemens – Integration of 3D Printing into Energy Flows
Siemens uses digital twin and 3D printing to produce optimized components for turbines, equipment, and industrial parts, integrating virtual design and physical production.
Siemens represents one of the most solid examples of integration between digital twin and additive manufacturing. Through its software divisions for digital industries and manufacturing operations, Siemens uses AM to produce components that are first designed, optimized, and validated within digital twin environments. Components for turbines, equipment, and industrial parts are often printed after virtual optimization of performance and lifecycle behavior.
In this model, additive manufacturing is not just a production method, but the physical output of a digital twin workflow. Every printed component is linked to a digital record that tracks performance, maintenance, and future redesigns. As more industries adopt digital twins for factories, infrastructure, and energy systems, additive manufacturing becomes the fastest and most faithful way to transform optimized digital designs into real hardware.
In the oil & gas sector, companies like Shell have implemented metal 3D printing to produce spare parts for offshore platforms, including valve components, brackets, and equipment. In several recent cases, parts that previously required months for procurement were printed locally in a few days, reducing downtime, inventory costs, and dependence on long supply chains.
Measurable Operational Advantages
Documented benefits include reduction in development times, decrease in the number of components, local on-demand production, and greater operational flexibility in complex environments.
The operational advantages of the industrial adoption of AM in non-traditional sectors are measurable and documented. The reduction in the number of parts through geometric consolidation simplifies assembly, logistics, and maintenance. The acceleration of development cycles allows for rapid iterations without the commitment of expensive tooling, drastically reducing development risk and shortening the path from concept to production.
Local on-demand production represents a further economic advantage: by positioning production closer to demand, manufacturers reduce lead times and accelerate time-to-market. This is particularly relevant in contexts of global commercial volatility and supply chain pressures. In the energy sector, the ability to redesign parts to improve performance or durability based on operational data creates a continuous improvement cycle impossible with traditional methods.
Adoption does not occur due to technological enthusiasm, but because AM solves specific operational problems better than traditional methods, generating documented economic and operational advantages.
Conclusion
The adoption of 3D printing in non-traditional sectors requires a structured and methodological approach, but the results demonstrate a real transformative potential.
The industrial implementation of additive manufacturing in non-traditional sectors is no longer experimental: it is a structured process based on concrete operational playbooks, documented cases, and measurable benefits. Companies like Boston Dynamics and Siemens demonstrate that the integration of AM into development and production flows generates tangible benefits in terms of performance, times, and costs.
Success requires discipline: qualification of materials and processes, control standards, data management, and production-oriented design with measurable objectives. The industry rewards those who demonstrate performance and repeatability, not generic promises.
Explore operational best practices and evaluate applicability in your production processes: the structured adoption of additive manufacturing can transform consolidated operational flows, generating concrete and sustainable competitive advantages.
article written with the help of artificial intelligence systems
Q&A
- What are the sectors considered non-traditional for the adoption of 3D printing?
- Non-traditional sectors include industrial automation, mobile robotics, energy infrastructure, data centers, and systems based on digital twins. These areas are integrating 3D printing for concrete applications beyond simple prototyping.
- How does Boston Dynamics use 3D printing in its production processes?
- Boston Dynamics employs 3D printing to create structural components, protective covers, and test parts for humanoid and mobile robots. This approach allows for balancing strength, flexibility, and weight, reducing the number of parts and simplifying assembly.
- How does Siemens integrate 3D printing with digital twins?
- Siemens uses digital twins to design, optimize, and validate components virtually before they are printed. Additive manufacturing thus becomes the physical output of a digital workflow, connected to a record that tracks performance and maintenance over time.
- What measurable operational benefits does the industrial adoption of 3D printing offer?
- Benefits include the reduction of the number of components, consolidation of parts, acceleration of development cycles, local on-demand production, and greater operational flexibility. This leads to lower costs, reduced downtime, and better scalability.
- What are the three pillars of an operational playbook for the adoption of 3D printing?
- The three pillars are: design for additive manufacturing (DfAM) to leverage the geometric freedoms of AM, engineering simulation to validate performance virtually, and integration into the production cycle to standardize the use of AM with quality control and traceability.
