Most energy companies we have covered advance AM with support from an external partner. For example, Equinor and Vår Energi use the shared digital inventory Fieldnode.
The approach pools qualified part files across companies that do not own their designs. As a result, those companies can reduce lead times together.
By contrast, Vestas takes a different route. The major wind turbine and turbine blade manufacturer has close to 35,000 employees and its headquarters in Denmark. It also operates an additive laboratory in the United States. Rather than join a shared platform, Vestas built its own digital inventory and kept it closed.
Vestas is an energy company, and a renewable one. Does that change how it deploys AM? Less than you might expect.
How ownership shapes the AM strategy
Jeremy Haight is Product Owner and Chief Engineer for Additive Manufacturing & Applied Robotics within Vestas’ Digital Solutions group.
In practice, he describes the use cases as “very, very similar” to those of his oil and gas peers. Both sectors operate in remote areas. In addition, both see mobilized manufacturing as an important future direction.
Vestas tracks material circularity and carbon footprint more closely than its fossil-fuel counterparts. It even builds models to calculate carbon diversion as a performance metric.
There is also a difference in ownership. Equinor and Vår Energi operate assets but do not own the designs of many parts they need. This helps explain their use of a shared inventory.
By contrast, Vestas designs, manufactures, commissions, and services its turbines. It owns the intellectual property, which makes a closed system more relevant.
A closed system, by design
For Haight, keeping the system in-house was “very much intentional.” Vestas initially focused on calibrated inspection tooling, production aids, and machinery spare-part replacements. For these applications, an inward-facing program offered two advantages:
- Speed: a closed setup let the team stay highly agile and make the program operational quickly.
- And security: guaranteed protection of intellectual property rights
Timing also reinforced that decision. Vestas began its Direct Digital Manufacturing (DDM) program in 2017. It reached full launch around 2020–2021 through a partnership with machine manufacturer Markforged.
Fieldnode arrived around 2020. Vestas’ system therefore predates that shared-inventory approach. Nevertheless, Vestas continues to assess other technologies and platforms to avoid depending on a single solution.
Opening the model through Digital Kanban
However, Haight told 3D ADEPT Media that he expects a move toward a hybridized model. The team calls this planned expansion Digital Kanban.
Under this approach, Vestas would work with external suppliers on a royalty basis. A supplier’s component would become a digital asset for production on Vestas’ own printers. Each download and satisfactory printed part would earn the supplier a one-time royalty. In this way, Vestas could open the system while retaining control over production locations.
The numbers behind Vestas’ DDM program
Vestas’ DDM is a distributed manufacturing model. Identical machine fleets operate inside its manufacturing facilities. Each site draws qualified parts from a central digital repository and produces them locally.
When we last checked Markforged’s files, the repository contained about 2,000 parts. The vendor reported average part-cost savings of roughly 88%. In one pilot, it also reported eliminating around 7,800 days of cumulative lead time.
Those figures now look modest. According to Haight, Vestas’ digital inventory holds close to 6,000 parts. The program has produced nearly 28,000 parts to date.
Teams add new designs at roughly 1,000 parts per year. Together, these figures show how deeply the organization has adopted the program.
From the US lab to the factory floor everywhere
Haight’s team oversees all additive manufacturing across the organization. Before any rollout, the US laboratory stress-tests new platforms and materials at the application level.
The rollout then extends across the organization. Revised strategies and technology roadmaps reach every manufacturing site, where production takes place in-house.
Vestas began with tooling, jigs, and gauges. It is now moving into what Haight calls “product architecture”: components for the end-use product itself.
Progress has been “slow moving, but moving.” Several qualified parts can now come from onsite production or central distribution hubs.
Qualification through field service
The main challenge is familiar across oil and gas and other demanding industries using AM: qualification. I find Vestas’ approach particularly interesting.
According to Haight, Vestas commissions and services turbines it does not own. It works with the wind-farm owners under a right-to-repair arrangement. The owner accepts liability for a 3D-printed part. In turn, Vestas restores the machine faster than the original subcomponent OEMs could.
In effect, the part demonstrates its qualification through field service without failure.
Vestas has built turbines for more than 30 years. Many older platforms remain in operation, and their owners want to keep them running.
Connecting additive manufacturing to enterprise systems
Automation remains a goal for many manufacturers. Since Vestas produces these parts in-house, I asked Haight how far the company had progressed.
He says the means and methods already exist. What remains is connection, and that work is progressing well.
The AM team is linking its applications to other enterprise platforms, including SAP, Windchill, and Dassault. Each connection demands resources and follows a strategic sequence. The team therefore prioritizes these integrations carefully.
Meanwhile, the workflow itself is designed to run autonomously. Bringing the wider enterprise into it requires connecting those systems methodically.
Capital, people, and long-term value
These efforts reveal where today’s bottlenecks lie. Haight says organizational adoption is largely behind the team. The next hurdles are capital and people.
Vestas is assessing more elaborate metal technologies, including LPBF, DED, and cold-spray additive. These require substantial investment and properly trained workers at several locations.
To build confidence, the team first pursued accessible applications with high business value. This approach helps the organization accept more demanding additive applications over time.
However, capital requirements make metal AM especially difficult to establish. Haight calls it “a very hard thing to position in the company.”
“We don’t want additive to be one of those buzzwords. We want it to be something that brings extremely high value year over year over time,” he notes.
Five foundations for a managed AM program
Haight believes the AM industry still pays too much attention to machines and parts. In his view, it should focus more on what enterprises need to manage additive manufacturing.
For him, software and systems management rest on five foundations:
- Cybersecurity and cyber‑resilience
- Role‑based access control (RBAC)
- Cross‑enterprise integration; connecting SAP, Windchill, PLM, MRP, and other platforms directly into the additive pipeline
- Data integrity: outbound job/print files
- Data pedigree: telemetry and quality data capture
In his view, the strength of additive lives in the supply chain. What holds the industry back is still the lack of interoperability between the 3D printers and the systems around them.
What success looks like
What would success look like three to five years from now? Would Vestas print a larger share of parts, operate a fully distributed network, or make AM standard in new turbine designs?
“All of the above,” Haight says. He wants product-design teams to see additive as another tool in their toolbox.
At the same time, he wants the pace of 1,000 new parts per year to hold or increase. A rising number would signal deeper adoption rather than a plateau.
Vestas has been playing a different game from the operators we usually cover and winning it on its own terms.
Finally, Haight will explore this further at the technology talk organized by Formnext. There, he wants to compare experiences with energy-sector peers. In particular, he is keen to learn about their work, their partners, and possible lessons for Vestas.
*All images: Courtesy of Vestas Wind Systems A/S. Partner content: Formnext.
Source: GWEC — wind turbine supply data, 2025.
THE 3D ADEPT WEEKLY NEWSLETTER
The industry moves fast. Stay ahead.
Every week, the latest additive manufacturing news, in-depth features and real-world applications, straight to your inbox. Plus, be the first to know when a new issue of 3D ADEPT Mag is out.
Free · One email a week · Unsubscribe anytime
Clicking loads our email provider’s sign-up form, including its analytics and Google’s anti-bot protection. You’re only subscribed if you complete the sign-up. Read our privacy policy.
