AUTOMATED PROCESSING TECHNOLOGY FOR
COMPOSITES: CURRENT STATUS AND VISION FOR THE
FUTURE
Carroll Grant, Equipment Marketing
Jim Martin, Fiber Placement Manager
Automated Dynamics
Schenectady, New York 12305
ABSTRACT
Although the aerospace composites industry is currently experiencing a good annual growth rate,
the “cost of composites” is a continuing issue that tends to limit industry growth. Aerospace
grade materials and manufacturing processes are still expensive. Manufacturing processes for
composites are still predominately non-automated and aerospace grade materials are much more
expensive than metals (the competition).
Highly efficient automated processing equipment is available to the industry and utilization of
automation has grown in recent years. However, automated composites equipment has
historically been very expensive and this factor tends to limit the spread of automation
throughout the industry. For example, Fiber Placement and Automated Tape Laying processes
have been historically the exclusive domain of the largest aerospace companies in the world.
In order for the aerospace composites industry to achieve full growth potential, automated
processes must become more affordable and therefore more accessible to the multitude of
smaller and mid-sized companies around the world who are producing composite structures.
This paper provides the author’s perspectives on reducing the cost of composites automation.
KEY WORDS: Automation, Manufacturing/Processing, Cost/Economics
1. INTRODUCTION
The issue of “reducing the cost of composites” has been frequently addressed at composites
industry conferences for many years. This issue is normally either a primary subject or at least
the secondary subject of most every paper presented at composites conferences. Without
question, the “cost of composites” has been a major issue in the aerospace composites industry
and unfortunately is a continuing issue.
During the last 15 – 20 years, there have been many Research and Development (R&D) projects
that focused on reducing the cost of composites. R&D projects funded by the government and
the private sector have been successful in developing innovative processes for reducing the cost
of specific composite structures. Many of these processes have been successfully implemented
on aerospace programs. There have also been papers written that recommended “cost reduction
concepts” which had excellent merit, had not actually been tried and validated.
The fiber placement based process developed for the C-17 engine nacelle fan cowl door is an
excellent example of a successful composites R&D program funded by the US government. The
DARPA funded “Affordable Composites for Propulsion” Program (ACP) developed the C-17
fan cowl door process in the mid 1990’s and this process was implemented on the C-17
production program in 1999.
The subject of this paper is also “reducing the costs of composites.” However, the
recommendations expressed in this paper are more in line with an overall philosophy for the
aerospace composites industry as opposed to a recommended process for a specific aerospace
composite component. This paper provides an overview regarding why aerospace composites
are expensive and a vision for future direction in the industry that would result in a global
reduction in the cost of aerospace composites. The perspectives expressed in this paper were
developed as a result of over 60 meetings held during the last 3 ½ years with worldwide
aerospace composite structures suppliers. These meetings were held for the purpose of
discussing automated composites processes and automated equipment for aerospace composites.
2. AEROSPACE COMPOSITES INDUSTRY GROWTH
Despite the “high cost of aerospace composites” issue, aerospace companies usually increase the
usage of composites with each new aircraft program that goes into production. This is true on
both commercial and military aircraft programs. The aerospace composites industry, which is
primarily carbon fiber based, is growing at an annual rate of just over 2%. The following are
some of the programs that are driving aerospace composites industry growth (Table 1.).
Table 1. New Aircraft Program Composites
AIRCRAFT PROGRAM USAGE OF COMPOSITES
C-17 AirLifter 16k lbs of Composites
F-18 E/F Super Hornet 18% of airframe
F-22 Raptor 24% of airframe
Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) 25% of airframe
A380 Commercial Jet 66k lbs of Composites
Other aircraft programs such as Raytheon’s new generation of Business Jets are dramatically
increasing the usage of composites. Raytheon’s Premier 1 and Hawker Business Jets feature all
composite fuselages. The fuselages for these aircraft are a closed 360º one-piece designs that are
built with an automated process which reduces the cost of these large carbon fiber structures.
3. COST DRIVERS FOR AEROSPACE COMPOSITES
As new aircraft programs provide the opportunity for expanding the use of composites, the “cost
of composites” issue must be evaluated each time a new aircraft is designed and decisions made
regarding materials to be used on specific structure - metal or composites. Aluminum structure
is today, as always, the primary competitor of composites. Weight reductions, which were once
a key attraction for use of composites, are no longer of primary importance, composites must
also buy their way into each new aircraft program.
As we look at our competitor (the metals industry), a simple comparison reveals some important
differences and provides insight into why the composites industry has a cost problem. Although
the aerospace metals industry has been in existence for many decades and certainly many years
longer than the aerospace composites industry, the following comparison illustrates how far
behind the aerospace composites industry is with regard to processes and materials (Table 2).
Table 2. Industry Comparison (metals vs composites)
METALS INDUSTRY COMPOSITES INDUSTRY
• Most suppliers have automated • Very few suppliers have automated
processes processes
• Even smaller shops can afford • Only the largest companies can
CNC metal cutting equipment afford composites automation
• Materials cost in a range of • Aerospace grade materials can cost
$2 - $6 per pound 10-20 times more than metals
• Extensive variety of automation is • Limited variety of automation is
available from large supplier base available from small supplier base
As the table illustrates, process automation is widespread throughout the metals industry and
materials are not expensive. A large variety of automation is available for metals processing
from a supplier base that numbers in the hundreds. Automation for metals processing is also
affordable to most if not all suppliers of metal parts. In the composites industry, there are only a
few automated processes available, equipment is expensive, and materials can cost 10 –20 times
more than metals. Labor intensive, high material scrap rate manual processes are still the most
predominately used manufacturing method in the aerospace composites business. It is easy to
see why the aerospace composites industry has a cost problem.
4. REDUCING THE COST OF COMPOSITES
Although it is easy to see why the aerospace composites industry has a cost problem, it is
difficult to understand why this problem continues year after year without being globally
resolved. When we consider the issue of “reducing the cost of composites”, there are two (2)
primary areas to address - the cost of aerospace grade materials and manufacturing process
costs. Since it is highly likely that aerospace grade materials will remain relatively expensive
when compared to metals used in aircraft structure, more efficiency in composites manufacturing
processes becomes the key to reducing the overall cost of aerospace composites. Process
efficiency can be achieved with automation - this has been proven many times. The higher cost
of aerospace grade composite materials can be offset with more efficient processes.
Automated processes can reduce the cost of aerospace composite structures several ways. The
following are a few specific items that combine to make up the overall cost reduction provided
by automation:
• Reduction in Labor Hours Per Component - automation will provide a significant
reduction in the labor hour content required to fabricate each component
• Reduction in Material Scrap Rate - automated processes typically have a material scrap
rate in the 3% - 8% range. This is compared to manual processes with scrap factors in a
range of 20% - 50%. The material scrap range for hand lay up processes was developed
with input from a large cross section of companies who use manual processes. The reduced
material scrap rate is a major contributor to the overall cost reduction provided by automation
• Reduced Need for In-Process Inspection - with a computer controlled machine laying up
the prepreg material - it is not necessary to have a QA person verify that each ply has been
completed and the plies are the specified orientations.
• Higher Quality, Repeatable Quality Parts - implementation of automation normally
provides some improvement in quality and better process repeatability. This can contribute
to the overall cost reduction provided by automation.
There are currently six (6) manufacturing processes that are utilized extensively in the aerospace
composites industry:
• Hand Lay up - the most predominately used process by far
• Filament Winding - a low tech process used for cylindrical shapes
• Pultrusion - fiberglass parts, small parts
• RTM - and variants of this process (VARTM, RFI)
• Tape Layers - used for large, flat, or mild contoured parts
• Fiber Placement - a hi-tech process used for complex shapes
RTM, Tape Layers, and Fiber Placement are the processes normally associated with fabrication
of carbon fiber aircraft primary structure. For the purposes of this paper, the primary focus will
be on the Automated Tape Layer (ATL) and Automated Fiber Placement (AFP) processes.
These two (2) processes are the most totally automated of all manufacturing methods that are
currently being utilized for composite aircraft structure.
An excellent example of cost reductions that resulted from implementing an automated process
would be the V-22 Rotor Grip. The Rotor Grips are thick walled, complex shaped components
that attach the V-22 Rotor Blades to the rotor hub assembly. These parts were originally built
with a combination of filament winding and hand lay up (FW / HLU). The table below
illustrates the weight advantage of composites and the significant cost reduction when the
process was converted to AFP (Table 3).
Table 3. V-22 Rotor Grip Process Cost Reduction
WEIGHT ADVANTAGE
Original Steel Design 225 lbs
Titanium Design 125 lbs
Composite Design 80 lbs
COST ADVANTAGE FW / HLU AFP
Material Used 170 lbs 90 lbs
Total Process Manhours 410 Hrs * 163 hrs
* Theoretical - nearly double in practice
Changing to the fiber placement process for this component dramatically reduced the material
scrap rate and reduced the process manhours to less than half the hours required for the original
process. The reduced material scrap rate was a significant part of the overall cost reduction.
Tape Layers and Fiber Placement Systems are highly efficient machines that can provide a
significant cost reductions in fabrication of composite parts, especially larger parts and complex
shaped parts like the V-22 Rotor Grips. However, most of the ATL and AFP machines operating
in the world today are also very large and very expensive. Due to the huge investment required,
the decision process companies go through regarding investment can continue for several years.
ATL and AFP machines were originally developed with the philosophy in mind of “one-size-
fits-all” - one universal process that could be utilized for many applications. This is especially
true with AFP. The problem with this philosophy is most suppliers out in the industry who are
building composite parts cannot afford that one large machine for all applications. Only a
limited number of major companies can afford large automated systems like ATL and AFP. This
approach to automation has left most suppliers shut out from ATL and AFP processes.
There are approximately 200 - 300 companies in the world (depending on the criteria of the
count) who are engaged in building aerospace composite structures. This includes all companies
from the OEM’s, to the mid-sized companies, and on down to the smaller suppliers. For every
OEM, there are a multitude of smaller companies who are building composite parts for the
aerospace industry. There are many companies with annual sales in the $10m to $20m range that
build composite parts, but because of the investment requirements, advanced composites
automation like ATL and AFP has been the exclusive domain of the largest companies.
5. REDUCING THE COST OF AUTOMATION
In order to achieve a global (or industry wide) reduction in the cost of aerospace composites and
attack the cost issue that has plagued the aerospace composites industry for decades, automated
composites processing equipment must become more affordable and therefore more accessible to
a broader spectrum of suppliers. The industry can not make progress in resolving the cost issue
as long as only the largest companies in the world can afford advanced composites processes.
The authors of this paper firmly believe that automated processing equipment can be more
affordable. The following are some specific recommendations that would result in lowering the
cost of automation and therefore result in more widespread use of automated processes:
• Competition - at the moment, there are only a few companies in the world that market
automated equipment for aerospace composites. The composites equipment industry needs
more suppliers. New suppliers are needed with innovative ideas for composites automation.
Competition in itself normally results in a global reduction of product costs.
• Lower Complexity Machines - automated equipment suppliers should include lower
complexity machines in their product line. Expensive, advanced technology equipment may
not necessarily always be required for each and every aerospace composite part.
• Custom Automation - the equipment industry needs to develop low cost, product specific
“work cells” for specific parts or families of parts. There are a variety of custom machines
that could be designed which would be based on the ATL or AFP process.
• More Variety - the composites equipment industry should be more flexible and offer
more variety in their product line. The industry needs more variety in machine sizes,
machine capabilities, and process applications. For example, many primary structure
applications for aircraft require stringers to stiffen the composite skins. There are automated
processes for efficient lay up of the prepreg skins, but no process has been developed to
automate forming of “hat section” stringers which are utilized by designers frequently.
When we look at our competitor (the metals industry), equipment suppliers in the metals world
offer an extensive variety of equipment with a broad price range. In the metals industry, the
supplier base numbers in the hundreds. There are many companies building automated metal
cutting machines throughout the world. One machine tool company in Japan lists approximately
180 variations of processing equipment in their catalog. In the metals world, a customer has
choices of 3-axis, 4-axis, 5-axis, and high-speed equipment that comes in a variety of sizes and
configurations. In the metals machine tool industry, a supplier can purchase a highly capable 5-
axis machining center for less than $500k. The composites industry needs ATL and AFP based
machines in a price range of $500k. The authors of this paper believe this price range should be
a composites industry goal - and that goal is achievable.
The following are two (2) examples of “affordable automation”. These machines were created by
Automated Dynamics (ADC) in Schenectady, NY. The machine in Fig 1 is located at Bell
Helicopter facilities in Ft Worth, TX and the machine in Fig 2 is located at Dassault Aviation.
Argenteuil (just outside of Paris), France
Fig 1. Product Specific Small Fiber Placement System
Converted Filament Winder
New Machine Controls
Fiber Placement Delivery
Head ( 8 tows )
Fiber Placement Software
Machine was developed
specifically for fabrication
of V-22 Rotor Grips
Bell currently has three (3)
of these machines
Fig 2. Small Thermoplastic FP System Used for R&D
Reconditioned Unimate Multi-Axis
Gantry Platform (5-axis Cantilever
Gantry)
Spindle System (Headstock &
Tailstock)
New Machine Controls
Thermoplastic Fiber Placement
Delivery Head
Fiber Placement Software
Machine has part size capability of
4 ft wide x 9 ft long x 5 ft diameter
Machine was custom designed for a
specific application and purpose
The custom designed machines pictured in Fig 1.and Fig 2. offer a good combination of
capability and affordability. These two (2) machines are good examples that affordability in
automation is indeed possible. These machines were developed for specific purposes using
innovative ideas and “outside the box” approaches to machine building.
Both machines are well suited to R&D and production applications alike and are priced well
below the industry standard. The two (2) machines at Bell Helicopter cost less than $500k each.
Custom machines similar to these can be delivered in less than nine (9) months and installed in
approximately two (2 ) weeks. Attractive delivery schedules enable a structures supplier to
consider automation when bidding on important programs and still have time to procure
necessary equipment when the contract has been won.
6. SUMMARY COMMENTS
The issue of “high costs” has plagued the aerospace composites industry since the time the first
aircraft composite parts were built. The drivers of this cost problem are widely known and well
understood. Expensive aerospace grade materials and inefficient manual fabrication processes
drive the cost of composites. Automated processes can reduce the cost of composites - this has
been proven many times. The industry has developed highly efficient automated processes, but
the equipment required for these processes for the most part has been priced out of reach of the
smaller and mid-sized suppliers in the industry. If automated processes could be made more
affordable and therefore more accessible to all suppliers throughout the aerospace composites
industry, the result would be a global reduction in the overall cost of aerospace composite
structure. With more affordability in the products, the aerospace composites industry would
most likely have a much better growth rate than is currently being experienced.
The authors of this paper have met with over 60 aerospace composites companies in the last 3 ½
years to discuss automated processes and automated equipment. The authors know first hand
there is a general desire in the industry for more process automation. However, regardless of the
strong desire for automated processes, there is also a reluctance by the mid-sized and smaller
companies in the industry to invest in expensive composites automation equipment. Therefore,
only the largest and richest companies in the world can afford advanced composites processes
such as Automated Tape Laying and Automated Fiber Placement.
The authors of this paper firmly believe that automation can be made more affordable to all
suppliers in the aerospace industry who build composite parts. The recommendations included
in this paper have proven to be successful (on a limited basis) in making automation more
affordable. The aerospace composites industry should vigorously pursue affordability in process
automation and resolve the “cost of composites” issue on an industry wide basis
