Fluid Power Advanced Manufacturing Consortium (FPAMC)

Interim Progress Report #2 for NIST AMTech Planning Grant Federal Award ID # 70NANB15H061

Prof. Kim Stelson, PI University of Minnesota Department of Mechanical Engineering

April 29, 2016

Table of Contents 1.

Overall Project Objectives .................................................................................................................... 1

2.

Overall Project Baselines ...................................................................................................................... 1

3.

Project Milestones ................................................................................................................................. 2

4.

Technical Progress ................................................................................................................................ 2

5.

Summary of Project Changes ................................................................................................................ 8

6.

Problems and Opportunities .................................................................................................................. 8

7.

Organizational Issues ............................................................................................................................ 8

Appendix ....................................................................................................................................................... 9 Participants in the FPAMC Manufacturing Roadmap Workshop 2 ...................................................... 10 Table A-1: Composites and Sintered Materials Manufacturing Roadmap ............................................ 11 Table A-2: Additive Manufacturing Roadmap ...................................................................................... 12 Table A-3: Robotics Manufacturing Roadmap ...................................................................................... 13 Table A-4: Thermal Processing Manufacturing Roadmap .................................................................... 14 Table A-5: Hybrid Manufacturing Roadmap ......................................................................................... 15

1. Overall Project Objectives The objective of the project is to establish a sustaining, interdisciplinary consortium focused on creating, maintaining, expanding and facilitating implementation of an advanced manufacturing roadmap for the U.S. fluid power industry. This group is called the Fluid Power Advanced Manufacturing Consortium (FPAMC) and includes members from industry, trade associations, academia and Oak Ridge National Lab. The FPAMC will not only develop a national fluid power manufacturing roadmap, it will also provide leadership in advancing the implementation of the roadmap. The roadmap will be a tool to direct the advanced manufacturing research and development efforts. It is expected to contain a combination of processes and technologies currently in use in other market segments, new processes, technologies and materials such as 3D printing and composites and new to the world processes and technologies. 2. Overall Project Baselines Fluid power components and systems have precise dimensional requirements and often function in highly loaded operating conditions. This places a premium on both material properties and manufacturing. The state of the art in low cost, precision machining is currently in the automotive market. Their manufacturing processes are characterized by high volumes that minimize changing setups which lead to higher productivity, less variation and better statistical process control resulting in lower cost components and systems. Fluid power components and systems, on the other hand, are typically manufactured in small to medium sized batches (e.g., dozens to perhaps a thousand). This means short production runs, a high numbers of machine set up changes, increased variability and higher cost. Manufacturers of fluid power component and systems face high product development and capital costs. Their products are often used in very demanding commercial duty cycles, so there is a premium on reliability. In addition, historically fluid power manufacturers have faced a lack of high end, advanced degree technical talent trained in fluid power. These and other factors have resulted in challenges to the fluid power industry’s market share in an industry dominated by U.S. suppliers. This has led to the creation of the National Science Foundation Engineering Research Center for Compact and Efficient Fluid Power and other initiatives. Prior to the creation of the Center for Compact and Efficient Fluid Power (CCEFP) in 2006, there were only a handful of academics working in fluid power research. Since its creation, CCEFP has funded research in fluid power that has created a core of roughly 30 PIs from seven universities for which fluid power is a major focus of their research activities. In addition, CCEFP-funded projects have supported 121 BS, 97 MS and 51 PhD students. These PIs and students have been primarily focused on design and control of fluid power components and systems and not how they are manufactured. It is, therefore, appropriate for CCEFP and the fluid power industry to turn their attention to applying new manufacturing processes to their products.

1

3. Project Milestones Figure 1 is a chart showing the project’s major activities and milestones. We are ahead of the project’s original schedule and anticipate no major challenges to complete all activities by the grant end date.

Milestone

Baseline Actual/Est. completion completion Comments date date

Fluid power roadmapping workshop #1

7/29/2015

7/29/2015 Workshop held July 28-29 in Atlanta

Innovation scorecards finalized and vetted

1/29/2016

1/29/2016

Fluid power roadmapping workshop #2

2/25/2016

3/30/2016 Workshop held March 29-30 in Atlanta

Fluid power roadmapping workshop #3 Fluid power manufacturing roadmap rev 1 complete 2017 Fluid Power Advanced Manufacturing Consortium meeting Fluid power manufacturing roadmap rev 2 complete

Sufficient progress made in first two 6/9/2016 Not needed workshops to enable cancellation of workshop #3 Pulled ahead due to cacellation of 8/31/2016 6/26/2016 workshop #3 Plan to have biannual face to face meetings 5/17/2017 Q1 2017 and semiannual teleconferences 5/31/2017 5/31/2017 Based on 2017 FPAMC meeting input or earlier

Figure 1: Milestone chart 4. Technical Progress Manufacturing Roadmapping Workshop 1 The first 2 day workshop to create the initial fluid power advanced manufacturing roadmap was held on July 28 & 29, 2015, at the Georgia Tech Global Learning Center. The event was hosted by Prof. Tom Kurfess of Georgia Tech and Prof. Kim Stelson of the University of Minnesota. There were 39 participants including members from industry, trade associations, academia and National Labs. The workshop was facilitated by Dr. Rich Albright of Albright Strategy Group (ASG). Dr. Albright was formerly Director of Technology Strategy and Assessment at Bell Laboratories. His company, ASG, specializes in facilitation of various types of roadmaps. The National Fluid Power Association retained ASG to facilitate the creation of their original product technology roadmap in 2009 and was very pleased with the results. In Workshop 1, the roadmapping team defined customer competitiveness drivers, key fluid power capabilities that address those drivers, and key enabling technologies for fluid power manufacturing. In addition, breakout teams mapped the manufacturing technologies to the fluid power capabilities and the capabilities to the fluid power competitiveness drivers. The resulting fluid power manufacturing driver map is shown in figure 2. 2

Figure 2: Fluid power manufacturing driver map from FPAMC roadmapping workshop #1 In the driver map, the lines connecting the various boxes represent links between the elements. Heavier lines have stronger links than their narrower counterparts. Software developed by ASG facilitated the creation of the driver map and made the process quite straightforward. Following workshop 1, sub-groups developed “innovation scorecards” that further define the fluid power capabilities and enabling technologies. These scorecards provided detailed information that was utilized in workshop 2. Manufacturing Roadmapping Workshop 2 Workshop 2 continued the process of creating the Fluid Power Advanced Manufacturing Consortium’s manufacturing roadmap. It was held at the same venue as workshop 1 on March 30 & 31, 2016. A total of 29 industry and academic individuals participated in the event. A list of participants is provided in the appendix. The focus of the second workshop on the key enabling technologies for fluid power manufacturing. It should be noted that the phrase used to describe the relevant manufacturing technologies in workshop 1 was emerging manufacturing technologies. However, it was felt that a broader and more appropriate phrase is enabling manufacturing technologies. This implies that manufacturing technologies currently in use in other market areas that are not or insufficiently used in fluid power as well as emerging manufacturing technologies will be considered for the roadmap. The roadmapping team heard from subject matter experts in six enabling manufacturing technologies that allowed breakout teams to develop the roadmap for the technologies.

3

The enabling manufacturing technologies for fluid power from workshop 1 were modified by consensus in workshop 2 (figure 3). The figure also identifies the enabling manufacturing technologies that were covered in workshop 2 (right column, coatings through robotics).

Figure 3: Fluid power enabling manufacturing technologies The process used to develop a roadmap for the emerging manufacturing technologies was: 1. If necessary, revisions were made to the overall definition and benefits of each enabling Manufacturing Technology. 2. Identify specific technology innovations and their benefits, risks/barriers, and work that may be leveraged. 3. Develop a timeline for innovations in the each technology area. 4. Identify the highest priority innovations that should be pursued first. A detailed description of the process for coatings is now provided as an illustrative example. Dr. Bill Grant, Technical Steward – Engine & Power Systems Machining & Metrology, Manufacturing R&D, Manufacturing Technology Division at Caterpillar was the subject matter expert that made a presentation on coatings. He also participated in a breakout group that developed the coatings roadmap. As noted above, the first step was to make any necessary changes to the benefits of the technology identified in the innovation scorecard. The results of the group were: Overall Benefits to Fluid Power Manufacturing 

Coatings that are cost effective, i.e. easier to apply 4



Optimize production value stream



Shapes that are difficult to coat



Improved substrate interface strength, including intercoating bonds



Anti-friction



Anti-wear

Performance improvement or benefit offered to the fluid power user 

Greater power density



Greater load carrying capability



Faster speeds



Increased corrosion resistance



Increased life/reliability



Lower friction/improved system efficiency



Lower environmental impact / improved compliance



Increased/decreased adhesive strength (depending on desired result)

The breakout group identified seven coating technologies and rated them against key performance criteria and barriers/risks to adoption (figure 4).

Figure 4: Coating technologies benefits and risks The group then developed a timeline for applying the coatings technologies to the fluid power industry (figure 5). Case hardening and laser cladding were identified as the highest priority with High Velocity Oxy Fuel/High Velocity Air Fuel coatings (HVOF/HVAF) and vapor deposition the next highest. 5

Figure 5: Roadmap for integrating coating technologies into fluid power The roadmaps for the enabling manufacturing technologies covered in workshop 2 are in the Appendix. During discussions near the end of the workshop, it was decided to add one enabling manufacturing technology (micro-machining) and modify the definition of one (composites becomes composites and engineering plastics). The updated fluid power manufacturing driver map is shown in figure 6.

6

Figure 6: Fluid Power Manufacturing Driver Map The major steps remaining to complete the Fluid Power Manufacturing Roadmap are: 

Complete the three remaining enabling manufacturing technology reviews, including timelines and priority innovations.



Review the priority enabling manufacturing technology innovations, looking for a more synergistic set.



Draft the Roadmap document and circulate widely for comments and improvements.



Review the roadmap with manufacturing application experts and many who have or are experiencing manufacturing problems. Ask for their input in prioritizing action plans.



Connect the Fluid Power Manufacturing Roadmap to the Fluid Power Design Roadmap



Organize a session on manufacturing at the Fluid Power Innovation and Research Conference in October 2016. This is an opportunity to disseminate the roadmap broadly and solicit input.

The major steps remaining to further develop the Fluid Power Advanced Manufacturing Consortium and ensure its continuation include: 

Investigate and connect with the relevant existing NNMI Manufacturing Innovation Institutes such as America Makes and DMDII, IACMI.



Identify opportunities for the consortium to pursue funding.



Plan and hold an annual webinar and an annual meeting to continue focus on the roadmap. These events will be phased approximately six months apart. 7

5. Summary of Project Changes The second workshop was delayed by roughly a month due to the availability of key participants. In addition, workshop #2 was so successful that it has been decided that a third workshop in 2016 is not needed. It is anticipated that the Revision 1 of the fluid power advanced manufacturing roadmap will be completed in June 2016 roughly two months ahead of schedule. The next in person meeting of the FPAMC will be in Q1 2017. The focus of that meeting will be to validate and potentially update the roadmap and to create and assign tasks for implementation of the roadmap. 6. Problems and Opportunities We were very pleased to learn that Worchester Polytechnic Institute (WPI) also won an AMTech planning grant in one of the key manufacturing technologies identified in the fluid power manufacturing roadmap: heat treating (or more broadly, thermal processing). Prof. Rick Sisson of WPI provided a recorded presentation about their research and roadmapping results that provided substantial information for the attendees. A visit to WPI to continue the conversation and flesh out the details and timing of integrating thermal processing of materials into the FPAMC roadmap is planned for May/June 2016. We believe that the linking of these two AMTech roadmaps will provide substantial benefits for both groups. 7. Organizational Issues A critical part of the second workshop was the recruiting of subject matter experts to attend and make presentations on the key manufacturing technologies identified in the first workshop. The Association for Manufacturing Technology (AMT) played an important role in identifying and recruiting these experts. AMT expressed interest in the opportunities the roadmap offered their members and we believe they will continue to support the FPAMC’s efforts to disseminate and implement the priorities identified by the roadmap.

8

Appendix

9

Participants in the FPAMC Manufacturing Roadmap Workshop 2 March 30-31, 2016

Georgia Tech Global Learning Center, Atlanta, GA

In person: Michael Betz, Danfoss Brad Bohlmann, University of Minnesota & CCEFP Mike Freisleben, CNH Industrial Paul Goc, Deltrol Fluid Products Dr. Marion (Bill) Grant, Caterpillar Mike Gust, University of Minnesota & CCEFP Bob Hammond, Deltrol Fluid Products Zach Holt, Netshape Technologies Sheku Kamara, Milwaukee School of Engineering Dr. Barney Klamecki, University of Minnesota Dr. Joe Kovach, KoMotion Technologies Dr. Rajeev Kumar, ExxonMobil Dr. Tom Kurfess, Georgia Tech Eric Lanke, NFPA Pete Molloy, SMC Ben Moses, Association for Manufacturing Technology Scott Nelson, Hydraquip Jacob Paso, Delta Computer Systems Dr. Gangopadhyay Paul, Netshape Technologies Denise Rockhill, NFPA Lyle Schuey, Czero Jesse Smith, Concentric AB Kent Sowatzke, Bimba Dr. Kim Stelson, University of Minnesota & CCEFP Michael Stewart, Steelhead Composities Eric Thorin, Sun Hydraulics Dr. Rich Albright, Albright Strategy Group, Roadmap Facilitator Remotely: Prof. Rick Sisson, Worchester Polytechnic Institute Dr. Bhaskar Dutta, DM3D Technology

10

Table A-1: Composites and Sintered Materials Manufacturing Roadmap

11

Table A-2: Additive Manufacturing Roadmap

12

Table A-3: Robotics Manufacturing Roadmap

13

Table A-4: Thermal Processing Manufacturing Roadmap

14

Table A-5: Hybrid Manufacturing Roadmap

15