JEC COMPOSITES MAGAZINE - Issue #117 - November/December 2017 - 64

TECHNOLOGY software

Building a case for automated composite lay-up
With technology advancing and engineers pushing further towards automation,
traditional composite manufacturing methods will soon phase-out for more cutting-edge solutions. Before committing to automated composite manufacturing,
one must first understand the vast differences between traditional methods and
contemporary ones.
ANDRE COLVIN,
Composites Product Manager
CGTech

company may employ a number of composite experts, but automation involves unique concepts that may not arise in traditional
lay-up. Engineers have to weigh a variety of unique features to arrive at the optimal ply-covering strategy. Not all composite parts make
for ideal Automated Fibre Placement (AFP) or Automated Tape Laying
(ATL) candidates. Companies need to take numerous factors into account before deciding to invest in this innovative technology. With the
help of software, companies can decide if a business case exists for automation, familiarize themselves with the AFP/ATL process, and test part
manufacturability.

Automated composite equipment
High startup costs deter most companies from considering automated
composite equipment. They incur expenses not only from hardware,
but also from software and investment time. These projects typically
exceed millions of dollars with high-ranking employees putting their
careers on the line, betting on the success of the project. This is why so
many companies shy away from this state-of-the-art technology and stay
content with traditional hand lay-up. However, if implemented correctly, the benefits of automation supersede the initial risk. Top aerospace
companies already rely heavily on automated composite manufacturing
with no intention of reverting solely back to manual lay-up. To succeed,
companies need a commitment from the top down to ensure success,
with an understanding that obstacles will arise throughout the implementation process. Furthermore, they must establish a business case.
They need to consider a variety of factors such as lot size, dimensional
tolerances, and manufacturing difficulty in order to understand the economics before investing in this new process.
For one-off parts or prototyping, hand lay-up allows for fast turnaround and typically makes the most economic sense. Regardless
of part quantity or size, certain work pieces mandate automated
equipment for material type or health concerns. The processing of
thermoplastic composites such as carbon PEEK requires the use of
a laser or flash lamp for material consolidation. In addition, some
resin systems such as phenolics pose health concerns for operators,

making automated equipment the safest choice. When deciding between automation and hand lay-up, one should also recognize the
part function. For non-structural work pieces or ones that do not require immense accuracy, hand lay-up might suffice. This logic holds
true even for companies that already own AFP/ATL equipment.
Why waste valuable machine time on non-critical parts? One must
also review part difficulty. If lamination technicians consistently
produce quality parts seamlessly, justification to change the process might not exist. However, for challenging parts, due to shape,
production quantity or sheer size, automation could turn out as the
most efficient solution, providing a more reproducible process that
increases quality and lowers manufacturing costs.

Programming
and simulation software
Companies must decide for themselves if automation can solve their
manufacturing problems by using programming and simulation software. Through the use of computer programs, engineers can test the
manufacturability of their part before taking the leap of faith to invest
in expensive equipment. In addition to manufacturing considerations,
mechanical properties can also be improved as automation allows for a
more advanced composite design that cannot be addressed by hand layup. In addition, software offers statistics such as material usage, scrap rate,
and lay-up time to evaluate if cost savings exist. If automation proves advantageous, companies
can begin researching
which machine tool
builder and machine
type best fits their process and budget.
AFP involves concepts
that might sound foreign to a hand lay-up
expert. Features such
as steering, fibre angle
deviation, gap, overlap,
and minimum length
tow all greatly impact Figure 1. Simulation of hexagon part lay-up using
the outcome of the ElectroImpact AFP robot

jec composites magazine / N°117 November - December 2017

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of JEC COMPOSITES MAGAZINE - Issue #117 - November/December 2017