Testbed for Material and Additive Manufacturing : Needs Analysis and Benchmarking

• The manufacturing industry is facing a radical transformation due to digitization of production, demands on sustainable production, and possibilities of additive manufacturing (AM). AM, an alternative to mechanical manufacturing, provides several benefits such as rapid prototyping and low environmental impact. AM offers an opportunity for companies to improve their competitive conditions and value offerings while contributing to sustainable development. However, AM also poses challenges for companies, especially for small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) as these companies often lack the financial resources and expertise to use new manufacturing methods. Testbeds are one way to support companies and accelerate change towards AM. This report builds on previous investigations concerning testbeds and AM and explores the possibilities and conditions to establish a testbed with a focus on AM in the Uppsala Region. This report builds on site visits and interviews with ten existing testbeds and site visits and interviews with 14 companies. The testbeds were spread around the country, and the companies were centered on the Uppsala Region.The findings are divided into two clusters: companies and testbeds. Altogether, nine companies either manufactured AM components or AM powder. All 14 companies had experience using AM, which is a clear indication that all these companies are early adopters or potential early adopters of AM. The companies that did not use AM (non-adopters) considered AM to be a promising technology but believed that AM did not fit with their current operations. The non-adopters believed AM was best suited for R&D, where proof of concepts and prototypes are developed and explored, which implies low technical maturity. Most the companies saw AM as a possibility for their operations. Non-adopters perceived AM as a possible complement to traditional manufacturing. Several non-adopters noted that they would adopt AM if customers requested it. Many non-adopters had difficulties identifying a business case for AM. In total, seven of the 14 companies had no experience with testbeds. Many companies envisioned a physical facility placed preferably near Uppsala and considered that a testbed could be helpful with material development. Many of the companies preferred a pay per use price model for the testbed. Furthermore, many of the companies were not willing to invest in creation of a testbed, but they were interested in using a testbed if available.Of the ten testbeds investigated, six integrate AM in their operations. Irrespective of whether the testbeds used AM, the establishment of the testbeds can be seen as an incremental trial and error process, which takes time and often starts with common projects. The path to establishing a formal testbed varied across the testbeds, but all the testbeds were developed based on the needs of their stakeholders such as academia or industry. Most of the testbeds needed to secure financing. Many of the testbeds initially received public funding, and these funds were used to establish facilities and set up an organization. The main challenge lies in having long-term financing covering running costs of rent, maintenance, human resources, and continuous investments. In addition to pay per use fees, a base funding originating (e.g., from member organizations) is crucial for long-term survival. The testbeds had difficulties estimating capacity use of the facilities, but all concluded the use is not yet 100%, so there are possibilities to increase the use of the facilities. It is clear that the testbeds need to define the value of the testbeds from a user perspective. Many testbeds experience challenges attracting SMEs irrespective of whether they focus on AM.Based on the investigation, this report formulates one key recommendation: Create a joint testbed building on the existing AM competences and facilities in Uppsala by combining existing testbeds (AM@Ångström and U-PRINT) into one testbed.That is, it is not viable to establish a totally new physical testbed as this would require several years of development and high investment costs. There are three main opportunities concerning this recommendation: 1) added value for Uppsala University and external users; 2) new user groups, and 3) specialization on life sciences.

Ämnesord

SAMHÄLLSVETENSKAP  -- Ekonomi och näringsliv -- Företagsekonomi (hsv//swe)

SOCIAL SCIENCES  -- Economics and Business -- Business Administration (hsv//eng)

TEKNIK OCH TEKNOLOGIER  -- Materialteknik -- Annan materialteknik (hsv//swe)

ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY  -- Materials Engineering -- Other Materials Engineering (hsv//eng)

Nyckelord

additive manufacturing

company

testbed

adoption

material

Business Studies

Företagsekonomi

Teknisk fysik med inriktning mot materialvetenskap

Engineering Science with specialization in Materials Science

Publikations- och innehållstyp

vet (ämneskategori)

rap (ämneskategori)