Additive manufacturing, also known as 3D printing, has the potential to revolutionize the U.S. military\u2019s logistics system. But numerous hurdles stand in the way of that dream becoming reality, experts said.<\/p>\n
Unlike the traditional manufacturing process, which creates items by taking raw materials and subtracting from them by drilling or whittling, additive manufacturing takes digital data and creates 3D objects by stacking printed layers of raw materials.
\nBrennan Hogan, a program manager at LMI \u2014 a Virginia-based not-for-profit corporation that is consulting with the Defense Logistics Agency about the implications of 3D printing \u2014 said additive manufacturing provides an opportunity for \u201cturning the supply chain on its head.\u201d<\/p>\n
Under the traditional supply system, \u201cyou create the parts at a manufacturing base and then you send it to a depot, and then it gets put on a component or it gets sent out into the field,\u201d she said during a panel discussion at the Brookings Institution, a Washington, D.C. think tank.<\/p>\n
\u201cIf you push the entire supply chain forward and you actually put the machine in the field and you\u2019re printing in the field, you\u2019re \u2026 truncating the entire process and meeting the need exactly where it is,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n
Three-D printing could potentially enable the Defense Department to reduce inventory and storage space, and thereby lower costs, she noted. It could also allow the military to print obsolescent parts that are no longer being manufactured.<\/p>\n
As the technology advances, some military leaders want to give 3D printers to depots and deployed troops to facilitate maintenance and operational readiness and save money. The Navy is particularly gung-ho about the technology, having created a \u201cPrint the Fleet\u2019\u201d project two years ago to develop procedures for building, qualifying and delivering parts. In recent years, the U.S. military has 3D-printed basic items like oil caps and medical supplies. Going forward, officials envision printing out larger, more complex objects such as aircraft wings or even small drones.<\/p>\n
\u201cSoon there will be no physical tether to the supply chain,\u201d Vice Adm. Phillip Cullom, deputy chief of naval operations for fleet readiness and logistics, said at an additive manufacturing conference earlier this year, according to a Navy news release.<\/p>\n
But integrating 3D printing into the force on a large scale isn\u2019t as simple as buying the machines and materials and installing them downrange. Many issues and challenges need to be addressed, analysts and industry executives said.<\/p>\n
Jim Joyce, a specialist leader at Deloitte Consulting\u2019s manufacturing and operations office, said ensuring quality is the key obstacle.<\/p>\n
\u201cWhat\u2019s that hurdle we have to get over in additive manufacturing before we can unlock the sort of logistical revolution? It\u2019s really part certification,\u201d he said. \u201cIf I make a part on my machine, can I replicate that process and all its detail and results on another machine and be sure that I did it [precisely]?\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cOnce you crack that code \u2026 you really unleash this technology,\u201d he added.<\/p>\n
James Kenyon, director of advanced programs and technology at Pratt & Whitney, said industry has concerns about the implications of additive manufacturing when it comes to product manufacturer approval.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe problem you run into, particularly with aircraft systems, is that there are certain characteristics of those parts that you have to have \u2014 its material properties as well as qualities such as surface finish. \u2026 If you don\u2019t have them, that part can fail, and when it fails, it will be spectacular and not in a good way,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe challenge for us as a manufacturer is that we stand by the quality of our products,\u201d he added. \u201cIf you start flying around products that have [3D-printed] parts that we can\u2019t stand by, then it makes it very difficult for us.\u201d<\/p>\n
Julie Christodoulou, director of the material science and technology division at the Office of Naval Research, said the service has ongoing initiatives at laboratories and depots to address quality concerns.<\/p>\n
\u201cWe\u2019re working toward building the confidence in those capabilities and really working to understand how to qualify parts for use,\u201d she told National Defense. \u201cThere\u2019s a number of different variables that affect the quality of the component, and we\u2019re spending resources and time to understand how to work with those variations and ultimately predict the capability of the components.\u201d<\/p>\n
The Navy hosted an industry day this summer to talk about the service\u2019s additive manufacturing objectives. Christodoulou said a broad agency announcement is expected to be released this fall, soliciting ideas from industry for 3D printing and supporting work to enable part qualifications at military depots.<\/p>\n
Efforts to utilize 3D printers on ships could prove more challenging because conditions at sea, such as water vapor and ship movement, make additive manufacturing in such environments more difficult, she said.<\/p>\n
At this point, the Navy is having difficulty producing certain types of items with 3D printers, she noted.<\/p>\n
\u201cWe can pretty well routinely provide mechanical properties that meet or exceed those of a cast product\u201d such as a simple valve, Christodoulou said. \u201cIt\u2019s more challenging and indeed at this point impractical to meet properties equivalent to those of a wrought product, one that\u2019s gone through forging or \u2026 had some sort of thermal mechanical processing after the casting.\u201d<\/p>\n
Technological development isn\u2019t the only issue of concern for those who want to push forward 3D printing. The idea raises intellectual property questions for the Defense Department and industry, analysts noted.<\/p>\n
The Pentagon would need to sort through legal issues because it has not licensed the technical rights to many of its acquired end items for decades, Deloitte said in a report last year.<\/p>\n
\u201cAs a result, the DoD will not be able to adopt [additive manufacturing\u2019s] full promise quickly,\u201d said the report titled, \u201c3D Opportunity in the Department of Defense: Additive Manufacturing Fires Up.\u201d<\/p>\n
The Pentagon needs to develop a licensing strategy for computer-aided design (CAD) files and determine the extent to which scanning and reverse engineering can be legally accomplished, the report said.<\/p>\n
Troops must also be trained to use 3D printing technology. Forward-deployed end users need to know how to employ CAD files and 3D data and in some cases have engineering knowledge, Hogan said. \u201cThere will be a need for having specialists and generalists who can facilitate the process so that the technology can actually be applied.\u201d<\/p>\n
While 3D printing could reduce the risk to the U.S. military\u2019s physical supply chain by eliminating the need for parts to be transported, it creates new threats in an age of cyber warfare.<\/p>\n
\u201cIt\u2019s going to be a digital supply chain, so the military will be sending CAD files to their 3D printers that are forward deployed. Those designs could be manipulated\u201d by a malicious actor, said Jennifer McArdle, a cyber expert at the Center for Revolutionary Thought at the Potomac Institute for Policy Studies.<\/p>\n
Navy officials are worried that an adversary could use cyber tools to cause the military to unknowingly print faulty parts for aircraft or other systems.<\/p>\n
Troy Johnson, director of the new Navy cyber division within the office of the chief of naval operations, said the service is examining how best to protect 3D printers from direct and indirect attacks. The systems could be vulnerable if they are connected to the Navy\u2019s information networks, or if sailors take a compromised thumb drive and insert it into a 3D printer, he told reporters at the Pentagon. \u201cThose are the areas that we\u2019re concerned about, and those are the areas that we\u2019re working through now as we go.\u201d<\/p>\n
The Defense Department will also need to help companies involved in additive manufacturing with cyber security, McArdle said.<\/p>\n
\u201cDoD contractors will have to deal with these issues because they are going to be producing systems that the military will be using.\u201d<\/p>\n
When it comes to deciding whether to use 3D printing to create a particular item, cost, quality requirements and volume demand are factors that come into play, Christodoulou said.<\/p>\n
\u201cIt\u2019s not going to be used for everything,\u201d she said. \u201cThere is still going to be some components that are just best made by traditional routes. More complex systems certainly are going to be taking advantage of [additive manufacturing technologies] more and more\u201d but \u201cit\u2019s going to come back to the economics of the process and the properties that you want.\u201d<\/p>\n
The Defense Department is now on an \u201cevolutionary\u201d rather than revolutionary path when it comes to using 3D printing to facilitate logistics, analysts said.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe most effective way of applying the technology would be in a modest incremental way\u201d because there are so many complicated aspects to the endeavor, Hogan said. \u201cOur recommendation is that it is \u2026\u00a0 more of a 10, 15, 20-year timeframe.\u201d<\/p>\n
On the industry side, companies also face challenges when it comes to taking full advantage of additive manufacturing to create products.<\/p>\n
\u201cDesign software needs to take a jump forward before it catches up with the technology,\u201d Joyce said. \u201cThere\u2019s a lot of lack of understanding or just frankly, knowledge about how you design the digitally optimal part.\u201d<\/p>\n
He compared the current situation to the emergence of composite materials as an alternative to traditional metals in manufacturing.<\/p>\n
\u201cThere was just an incredible adoption cycle \u2026 of getting composite education out to engineering schools before it really flourished,\u201d he said. \u201cThat took decades, really.\u201d<\/p>\n
Kenyon said Pratt & Whitney has used 3D printing technology to design engine components for the U.S. military, but right now exploiting those tools for design work is \u201can art,\u201d not a science.<\/p>\n
\u201cThat\u2019s the real [business] opportunity \u2026 because it opens up a whole new way of making things that can cost less because I need less material; that can take less time because I can eliminate some processes out of my manufacturing line,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
Joyce expects 3D printing to propel two different trends in industry.<\/p>\n
\u201cYou\u2019re going to see the rise of imitative individuals and companies that are producing \u2026 obsolete parts and then frankly, going into mainstream parts as we start to sort out what is protected and what isn\u2019t protected legally,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
As the cost of 3D printing machines and materials comes down, \u201cmanufacturing increasingly becomes a commodity where folks can just get in. They don\u2019t need as much money. They can set up a very capable machine shop and manufacture things that traditionally were done by very large defense companies.\u201d<\/p>\n
On the other hand, opportunities exist for companies to separate themselves from the herd, Joyce said.<\/p>\n
\u201cThere\u2019s also a group of machines and materials that are becoming highly specialized and regarded as a competitive advantage,\u201d he said. \u201cThere\u2019s a limited number of folks, usually with a lot of capital, that are truly differentiating themselves in additive manufacturing.\u201d<\/p>\n
Companies pursuing high-end capabilities are building their own additive manufacturing machines, Joyce said. \u201cThe machines that are available just aren\u2019t up to snuff.\u201d<\/p>\n
Those types of investments have been paying off in the commercial industrial sector, he said. \u201cWhat we\u2019re seeing so far is it takes a lot of money to lock down the processes on the metal side and create parts. But when you do, you have an advantage over other companies that is significant and justifies that capital investment.\u201d<\/p>\n
Christodoulou sees 3D printing as the wave of the future for industry and the Defense Department. \u201cI think it is a longterm trend,\u201d she said. \u201cIt\u2019s a very exciting tool that is given to the engineer, and I think that as we begin to understand the capabilities and the limitations it will be used more and more broadly.\u201d<\/p>\n