Automation in manufacturing operations

3D printing has taken much of the manufacturing world by storm — and the food industry could be up next.

Manufacturers across the aerospace, automotive and energy industries are working to boost adoption of additive manufacturing among their suppliers and in their factories for its ability to alleviate supply shortages and enhance product customization. Motivated by the technology’s potential benefits, Robin Simsa embarked on his journey to establish Austria-based seafood startup Revo Foods in 2020.

While working on his doctorate in cultivated meat, Simsa discovered an additive technology that could integrate a fat component into plant protein fibers to create more realistic meat alternatives.

“As often in startups, you have a new finding, you figure out there’s no industrial way to do it, and then you’re foolish enough to start it yourself,” the CEO said.

Revo Foods’ first product — 3D-printed salmon fillets — hit Austrian supermarkets in September 2023, the first 3D-printed food to ever be sold in grocery stores, according to the company. The startup already plans to scale production with its multi-nozzle system, which combines multiple print heads within a single piece of production machinery.

Revo Foods uses extrusion to manufacture its alternative seafood products, a common 3D printing process in which a material is squeezed through a nozzle in successive layers to recreate an object from a digital file. The startup’s patented food printing technology lets it precisely combine its plant-based protein and fat ingredients, making its final products more authentic in terms of cooking and mouthfeel, Simsa said. 

One of the earliest things the startup focused on achieving was a continuous extrusion process. “Normally, this is a batch process, and it’s very hard to think in terms of scale,” Simsa noted.

Although companies like Revo Foods are advancing in the realm of 3D-printed food, scalability remains a significant challenge.

“The largest obstacle for 3D printing to overcome is throughput,” said Edwin Palang, senior commercialization manager for food R&D firm Mattson. “When we talk to co-manufacturers, the first thing they ask [about] right away is volume.”

Palang underscored the efficiency gap between the technology and traditional food production methods, for example when making a hamburger patty. The quickest he had observed a 3D patty get formed was in about two minutes, whereas conventional processes can churn out about 130 patties in that time. 

However, Palang still believes 3D printing could have a place in the food industry, mainly for high-end products. This includes items that require complex shapes that traditional manufacturing can’t deliver, such as alternative premium meat cuts and highly marbled fish fillets.

“The benefit of 3D printing here extends beyond customization; it supports the creation of sustainable, alternative protein sources that closely replicate the taste and texture of high-end meats and seafood,” he said.

Consumer demand for seafood has skyrocketed in recent decades, with more than a third of global fish stocks overfished as of 2019, according to the United Nations. Revo Foods aims its product portfolio at bridging this gap, and it is not the only company to do so.

Since December, Israel-based food tech company Steakholder Foods has unveiled two 3D-printed seafood products: eel and shrimp. The $4.3 billion eel market faces severe challenges like overexploitation and the threat of extinction, the company said in a press release, emphasizing the need for sustainable alternatives as demand continues to grow.

In a statement, CEO Arik Kaufman touted the company’s patented printing technology’s ability to reproduce the intricate texture of an eel on a potential scale of hundreds of tons a month at lower costs than harvesting wild eel. The CEO also highlighted the process’ flexibility to make a range of printed products using the same production line.

As of now, however, Mattson’s EVP of Product Development and Commercialization Jaime Reeves said companies exploring 3D-printed food are focusing on products that already have a premium price point. 

“It’s a really awesome technology, but the thought that it’s going to take over and be equivalent to regular meat production is hard to imagine at this point, from what we’ve seen and the people we’ve talked to in the industry,” Reeves said.

Still, Purdue Professor of Mechanical Engineering Ajay Malshe believes 3D-printed food could be scaled within the next decade.

“Additive manufacturing technology is, in my mind, at a commercial level for metals and polymers,” Malshe said. “A lot of those equipment design know-hows are being repurposed in the food industry.”

He suggested that incentives for food producers to adopt the technology could transcend the high-end market.

Using 3D printing, food producers could tailor the typically large footprint of their manufacturing plants to bring production closer to consumers by creating custom, modular food manufacturing platforms. These would lower transportation costs and have the potential benefit of using local resources to create products, according to Malshe.

He also highlighted shifting consumer preferences as another driving force, particularly as younger generations become increasingly aware of the origin and quality of their purchases.

“The ‘where my food comes from,’ people do want to know that – they want the traceability of that,” Malshe said.

Dive Brief:

• Tyson Foods opened one of its most advanced manufacturing plants in the U.S. in November 2023, allowing the meat packer to expand capacity for chicken nuggets and other value-added products through the help of automation.
• The $300 million facility in Danville, Virginia, will produce fully-cooked Tyson brands including Any’tizers snacks and chicken nuggets. The plant, expected to employ 400 people, features automated case packing lines and high-speed robotic case palletizing units.
• The 325,000-square-foot factory is expected to produce 4 million pounds of protein each week when it reaches full capacity, according to a statement from local county officials. Tyson has committed to purchasing and using Virginia grown poultry for the operation, officials added.

Dive Insight:

Tyson's state-of-the-art plant opening comes after a series of facility closures as the meat producer looks to simplify operations and scale production of more profitable value-added products.

The company closed six chicken and two case-ready meat plants this year "to improve our capacity utilization and mix," President and CEO Donnie King said on a fourth quarter earnings call in November 2023, noting prepared foods "was the profit engine for the company last year."

The Daville plant, first announced in 2021, will use robots to turn meat into prepared foods. The plant will also make use of wearable armband devices to improve worker safety and productivity.

Additionally, metal detection, X-ray and vision grading will assist the product inspection process. In November, Tyson recalled around 30,000 pounds of dinosaur-shaped chicken nuggets after consumers reported finding small pieces of metal in the product.

“The combination of our team and technology at Danville will strengthen our ability to better meet demand for retail and foodservice fully-cooked Tyson brand products,” Wes Morris, Tyson group president of poultry, said in a statement.

The meat producer recently expanded or broke ground on other prepared foods facilities as it leans into the profitable food service segment. The company spent $83 million to expand a cocktail sausage manufacturing plant, and a $355 million bacon production facility in Bowling Green, Kentucky, was expected to be operational later in 2023. Tyson's CEO told investors in November 2023 that there are "a number of operations coming online outside the United States" as well.

However, as sales slow, Tyson is cutting back on future capital expenditures. In its recent earnings call, CFO John Tyson said the company reduced capital investment by $600 million in fiscal year 2023 "as we reacted to market conditions driving lower profitability and impacting our operating cash flow.”

Sponsored content

By Duke Energy Sustainable Solutions

Nationwide electricity demand is expected to grow 4.7% over the next five years according to a 2023 report from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). The estimate is nearly double that of expectations in 2022.

This is largely due to significant growth in new manufacturing processes, automation and AI data centers. Electric utilities are dedicating major resources to improve the electric grid to meet those needs, but there are actions manufacturers across the country need to consider now to improve their resiliency and protect their operations.

Many organizations allocate time and effort to manage energy and utilities to minimize disruption. In doing so, they perform these tasks at the expense of revenue-generating activities that are core to their business plans. 

The infrastructure-as-a-service model is a cost-effective option that can boost return on investment (ROI) because it stabilizes cash flow, makes your costs more predictable and defers capital expenses. Most electrical and mechanical assets have a known useful and efficient life, and the concept of maintaining these assets within an as-a-service program is simple. Infrastructure as a service combines all expenses related to delivering this useful life into a single monthly payment that does not escalate over time. Best of all, the burden and costs of unexpected risks, failures, escalation and inflation are transferred to the service provider.

What is your total cost of ownership for energy infrastructure?

When considering the cost of energy infrastructure projects, most organizations recognize the large, upfront costs of asset purchases. The cost doesn’t stop there though. Ownership comes with maintenance and labor costs that grow over time, but there are additional costs you may not consider when making energy asset investments.

To better understand your company’s current investment, consider both direct and indirect costs for your critical energy assets. These include:  

• Costs associated with interruptions and unplanned downtime
  • Missed shipments and contractual penalties  
  • Reduced machine performance  
  • Quality and rework
  • Safety implications associated with restarts
• Operating and maintenance costs
• Capital investments/cost of capital
• Overhead (asset management, scheduling, warranty claims) 
• Asset monitoring and testing
• Fuel certainty expenses
• Added insurance cost
• Opportunity cost and costs related to inefficient operations (energy and maintenance)

Analyzing your total cost of ownership for energy assets

So, what does this look like in practice? The example below is from a client with a history of deferred maintenance and letting equipment run to failure. They reached out to the Duke Energy Sustainable Solutions (DESS) team for a potential long-term solution. 

Customer’s needs: 

• Cost predictability
• Capital conservation
• Worry-free operation  
• Energy management and construction expertise

How DESS meets customer’s needs: 

• Flat/fixed monthly payments with flexible contract terms  
• Zero initial capital required
• DBOOM model for mitigating risk and managing assets
• History of successful projects
• Full custom design processes

Let’s consider the total cost of ownership for a hypothetical combined heat and power (CHP) project assuming a discount rate of 12% as well as 3% inflation and 7% cost of capital. A total cost of ownership (TCO) analysis was performed by forecasting 20 years of exactly how the customer is handling their equipment today versus a DESS implemented design, build, own, operate, maintain (DBOOM) solution. The result was a grim outlook for the customer if they were to continue to operate as they historically have.

DESS DBOOM benefits: 

• Approximately $4.68 million or 23% savings versus customer self-perform
• O&M cost predictability/stability
• Capital preservation for higher ROI opportunities
• Redeployment of existing maintenance personnel

Our analysis considered the customer’s capital cost, escalation, overhead, insurance, preventive maintenance costs, emergent maintenance costs, customer labor rates, and more. This analysis accounts for equipment overhauls due to deferred maintenance in years 11 and 16. Overall, the customer is projected to save nearly $5 million in costs over the life span of the project.    

Finding the cost-effective answer

Running a TCO analysis is also useful for energy resilience projects that have a life span shorter than 20 years. This is helpful as some backup energy projects for manufacturers may span as little as 10 years. Check out our guide on total cost of ownership for energy projects to gain a comprehensive understanding of all the potential costs and risks associated with owning backup energy assets. 

Energy is critical for manufacturing operations to continue to grow and evolve. Powering AI and automation in your facilities means needing to have a future-ready energy solution. Make an informed decision by recognizing the value and costs for your business.

When Houman Salem, founder and CEO of Argyle Haus of Apparel, puts in a fabric order, his Los Angeles-based supplier requests the order by fax — a machine Salem said Argyle Haus doesn’t have. To accommodate this, Salem said his team has to jump through hoops to print, scan and send the order.

“We’re talking about a very old and low-tech industry,” Salem said. “It’s not something the younger generation is gravitating towards. It’s not as fun and cool as tech.” 

Apparel manufacturing facilities are often family-run companies but younger generations aren’t interested in taking over the business, according to Salem, and the current owners are resistant to change. 

“They’re getting ready to retire and it doesn’t make sense to overhaul their entire system, so instead they just keep things running the way they are,” he said. 

The lack of successors for these businesses has its repercussions. Eventually, Salem said, these facilities will close shop and a few power players will remain, forcing brands to look overseas to manufacture goods. 

Salem said at one point California housed approximately 9,000 apparel factories. Now it’s down to about 2,000 and is continuing to dwindle. 

Built-in manufacturing costs impede tech investments

Cost is another hurdle to tech adoption. Manufacturing costs on average in the United States are higher than overseas, according to Salem, particularly in its largest manufacturing hubs like California and New York.

The fashion and garment industry in Los Angeles, including textile mills, cut and sew facilities, wholesalers and distributors, is a $15 billion per year industry, according to the California Fashion Association. Los Angeles also has the largest cut and sew apparel hub in the country, according to L.A.-based Garment Worker Center. More than 45,000 garment makers work in the city’s garment-manufacturing sector and sew clothes for some of the country’s largest brands, including T.J. Maxx, Revolve, Ross and Fashion Nova, the report found. 

However, the state’s garment and manufacturing facilities' biggest cost drivers are wages, insurance and taxes, according to Salem. “For example, I have to pay the highest workers compensation rate for my manufacturing employees,” he said. “For every $100 of wages, we have to pay $18 in workers compensation.” Meanwhile the national average in 2023 is 93 cents per $100, according to insurance company The Hartford.

The multitude of regulations and inspections on manufacturing facilities in California, particularly related to gig workers as highlighted in the state’s AB5 law, makes staying compliant difficult compared to other states with looser restrictions and leads to heavy fines as well, said Salem. The fines, which range from thousands to millions of dollars, reduce companies’ ability to invest in technology and automation, Salem explained. 

But for manufacturing companies, operating facilities in these hubs are vital because that’s where the labor force is.

These excess costs are then offset to brands, which as a result turn to offshore factories with lower human labor costs and fewer regulations, but more manual systems and processes, said Salem. According to a 2020 report published at the University of Delaware, the United States offers one of the highest minimum wages for garment workers at about $1,160 per month. In comparison, Indonesia’s garment workers were making a minimum wage of $181 per month.

“The things that hold companies back may be lack of skills or lack of funding,” said Inna Kuznetsova, CEO of ToolsGroup, a supply chain planning and optimizing firm. “They often get caught in a chicken and egg situation where you need to invest in technology to reduce the spending of inventory, but spending on inventory is so high that you can’t spend on technology.” 

This is also true of companies looking to bring work back into the U.S. “If brands are going to invest in reshoring their manufacturing process, they’re going to invest in modernized warehouses and manufacturers,” said Matt Jackson, vice president of digital innovation services at Insight.

Targeting the supply chain

Even with high costs, clothing manufacturers in the U.S. were forced to invest more heavily in technology over the last three years because the COVID-19 pandemic exposed issues with demand management and supply chains, said Jackson. 

According to Kuznetsova, the pandemic threw off retailers’ monthly inventory predictions, especially as lead times for shipments from Asia began taking eight months or longer compared to four to six months prior to the pandemic. 

“Leading up to the pandemic everything was about cost control and driving the absolute lowest cost and getting the cheapest supply chain possible,” said Jackson. The supply chain was relatively stable and retailers could use basic tools or Excel to manage inventory, Kuznetsova said. The technology, however, provided little help in optimizing how much of what item they needed. 

Now Jackson sees most technology investments going toward AI and data analytics to address some of these issues by boosting efficiency, which increases profitability and improves sustainability. This is because it doesn’t replace a core part of the brand’s business but still allows them to respond more quickly to customer demands and trends, Jackson said.

“We’ve seen new investment in modeling around demand,” said Jackson. “Understanding when they are going to see spikes in demand, what’s happening in the market, what are the trends and what are other fashion companies seeing.”

Brands such as Abercrombie & Fitch, one of Jackson’s clients, have been allocating funds for AI and data analytics to get products to customers more quickly and fulfill demand.

Another aspect of the supply chain process that has seen the most innovation is placing orders in showrooms, according to Whitney Cathcart, co-founder of AI mobile body scanning solution 3DLook and formerly a consultant focused on automated processes and digital innovation.

Previously, retailers would come into the showroom and fill out a physical order form, but now there are systems like NuOrder and Joor that have digitized this process and are widely used. NuOrder’s cost starts at $600 per month, its website states, and Joor’s costs range from $5,000 to $20,000 per year, according to Inc.

“If anyone is still doing it by hand, it is by choice,” said Cathcart. “Some people are like, ‘I’ve been doing this for 30 to 40 years so I’m going to continue doing it this way.’”

Apparel development innovation falls short

Another aspect of the manufacturing process that is still very manual is apparel development, which, unlike some aspects of managing the supply chain, is very expensive to automate. 

Apparel development has three stages: pattern making, cutting and sewing. The industry has made great strides in automating cutting and using software to develop patterns, said Salem. 

While cutting technology is available, the automated machine isn’t widely used due to its high cost, which Salem said is upwards of $500,000. The machine doesn’t completely eliminate human labor either. A worker must place the fabric in the machine, which rolls it out and cuts, and someone has to come pick up the stack and deliver it to the sewers. 

On the other hand, the sewing process is almost impossible to automate and most manufacturers still use conventional methods like hand stitching or sewing machines. The cut and sew process is one of the top expenses in apparel manufacturing due to its reliance on manual human labor, representing about 35% to 40% of the total cost. 

It’s easy to use robotics to manufacture goods for cars or planes due to their rigid structure, but clothing, not so much, said Cathcart. Fabric is malleable and creating clothing requires layering fabrics of different weights and stretches. “To think you’re going to automate that whole thing is incredibly complex,” she said. 

That’s not to say there haven’t been attempts at finding a solution. Sewbo, which launched in 2016, is a machine that chemically stiffens fabrics to allow robots to sew garments. The chemical used is polyvinyl alcohol, a polymer that is already in widespread use for textile production, according to its website. 

Jon Zornow, founder of Sewbo, told Fashion Dive in an email that it is developing its technology with a team of industry partners including Saitex, which is one of companies Levi’s uses for denim production; Bluewater Defense, a manufacturer of uniforms for the U.S. Department of Defense; and Industry Sewing and Innovation Center. However, its tools are still in development and evaluation, and are not currently used in production. 

Softwear Automation has found a way to automate the sewing process as well, but exclusively for T-shirts. The company created a robotic system called Sewbots Workline, which uses cameras to map the fabric while robots steer through sewing needles. In 2017, Softwear was tapped by Adidas to create 800,000 tees per day — a volume that wouldn’t be possible with manual human labor.

“The fashion industry, in general, from how we concept, to how we create, to how we sell, has been a very slow sector to innovate,” said Cathcart. 

But these emerging technologies show that change is afoot. “There has been a lot of innovation and forward movement, and it’s picking up pace because consumers have so much power,” said Cathcart.

Dive Brief:

• Germany-based technology company Siemens plans to build a $150 million high-tech manufacturing plant in Fort Worth, Texas, according to a Nov. 3, 2023 press release. 
• The plant will produce electrical equipment to meet growing demand for data centers in the U.S., which is being driven by the adoption of generative AI, Siemens President and CEO Roland Busch said in a Nov. 3 media call.
• Construction is slated to break ground in 2024 with the aim of being fully operational by Q1 2025, creating 700 new jobs, according to the press release.

Dive Insight:

The Fort Worth plant is part of a $510 million investment in U.S. manufacturing Siemens is undertaking to meet projected demand.

Earlier in 2023, Siemens announced a $220 million rail manufacturing facility in Lexington, North Carolina, which is currently being built, Barbara Humpton, president and CEO of Siemens USA, said on the call.

The company is also expanding a smart infrastructure manufacturing plant in Grand Prairie, Texas, and replacing an existing facility in Pomona, California. In total, these projects will create 1,700 jobs at Siemens.

Together, the new Fort Worth facility and the Grand Prairie and Pomona plants extensions will meet elevated demand for the electrification of critical infrastructure, in areas such as data centers, battery plants, semiconductor facilities and EV charging, Barry Powell, business head of Siemens Electrical Products, North America, said on the call. 

Growing investment will also have ripple effects for Siemens' manufacturing supply chain. The company has more than 100 suppliers in the Dallas-Fort Worth metro area, and several hundred more throughout Texas.

“The facility will be constructed and operated with Siemens advanced manufacturing tools, featuring cutting edge technology like digital twins and high tech automation,” Powell said in the call. “Big picture, there's never been a better time to invest in infrastructure and to support the backbone of America's economy.”

In line with the company’s digitization efforts, Siemens and existing partner Microsoft launched Siemens Industrial Copilot, an AI-powered jointly developed assistant aimed at improving human-machine collaboration in manufacturing.

“The common goal with Microsoft is to bring generative AI to all industries,” Busch said in the call, later adding: “Engineers are much much faster in programming robots or manufacturing lines. They can focus on more creative tasks.”

Siemens' isn’t only working toward advancing it’s U.S. strategy. In June 2023, the technology company said it’s pledging $2 billion to expand and build new high-tech factories, innovation labs and education centers as well as its production network in Asia and Europe.

Dive Brief:

• Most of the increase in U.S. wage inequality over the past 40 years can be attributed to declining wages experienced by workers in industries that automated rapidly, according to an October 2022 paper by researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Boston University.
• The researchers found that the inflation-adjusted earnings of men without a high school degree dropped by 15% between 1980 and 2016. Automation particularly reduced wages for those working in industries such as manufacturing, where employers introduced numerical-controlled machinery and industrial robots. Those working clerical jobs in industries that introduced software-based automation were similarly affected.
• The paper presents “a more stark outlook” on automation’s impact on earning power compared to more nuanced outlooks, MIT said in a press release, but it “does not obviate other nontechnological theories completely,” Daron Acemoglu, an MIT economist and co-author of the paper, said in the release.

Dive Insight:

The findings come as organizations continue to build in pay increases for 2023. A recent Willis Towers Watson survey found that U.S. employers planned to boost salaries by 4.6% in 2023, up from 4.2% earlier in the year.

Despite the news, not all worker groups benefit equally. A 2021 analysis by the Conference Board found wage gaps between white and Black men, for example, were wider between those with a bachelor’s degree than those without. Moreover, Black workers were underrepresented in jobs and sectors that saw the largest increases in top earners during the preceding decade, the Conference Board said.

Meanwhile, worker shortages in recent months have led to some high-profile instances in which employers turned to automation where they lacked staff. This was the case for several major grocery store chains going into 2022, according to Grocery Dive. Later in the year, fast food brand White Castle made headlines for introducing robotic fry cooks in an effort to ease labor pressures, Restaurant Dive reported.

Federal data do not identify workers that are most at risk for job losses due to automation, according to an August report by the U.S. Government Accountability Office. However, the GAO noted that U.S. Census Bureau researchers have found that companies reporting a greater degree of technological adoption were more likely to report a greater increase in the skills needed to work at their companies.

Boeing supplier Safran Landing Systems is investing $65 million to upgrade its manufacturing facility in Walton, Kentucky.

The facility in Walton produces and refurbishes carbon composite brake disks and makes aluminum alloy wheels and brakes for large commercial and military aircraft, including Boeing, according to a Sept. 6, 2023 state release. 

“This new investment will allow us to bolster our manufacturing capabilities with the addition of new equipment and strengthen our workforce to meet increased production volumes as we support our U.S. military and commercial customers,” Safran Landing Systems Kentucky CEO and General Manager Philippe Garnier said in a statement.

The investment will help Safran Landing Systems meet rising demand for its carbon composite brakes since airline traffic has returned to pre-pandemic levels, according to the release. The investment by the subsidiary of France-based Safran Group will add 92 jobs, including engineer, quality and supply chain professionals, Garnier told Manufacturing Dive in an email.

“We had limited hiring over the past few years so we need to continue what we put in pause in 2020,” Garnier said. “We’re currently hiring as we’re facing a steep ramp-up in production.”

The Walton facility is one of Safran’s three carbon brake production plants in the world, with two other facilities in Villeurbanne, France, and Sendayan, Malaysia. The company had planned to build a fourth carbon production facility in Feyzin, France, but postponed construction by up to two years due to rising energy prices, Aviation Week initially reported in November 2022.

“Initially, the plant was to be commissioned in 2025,” Garnier said. “However, due to the COVID-19 pandemic and its impact on air traffic, its entry into service was postponed until 2030.”

The postponement hasn’t stopped Safran Landing Systems from supplying its carbon brakes to aviation companies. In December, the company partnered with American Airlines to upgrade 300 of its Boeing 737NG aircraft steel brakes to carbon.

To help meet these customer agreements, the Feyzin plant will be entirely built to optimize logistics and flows to increase efficiency, Garnier added. The site will also integrate new uses of automation and robotics, making the factory 30% more productive than the company’s other sites, Garnier said.