Slashdot Mirror


An 8,000 Ton Giant Made the Jet Age Possible

Hugh Pickens writes "Tim Heffernan writes that when 'The Fifty,' as it's known in company circles, broke down three years ago, there was talk of retiring it for good. Instead, Alcoa decided to overhaul their 50,000-ton, 6-story high forging press, now scheduled to resume service early this year. 'What sets the Fifty apart is its extraordinary scale,' writes Heffernan. 'Its 14 major structural components, cast in ductile iron, weigh as much as 250 tons each; those yard-thick steel bolts are also 78 feet long; all told, the machine weighs 16 million pounds, and when activated its eight main hydraulic cylinders deliver up to 50,000 tons of compressive force.' The Fifty could bench-press the battleship Iowa, with 860 tons to spare, but it's the Fifty's amazing precision — its tolerances are measured in thousandths of an inch—that gives it such far-reaching utility. Every manned US military aircraft now flying uses parts forged by the Fifty, as does every commercial aircraft made by Airbus and Boeing making the Jet Age possible. 'On a plane, a pound of weight saved is a pound of thrust gained—or a pound of lift, or a pound of cargo,' writes Heffernan. 'Without the ultra-strong, ultra-light components that only forging can produce, they'd all be pushing much smaller envelopes.' The now-forgotten Heavy Press Program (PDF), inaugurated in 1950 and completed in 1957, resulted in four presses (including the Fifty) and six extruders — giant toothpaste tubes squeezing out long, complex metal structures such as wing ribs and missile bodies. 'Today, America lacks the ability to make anything like the Heavy Press Program machines,' concludes Heffernan, adding that 'The Fifty' will be supplying bulkheads through 2034 for the Joint Strike Fighter. 'Big machines are the product of big visions, and they make big visions real. How about a Heavy Fusion Program?'"

24 of 307 comments (clear)

  1. now technology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    We see various technologies come and go, one hit wonders, ephemeral vapourware and promises of the next big thing.

    When I read this, it made the engineer in me happy to think some things last longer.

    1. Re:now technology by JustOK · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It IS the blender.

      --
      rewriting history since 2109
    2. Re:now technology by tlhIngan · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I've always loved the older technologies for their ability to just keep going. In fact, just a few days ago, I finished cleaning up an old 1950's Remington typewriter. It hasn't been touched in decades in my parents' damp, cold basement, was covered with more dust and grime than I thought was physically possible, but a lot of hours of cleaning later, and every key still works absolutely perfectly. Found a place online that still sells ribbons, so I've got it typing again. And odds are, unless it's dropped from something high up (and it even has a good chance of surviving that, since it's over 30 pounds of stainless steel), it'll probably last well until after I'm gone.

      The new technology may be awesome for what it can do, but the old technology is awesome for what it can survive and keep going through.

      Well, the old technology is like that because it's overdesigned to be like that. It survives because all the parts are stronger than they need to be (material science being what it was then, and quality variance between batches was probably a lot higher) because they had to - unlike modern manufacturing processes where we can get remarkably consistent raw materials due to smeltters carefully controlling the alloys. When your inputs are of varying quality, you compensate by overdesigning. And yes, it happens today in the semiconductor industry - it's remarkably hard to produce a consistent product so transistors and such are overdesigned to compensate (we can spec chips to run slower, we avoid use of passive components (it's difficult to get resistors/capacitors to come out with less than a 20% tolerance in silicon - there are many "equivalent" circuits done using transistors which are easier to match), etc.

      Plus, we also have survivor bias - the "old stuff" survives because we threw out the crap that failed long ago. Heck, your typewriter may be a victim of that - it's just you got one of the few good ones. When things were cranked out by the thousands, it happens.

  2. Wow! by Kell+Bengal · · Score: 5, Funny

    That's something completely fascinating that I never knew before! It's days like this that remind me what it was like to be young - when everything was new and exciting. Thanks, internet!

    --
    Scientists point out problems, engineers fix them
    altslashdot.org: The future of slashdot.
  3. The future will be printed, not forged. by EasyTarget · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Modern planes, and other transport/engineering structures, are moving to composites. Which are layered, printed, sometimes pressure baked and squeezed into form. But no longer forged on this scale.

    While these machines are awesome, I've wandered along a car body stamping line and watched plates go from a flat sheet to a car door in 100meters, they are becoming less necessary to us. They will still be needed, of course, for some jobs where only such a monster can help, but I think the US should look on these as potential future museum pieces, with nostalgia for a bygone age of megaengineering, rather than a source of future industrial dominance.

    --
    "Oops, I always forget the purpose of competition is to divide people into winners and losers." - Hobbes
    1. Re:The future will be printed, not forged. by guises · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I know very little about metal working, but it seems to me that when you have the capability to do something unique it would be foolish to give up that ability. Even if a new process comes along that is faster and cheaper for most purposes.

    2. Re:The future will be printed, not forged. by hackertourist · · Score: 5, Interesting

      While in many applications it may be possible to replace metal with composites, there are always going to be corner cases. It wouldn't be too big a deal to lose one of these 50-kt machines, but losing the capability worldwide is another matter.

      I'm reminded of a story a while back about there being only one company worldwide that can cast nuclear reactor vessels.

    3. Re:The future will be printed, not forged. by icebrain · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Composites aren't going to replace everything. Landing gear and landing gear mounts, engine mounts, critical bulkheads, etc. will still be made of forged metal for a long, long time. Even with additive manufacturing techniques, forging will still be necessary because the forging process itself is what puts the strength in the parts.

      --
      The meek may inherit the earth, but the strong shall take the stars.
    4. Re:The future will be printed, not forged. by Grayhand · · Score: 5, Informative

      Apples and oranges. This type of forge isn't used for basic structure but high strength parts. While some parts can be redesigned for composites the materials aren't interchangeable. The only other process like it is using explosives to create exotic alloys but that process only is practical on a small scale. It reminds me of old battleships. People don't realize that some processes can't be duplicated today. Working with large scale multi-ton parts is old technology and tough to replicate. Another example is high performance submarine propellers. The US has the only mill in the world that can produce the propellers used in high speed silent running. Composites aren't a magic product that replaces everything that came before it. If they were then why isn't anyone making engine blocks out of them? They have their uses but they have their limits as well.

    5. Re:The future will be printed, not forged. by rhook · · Score: 5, Informative

      Composites aren't a magic product that replaces everything that came before it. If they were then why isn't anyone making engine blocks out of them? They have their uses but they have their limits as well.

      I present to you the carbon fiber engine block.

      http://www.thecarbonfiberjournal.com/?p=770

    6. Re:The future will be printed, not forged. by tgd · · Score: 5, Informative

      Modern planes, and other transport/engineering structures, are moving to composites. Which are layered, printed, sometimes pressure baked and squeezed into form. But no longer forged on this scale.

      While these machines are awesome, I've wandered along a car body stamping line and watched plates go from a flat sheet to a car door in 100meters, they are becoming less necessary to us. They will still be needed, of course, for some jobs where only such a monster can help, but I think the US should look on these as potential future museum pieces, with nostalgia for a bygone age of megaengineering, rather than a source of future industrial dominance.

      Even a rudimentary knowledge of chemistry would help you understand how you're wrong. There are fundamental differences at the atomic level between things that are cast, forged, and "printed" in the manner that modern metal-based 3D printing works. The Venn diagram of things forged metal is good for and composites are good for has some overlap, but not a lot.

      Thankfully, the engineers who are actually building things know the difference.

    7. Re:The future will be printed, not forged. by jandrese · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The "ability is lost" when the last plant capable of doing it shuts down. The knowledge isn't lost (we hope), but for various reasons (typically it was being done cheaper overseas) the actual facilities will close. If we had to, we could rebuild/reopen the plants here, but it would take a few years and the investors would want some sort of guarantee that the same economic forces that caused the previous plants to close won't apply to the new plant.

      We are seeing this today with the rare earth mining industry, where all of the US mines shut down because China was exporting government subsidized minerals for peanuts. Then, when they got a monopoly on the rare earth market, they suddenly shot the prices up and started raking in the cash. Now the US company is reopening their plant because the economic conditions are favorable and because worldwide demand is growing enough that it will be difficult for China to flood the market again. People were biting their nails over the US "losing the ability to make a strategic resource", but the ability wasn't lost, just on hold while they waited for the economics to turn around.

      --

      I read the internet for the articles.
    8. Re:The future will be printed, not forged. by weiserfireman · · Score: 5, Informative

      There are laser-sintering machines that can "print" parts out of powdered metals. Titanium, Aluminum, Bronze can all be used in these machines. While most 3d printers use low temp plastics, like ABS, there is one sintering machine in the Midwest that uses PEEK plastic.

      Laser-Sintering machines start at about $500k now. Significantly cheaper than they were 10 years ago

    9. Re:The future will be printed, not forged. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The knowledge isn't lost (we hope)

      There is TONS of knowledge in industrial processes that only people who work on it every day really know. I've done some work in software for Steel manufacturing, and I tell you first hand, that many of the "Recipes" are over 50 years old and scribbled in the notebooks of the people who run the mills. These "Recipes" vary for each press/line and if the specifications are not followed exactly, it's the difference between good steel and shit. The "theory" is well documented in texts on metallurgy etc, but, the actual practice, where the rubber meets the road, not so much. When these types of plants shutdown and the people who have been doing it for years retire without passing on that knowledge and experience, it is LOST. In order to get it going again will take many years for people who have learned the theory to actually work out all the kinks in practice.

  4. Additive manufacturing? by Karmashock · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This thing is neat and maybe that's the best way to do things. But I thought Boeing was talking about additive manufacturing. I know they have ways of making titanium parts using additive manufacturing. I don't know if they're as strong as forged parts. But once that's cracked this forging process should become obsolete in aerospace. After all, why use solid pieces when you can have pieces articulated down to the level of bone. Fine latices of metal interwoven to build parts that have strength to weight ratios similar to what we see in nature. Sure, metal is stronger then bone. But bone is made out of relatively weak materials. If you build something with the same structure out of metal you could get something very strong and very light.

    Still, very neat machine. I wonder if the Chinese have such a thing and it sounded like the Germans might?

    It would be interesting to know if these machines are critical to a heavy industry economy.

    --
    I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
    1. Re:Additive manufacturing? by Dupple · · Score: 5, Informative
      --
      Watch those corners
    2. Re:Additive manufacturing? by jkflying · · Score: 5, Informative

      The laser Ti benificiation is the strongest additive manufacturing process available at the moment, and even it is very brittle because of the thermal stresses formed when it is produced. These are because as the laser melts the particles they are much hotter than the parts it is bonded with, and as they cool they shrink causing lots of stresses all throughout the material. That said, being able to make a ball inside of a socket during the manufacturing process is quite useful sometimes... not to speak of woven Ti mesh for grafts and such.

      --
      Help I am stuck in a signature factory!
    3. Re:Additive manufacturing? by PeterP · · Score: 5, Funny

      How long until I can buy one at Harbor Freight?

  5. Score 1 moe for the government. by serviscope_minor · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is another score for the government and a blow to the idea that provate industry always does everything best.

    Some things are simply too expensivre and farsighted for private industry to invest. That's why a decent sized government is needed, to invest massive sums of money in things like this giant press. It has paid back massively.

    --
    SJW n. One who posts facts.
  6. Of COURSE we lack the ability to make a new one by Troyusrex · · Score: 5, Funny

    The 400 yard long wrench needed to tighten the 10 foot wide bolts was lost when someone (I think we all know who...) used it and never put it back.

  7. Re:US Steel "Shield" by garyebickford · · Score: 5, Informative

    A bit of history provides some useful background. During WWII, the area near Pittsburgh PA produced more steel than the rest of the world combined. (But those mills were mostly built with 19th century technology. They were at the 'prime of life' and would have been obsolete soon even without the war.) Steel mills and other heavy industry throughout the rest of the world also were largely destroyed by bombing from one side or the other - mostly Allied bombing of German and Japanese steel mills. So after the war US industry, and particularly US steel, were the only ones still able to produce products. We then lent money to all parties (the Marshall Plan), with the proviso that they had to spend the money on US goods. The boom of the 1950s was the result of this and some other policies (the GI bill was another). This amounted to a postwar bubble.

    One of the things that those other countries did was build new steel plants, using the latest technology. By the end of the 1950s these new plants were coming online, able to make steel for much lower prices. At that point the US steel industry, still based on late-19th century mill technology, became completely obsolete. The US steel companies, still competing with each other as well as the rest of the world, could not justify spending $zillions to essentially compete against themselves, while it was well worth while for other countries to develop their own industries, as they were starting from a zero base. This is a classic problem that results in constant turnover in many/most/all industries - it rarely seems like a good idea to build your own competition looking at the short term - all it does is spend money to reduce profits- but it's often a good idea to come in from outside and build the competition to the entrenched, inefficient market leader..

      Since the 1970s there have been quite a few new, smaller mills built here using the latest (IIRC NUCOR was one of the first examples) but they still have to work hard to compete with the lower costs elsewhere - lower wages, lower land prices, etc. So it's an uphill battle, and that kind of dominance after WWII was a one-time deal.

    One of the side-effects of the loss of those two-mile-long mills in the Pittsburgh area is that the side has become clean. When I lived there (early 1990s) the Carnegie Library and Museum was being scrubbed. The building had been black for 80 years or so. After scrubbing it turned out to be blond! I saw pictures from the 1950s where it was too dark and smoky to see across the street in downtown Pittsburgh. And those big mill areas along the rivers are now available to be turned into parks, housing, light industry, clean industry, whatever. But of course, there aren't many jobs. The population of Pittsburgh now is about 1/3 what it was in 1965. Houses are (or at least were) cheap.

    --
    It's easier to be a result of the past, but more fun to be a cause of the future! http://www.spacefinancegroup.com/
  8. Re: carbon fiber engine block by M.+Baranczak · · Score: 5, Informative

    http://blog.caranddriver.com/is-this-the-engine-of-the-future-in-depth-with-matti-holtzberg-and-his-composite-engine-block/

    This article goes into a little more depth. The block is actually a combination of aluminum and carbon. The parts that see the highest stress and highest temperature still have to be metal.

    Also, this engine was announced a year ago, and I haven't been able to find any links to people actually driving one.

  9. Re:Airbus? by Richard_at_work · · Score: 5, Informative

    Then you know nothing about aviation manufacturers - a modern Airbus aircraft can be over 50% American by weight if chosen with GE or P&W engines, and 40% with RR engines. Airbus has major US suppliers.

  10. Re:Summary contains entire article... plus some? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    The summary is a summary of the article on BoingBoing, here:

    http://boingboing.net/2012/02/13/machines.html

    which mentions all of those things. (Specifically, the company that built the press went bankrupt some decades ago and the machines used to cast the parts of that size have been sold for scrap). The link is to a similar article in The Atlantic, for whatever reason.