Manufacturing Technology Centre (MTC) and aerospace control-system manufacturer Moog have developed a proof-of-concept machine to automate the alignment of valve assemblies during production and test operations. The system is designed to position assemblies accurately while they are under load, replacing a specialist manual task with controlled movement, adaptable tooling and sensor feedback.
The Convergence programme brought MTC and Moog together to examine an aerospace production task previously performed through skilled manual adjustment. Moog needed greater repeatability without replacing its existing test rigs. The proposed mechanism therefore had to withstand loads applied during alignment, accommodate differences between assemblies and attach to more than one existing machine. Those constraints shaped the prototype as much as its positioning accuracy.
The resulting alignment machine has demonstrated positioning accuracy better than 50 micrometres under load, according to the MTC. Its present status is technology readiness level four, meaning the equipment has been validated as a proof of concept rather than qualified as a production installation. A demonstration at that level establishes that the intended mechanism can function, but does not settle every integration, reliability or production-rate question.
Reconfigurable sides accept different end effectors and actuation methods, while a machine controller coordinates movement with the existing rig and the operator. Sensors feed measurements from the pressing operation into the control sequence. Rather than leaving the final adjustment to an operator’s judgement alone, the machine can respond to measured conditions and bring an assembly towards its specified position under load.
Precision under applied force is a demanding problem because a position measured without load is not necessarily the position held when a component is being pressed into place. Fixtures, the assembly itself and any contact interfaces can deflect as force increases. Feedback from the actual operation allows the controller to relate movement to the conditions occurring during alignment, although the specific sensing and control architecture has not been disclosed in sufficient detail for independent performance assessment.
The MTC also designed the concept around retrofit rather than a dedicated new production line. Moog can therefore examine how the mechanism might attach to several existing rigs, with different tools or actuation arrangements selected to suit the valve being handled. The trade-off is that each target rig must still be assessed for physical fit, guarding, control interfaces and repeatable setup before the proof of concept can be introduced into routine work.
Manual processes often carry a large amount of knowledge that is difficult to capture in ordinary work instructions. Skilled employees may adjust the sequence in response to differences in part geometry, force response and previous operations. Transferring that activity into an automated mechanism requires engineers to specify tolerances, loading conditions and acceptable end states, then show that the equipment can recognise whether an alignment operation has met them.
MTC says the proof of concept has improved the effectiveness of operators who would otherwise spend time on manual alignment. Its case study includes separate operator-effectiveness and precision indicators, but those figures should not be confused with a verified increase in Moog’s shipped output. The company has not reported deployment across a production fleet, nor a completed qualification programme for every valve design that the equipment may eventually handle.
Work at proof-of-concept maturity can nevertheless determine whether further factory integration is justified. Reconfigurable tooling makes a stronger case when product variants can share a common controlled process, because a single mechanism can then be adapted without building another machine for every assembly. The scope for that approach depends on the dimensional range, required load and test interface of each valve family.
Further development will need to establish repeatability across the full intended range of valves and loads, then integrate guarding, control interfaces and maintenance arrangements into each host rig. Production acceptance criteria will have to specify permissible alignment errors, the sensors used to verify them, and the action taken when the machine cannot complete a cycle within tolerance. Traceable records can then distinguish an accepted adjustment from a cycle requiring rework.
Testing at the edges of the operating range is as important as achieving a precise result on a reference assembly. Variations in component dimensions, force response and fixture condition can change the actual position obtained during pressing. A future deployment would need to show stable results through repeated cycles and explain how calibration is retained after tools or product variants are changed. MTC’s TRL4 demonstrator provides a basis for that work, rather than evidence it is finished.
Moog now has an automated alignment concept designed around existing equipment, with reported under-load positioning better than 50 micrometres. The next milestone is to establish which valve families and production rigs can use the mechanism reliably, and what additional testing is needed before routine aerospace manufacturing begins.
