CompositesWorld
Issue link: https://cw.epubxp.com/i/866813
NEWS 31 CompositesWorld.com Q&A; CW: What lessons have you learned in your experiences with different employers and end-markets? JA: With such a young industry . . . there is still a long way to innovate, and innovation is really at the heart of our success as an industry. Metals are the enemy, and we still can't do a lot of what metals can do, and there's still a long way to go down the innovation road to be a competitive technology. After that, cost is [a concern]. Why aren't composites used universally? Because they're too expensive. CW: Where and how would you like to see the composites industry mature? JA: I think a piece the industry still is missing is a kind of standardization of materials, and I think half the indus- try is probably with me on that and half the industry is not with me. You know, you buy a standard alloy, you know what you're getting, the engi- neer knows what he's getting, and you can engineer it into a structure and it's all fairly safe. And the equiva- lent doesn't exist in the composites world, and that's a huge barrier to us. CW: The argument against stan- dardization is that composites can be engineered to meet a variety of applications, and that's their strength, so why would we change that? What is your response to that argument? JA: Because, if there was an oversupply of composite engineers out there in the world who could do refined engineering for everything that could use composite materi- als, then I could accept the non- standardization argument. But there aren't enough composite engineers out there in the world. There are more engineers — not composites engi- neers — who could maybe work to a standard set of materials like conven- tional engineering does. So, whilst the world is not overburdened with highly refined and skilled composite engineers, the rate of uptake is, I think, limited. Or, one of the limitations is the engineerability of the materi- als, and standardization is one way through that.