Editorial

First there was gunpowder, then nuclear weapons. Now another revolution in warfighting is underway with the rise of algorithmic warfare using robots and precision targeting technology. Their use is highly controversial but to date there has been no systematic attempt made to map the debate unfolding in academic, intergovernmental, corporate and social media domains. Internationally, the use of lethal autonomous weapons (LAWS) or so-called ‘killer robots’ is being debated at the highest levels. A new University of Canterbury (UC) study, which has recently received a generous grant from the 2019 Marsden Fund/Te Pūtea Rangahau a Marsden, aims to map and analyse this fast-evolving debate. Its findings could help shape the development of effective and ethical regulation of these sophisticated weapons. Dr Jeremy Moses and Associate Professor Amy Fletcher, from the Department of Political Science and International Relations at UC, and Dr Geoff Ford, a political scientist with the UC Arts Digital Lab, aim to delve deeply into this issue in a three-year project starting this year. Their research has attracted a prestigious 2019 Marsden Fund grant of $842,000. Around 12 countries are known to be developing LAWS, among them the United States, China, Russia and Israel. While the perception in those nations is that LAWS are needed to maintain geopolitical balance, groups such as the Campaign to Ban Killer Robots and other international bodies are seeking a global ban on their use. “Proponents argue that autonomous weapons could decrease civilian casualties through enhanced targeting precision and reduce the risks for human soldiers,” Associate Professor Fletcher says. “Opponents fear a world of ‘algorithmic warfare’ in which robots can make decisions to kill in the absence of human oversight and in which the speed and complexity of war accelerates to the point that international rules of conduct are rendered irrelevant.” This project […]

From 3D printing to blockchain, automation to predictive analytics, the fourth industrial revolution is changing how the manufacturing industry is operating. However, with this rapid transformation comes manufacturing talent challenges, exacerbated by an industry that has struggled to recruit the right people. 29 per cent of manufacturing vacancies are hard to fill and with a rapidly ageing workforce, it becomes increasingly hard for leaders in manufacturing to know where to start when it comes to talent planning. Engineering businesses have always required a unique combination of technical and soft leadership skills, and it remains in short supply. The fourth industrial revolution is affecting all aspects of business because process is no longer about machines and people, but now about data. It is crucial that employees have the imagination and creativity to realise the full potential of digitilisation and end-to-end integration. Finding the right balance between the skills new technology requires and upskilling existing talent pools is the key challenge. Gap in the middle when it comes to manufacturing talent Siemens went through a period of structural reorganisation in 2014 to prepare it for the challenges facing the manufacturing industry, with industrial digitalisation being a key component of its Vision 2020 strategy. Commenting on the reasoning behind the changes in 2018, Siemens president and chief executive Joe Kaeser called digitilisation “the greatest transformation in the history of industry”. Brian Holliday, managing director of Siemens’ Digital Factory, the German manufacturer’s data integration wing, says: “From a talent perspective, many new roles are emerging in app development, connectivity and software engineering. Technology won’t replace people in future factories, but it will augment human effort through artificial intelligence and ‘co-bots’ [robots that work alongside people on the shop floor], so finding the right balance will be crucial to our survival. We won’t build factories in the future without full digital simulation and […]

The manufacturing and legal issues surrounding additive manufacturing. In 1984, Charles Hull invented the first 3D printer, which used stereolithography to build up a plastic product layer by layer. Over 35 years later, additive manufacturing (AM) is drastically altering a range of industries, from manufacturing to the medical sector. But what are the limitations of the technology? H In some applications, component manufacturing is shifting away from traditional subtractive machining methods and towards additive manufacturing techniques. The broadening of the applications of AM is causing manufacturers to assess the viability of using it in their own facilities. To do this, there are a few considerations to make before turning to 3D technology. Quality not quantity When moving from one manufacturing method to another, quality is a huge factor, particularly in highly regulated industries like aerospace and medical devices. In fact, quality has been one of the major hurdles to the widespread adoption of AM. One critical consideration is that quality and consistency must be the same machine to machine, regardless of location. Powder bed fusion is one of the most frequently used additive manufacturing methods and there is a possibility that it may introduce defects. However, if the process has a constant thermal gradient, it can prevent warping of the product, avoiding the introduction of defects due to incorrect temperatures. Another concern is that unsintered powder will degrade as a result of heat exposure and that this could impact quality, although regular changing of the powder can prevent this from becoming an issue. When investing in an AM system, manufacturers can overcome quality concerns by working with an experienced partner, who provides training and support on best practice. Those looking to invest in AM parts produced elsewhere should be mindful of their supplier’s approach to quality, to ensure that what […]

The founder of Connection Technologies, Lewis Woodward, started the business in December 1999.   The aim then and still now is to work with the customer and assist them in achieving their goal. “I knew that without a successful customer, I was going nowhere”. 20 years ago, business conditions were different to what they are today. Business then relied on personal contact and who you knew. Then there was no internet and business was largely done with New Zealand based companies. Technical input and having people who knew your business was important. Today “faceless” internet websites located outside NZ shores compete with each other for business. In the “old” days the customer did not need to know the part number of the item they needed, just a description. Today, you must have the part number to order on the web and so often you are drowned with the range of products available “Our aim was to be the best pro-active supplier with a finite range of product focusing on connectors and supporting tooling as might be required for the industrial, military and aviation market”. This was further narrowed down on the basis that Lewis recognised the OEM PCB market in any volume was dying in NZ. The data reticulation industry he had previously been part of was being. fought after at minimal margins, much of the coax market had moved to the data industrial markets. Getting the right staff in any business is always a challenge. Lewis said he was fortunate that an ex-employee from the same industry wanted to move back to Wellington and “this was exactly what we needed. “Hiring knowledgeable staff with industry background has always been a challenge. We needed people who saw sales different from the normal perspective of selling “nuts and bolts” and making their […]