National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine at Mill 19

When representatives of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine wanted to learn more about a unique and thriving manufacturing ecosystem, they invited leaders from across the Southwestern Pennsylvania region to join the roundtable discussion they hosted at Mill 19 about regional economic development and manufacturing.

Gary Fedder, the director of the Manufacturing Futures Institute (MFI) at Carnegie Mellon University, was among those who were invited to share their viewpoints and experiences. MFI’s mission matches the goal of the Vision for the Manufacturing USA Program in 2030 and 2035 study to promote the future development and adoption of advanced manufacturing technologies in the United States. Specifically, the committee is tasked with envisioning the Manufacturing USA program, which was created in 2014 to secure U.S. global leadership in advanced manufacturing.

After conducting numerous teleconferences over the past six months, members of the National Academies ad hoc committee held a rare in-person session in Pittsburgh, which is home to the Advanced Robotics for Manufacturing (ARM) Institute, one of the 18 Manufacturing USA Institutes. These public-private partnerships each have a distinct technology focus but work toward a common goal: to secure the future of U.S. manufacturing through innovation, education, and collaboration.

Ad hoc committee members, Theresa Kotanchek and Sujai Shivakumar moderated the discussion which focused on the role that the ARM Institute plays in supporting small- and medium-sized businesses and startups, developing robust supply chains and a skilled workforce for robotics, and providing resources including facilities, equipment, and capital.

Fedder was instrumental in the formation of the ARM Institute, which has close ties to Carnegie Mellon University.  He described the vision for the institutes as an ecosystem where the U.S. provides sustained funding that helps bridge the gap between the research and technology development within universities and laboratories and the commercial adoption of that technology into manufacturing in the U.S.

“Derisking manufacturing technologies is highly important for U.S. competitiveness, but the investment needed to derisk these technologies at scale is so huge that at the end of the day one of the biggest benefits of the institutes is the networking that develops between the stakeholders,” said Fedder.

The investment needed to derisk manufacturing technologies at scale is so huge that at the end of the day one of the biggest benefits of the Manufacturing USA institutes is the networking that develops between the stakeholders.

Gary Fedder, Faculty Director, Manufacturing Futures Institute

Several participants echoed Fedder’s appreciation for the strength and vitality of those partnerships and agreed that the need for reliable funding to support their efforts is a continuous challenge.

Suzy Teele, the Chief Strategy Officer at the ARM Institute, told the committee members, “There is no structured funding model for the final readiness levels that bring new technology full circle to adoption,”

She said that university research like that done at Carnegie Mellon typically covers Technology Readiness Levels (TRL) 1-3 and that institutes like ARM provide technology development and demonstration as defined in levels 4-7. The TRLs are the nine-level systematic metric used to assess the maturity of technology from basic research to an actual system proven in an operational environment.

“The challenge is what happens after TRL 7, as technology is proven and tested, but not advanced to the point where it is either ready to be used by industry or for investment by venture capital or other resources,” added Teele.

Sherri McCleary said that the Digital Foundry at Penn State New Kensington, where she serves as executive director, partners with manufacturing companies to accelerate adoption of digital technologies and data-driven decision-making. The ARM Institute has partnered with the Digital Foundry to provide additional funding for their services through a program provided by the Department of Commerce Economic Development Administration (EDA).

She says programs like hers can be of great benefit to small and medium enterprises, many of which struggle to adopt new technology.

“They know their business very well but don’t always know where to start with investing in new technologies,” said McCleary

With the right resources, she says that she and her team can spend time understanding their business, show them what is possible, and help them make a case for tech adoption and the workforce training they need to upscale their operations.

EDA funding has been especially important because too often, they must rely on a patchwork of funding to support their programs.

Annie Colarusso, who is the Regional Economic Competitiveness Officer at the Allegheny Conference echoed appreciation for the EDA funding that she says has done an especially good job helping community colleges establish programs to prepare high school students for manufacturing jobs.

“But those funds expire in 2026,” said Colarusso.

Petra Mitchell is the president of Catalyst Connection, an economic development organization dedicated to serving manufacturers that is co-located at Mill 19 with the ARM Institute and MFI. She agreed that Build Back Better has been of great value locally, but says it only served a limited number of regions throughout the country.

“More funding is needed especially for the financial assistance program and mini grants that can reduce risk and ease adoption of technology for smaller manufacturers,” she says.

Fedder says that the relationships Carnegie Mellon and ARM have with entities like those represented at the roundtable are the special sauce to having successfully competed for public funding. 

Still, a significant amount of new and reliable funding will be needed to scale robotic adoption throughout the U.S. manufacturing industry, says Fedder.

“Even for ARM’s role, it would probably take at least $50 million a year,” said Fedder, adding that they will all need to remain competitive in attracting other funding sources as well.

A Vision for the Manufacturing USA Program in 2030 and 2035:

In the decade since the creation of the Manufacturing USA Program, the importance of advanced manufacturing leadership remains high for U.S. economic and national security.  This study will recommend ways to strengthen technology transfer, scale-up, and workforce development at Manufacturing USA institutes sponsored by the U.S. Departments of Commerce, Defense, and Energy, with the goal of promoting domestic technology development and adoption of advanced manufacturing technologies in the United States.