Renewable Energy-Clean Technology Supply Chain Pre Assessment Program Final Project Report

8/3/2019 Renewable Energy-Clean Technology Supply Chain Pre Assessment Program Final Project Report

1/42

R e n e w a b l e E n e r g y / C l e a n

Te c h n o l o g y S u p p l y C h a i n

P r e - A s s e s s m e n t P r o g r a m

F i n a l P r o j e c t R e p o r t

P r e p a r e d b y :

A d v a n c e d M a n u f a c t u r i n g I n s t i t u t e

5 1 0 M c C a l l R o a d

Ma n h a t t a n , Ka n s a s 66502

N o v e m b e r 2 0 1 1


2/42

Supply-Chain Pre-Assessment

Final Report 2

Contents

Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................3

Introduction ......................................................................................................................................6

Project Goals .....................................................................................................................................8

Deliverables and Value to the Company and to the Region .................................................................9

Methodology ...................................................................................................................................10

Selection of respondents ............................................................................................................................ 10

Questionnaire development ....................................................................................................................... 10

Contacting the companies .......................................................................................................................... 11

Company Pre-Assessment .......................................................................................................................... 11

Post-visit follow-up ..................................................................................................................................... 12Report Organization .................................................................................................................................... 13

Report layout and question mapping ......................................................................................................... 13

Section I Geographic Details .......................................................................................................... 15

Map showing survey respondents across Kansas ....................................................................................... 16

Section II General Company Operations Information ..................................................................... 17

Section III Company Qualifications and Existing Products/Markets ................................................. 20

Section IV Manufacturing/Operation Functions, Capabilities, & Capacities ..................................... 22

Section V Quality Control System................................................................................................... 24

Section VI Skill Set Certification, Training & Labor Requirements .................................................... 25

Section VII Wind............................................................................................................................ 26

Section VIII Analysis and Recommendations ................................................................................. 28

Appendices ......................................................................................................................................30

APPENDIX A INTRODUCTION LETTER ............................................................................................. 30APPENDIX B AMI BROCHURE FOR FACILITY VISITS .......................................................................... 31

APPENDIX C QUESTIONNAIRE FOR FACILITY VISITS ......................................................................... 32

APPENDIX D SAMPLE RESPONSE LETTER SENT AFTER COMPANY VISIT ............................................ 35

APPENDIX E WIND CAPABILITIES PROFILE PROCESS ........................................................................ 39

APPENDIX F COMPANY LIST BY COUNTY ........................................................................................40


3/42


Final Report 3

Renewable Energy/Clean

Technology Supply ChainPre-Assessment Program

Final Project ReportExecutive Summary

This project was undertaken to assist the south central Kansas

region in developing a better understanding of the interest,

capabilities and capacity of regional manufacturing companies in

terms of their readiness to pursue renewable energy markets

(wind, solar and biomass). The purpose of the study was to provide

business development pre-assessments to manufacturingcompanies seeking to 1) increase their connectedness to emerging

renewable energy markets, 2) improve their operations and 3)

increase their competitive advantage.

Realizing that a number of the targeted companies may not have

specific interest in renewable energy markets, but still may be

seeking to diversify their current markets served, on-site pre-

assessments were conducted that included, where appropriate,

discussions of increasing connectedness to other emerging

markets, existing markets that may be new to a specific

manufacturer and other Kansas companies seeking new suppliers.

As companies were contacted and later visited, their labor trainingneeds were also reviewed in an effort to assist the Workforce

Alliance of South Central Kansas to assess possible future training

needs to better serve the regions manufacturers. In general, many

companies considered themselves self-sufficient and could not

identify external training needs. Those that reported training needs

listed quality control and lean manufacturing as primary external

training needs. Additional skills that required improvement

included engineering design and job-specific skills training (e.g.

machining, sheet metal work and assembly).

At company site visits, questions were answered regarding each

companys potential entry into the wind power supply chain. Manycompanies initially indicated an interest in supplying to the utility-

scale wind industry (57% of the companies visited). Utility-scale

wind turbines are defined as larger than one megawatt (MW)

capacity and are typically installed in large groups within a utility

wind farm as opposed to community-scale wind turbines which are

A total of 114 companies were

interviewed by phone for the

project and of those 56

participated in pre-assessment

visits.

The biggest recurring challenge

reported by a majority of the

companies was shortage of a wel

trained workforce.

Many companies claimed their

core competency as having the

ability to produce high quality

products.

Many companies are looking for

new market opportunities andmore than half (57%) were

interested in the wind Industry.

A majority of companies reported

Their workers are required

to have skills certification.

Quality control is the skill area that

most requires constant improvement

to remain competitive.

There is a shortage of well- trained

employees.


4/42


Final Report 4

typically between 100 to 1000 kilowatt (kW) capacity and are typically

installed as a stand-alone turbine or in a small group of turbines to

provide power for a community or industrial facility.

However, after AMI personnel visited their facilities and reviewed the

requirements for supplying to that industry sector, many companies

determined that the utility scale wind market may not be a good fit fortheir company. Reasons for this included undersized equipment, lower

margins for wind work compared to aerospace work, no interest in

machining ductile iron (the primary material machined for wind

components) and lack of a continuous improvement and 5S programs.

At the conclusion of each on-site pre-assessment, a follow-up letter was

sent that described potential improvements to operations and facilities.

These suggestions were both general in nature and wind-industry-

specific. If a company indicated an interest in supplying to the wind

industry, additional information was provided to assist them with

pursuit of that industry. In addition, general capability information that

was collected during the project may be used to populate a futureonline Kansas Department of Commerce searchable database of Kansas

manufacturers.

Please note the companies visited as part of this project represent a

sampling of companies from the 14 county region in south central

Kansas, and results obtained may or may not represent manufacturing

as a whole within the 14 county region.

Regional Overview

For this project, initially 114 companies (as selected by regional

economic development partners) were interviewed by phone and 56

agreed to a pre-assessment visit while 58 declined a pre-assessment.

Total companies contacted 114

Total companies visited 56

Total companies declined a visit 58

The following table shows number of companies visited for pre-

assessments by county.

County Number of

companies visited

Number of companies

declined a visit

Sedgwick 22 36

Reno 5 5

Butler 1 0

Cowley 0 0

Harvey 6 2


5/42


Final Report 5

McPherson 5 4

Sumner 3 0

Marion 3 1

Rice 3 1

Kingman 1 3

Greenwood 3 3

Harper 3 1

Chautauqua 1 1

Elk 0 1

Total 56 58

The following table shows an overview of the major findings by county.

Respondents

Loo

king

fornewm

arket

opportunities

See

kingTec

hnica

l

Assistance

See

kingAssistancewit

h

Finance

See

kingskil

ledwo

rkers

See

kinginsig

htsa

bout

markets

See

kingMarketing&

Sa

lesHe

lp

See

king

loca

lsupp

liers

HasInterestinwind

Butler 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1

Chautauqua 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1

Greenwood 3 2 0 2 3 0 0 1 2

Harper 3 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0

Harvey 6 6 0 2 2 0 2 3 6

Kingman 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0

Marion 3 3 0 1 2 0 1 1 1

McPherson 5 4 0 1 2 0 0 4 2

Reno 5 3 0 1 1 0 2 2 3

Rice 3 3 0 1 2 0 0 1 3

Sedgwick 22 21 1 2 4 3 6 8 11

Sumner 3 2 0 1 0 0 2 2 2

Grand Total 56 49 1 11 17 4 15 26 32


6/42


Final Report 6

Renewable Energy/

Clean Technology Supply ChainPre-Assessment Program

Final Project ReportIntroduction

This project was undertaken to assist the south central Kansas region in

developing a better understanding of the interest, capabilities and

capacity of regional manufacturing companies in terms of their

readiness to pursue renewable energy markets (wind, solar and

biomass). The purpose of the study was to provide business

development pre-assessments to manufacturing companies seeking to1) increase their connectedness to emerging renewable energy markets,

2) improve their operations and 3) increase their competitive

advantage.

The pre-assessment process enabled AMI to overview the general wind

industry in a one-on-one manner and served as a screening process to

sort potentially viable manufacturers from those whose likelihood to

successfully compete in the renewable energy industry may be very

limited. For those companies that were potentially viable suppliers to

the wind industry, they were recommended to consider making an

investment in a complete GLWN Wind Capabilities Profile which will

enable them, through an in-depth process, to identify 1) potential partsto manufacture, 2) operational gaps that need to be closed and 3)

prospective customers based on their capabilities and readiness.

As companies were contacted/visited, their labor training needs were

also reviewed in an effort to assist the Workforce Alliance of South

Central Kansas assess possible future training needs to better serve the

regions manufacturers. In general, many companies considered

themselves self-sufficient and could not identify external training needs.

Those that reported training needs listed quality control and lean

manufacturing as primary external training needs. Additional skills that

required improvement included engineering design and job-specific

skills training (e.g. machining, sheet metal work and assembly).Realizing that a number of the targeted companies may not have

specific interest in renewable energy markets, but still may be seeking

to diversify their current markets served; on-site pre-assessments

included, where appropriate, discussions of increasing connectedness to

other emerging markets, existing markets that may be new to a specific

manufacturer, and other Kansas companies seeking new suppliers. In

addition, general capability information that was collected during the


7/42


Final Report 7

project may be used to populate a future online Kansas Department of

Commerce searchable database of Kansas manufacturers.


8/42


Final Report 8

Project Goals

Initially, the project was originally scoped with an emphasis on assisting

south central Kansas companies who were interested in supplying

components to the utility-scale wind-power industry. The scope of the

project was expanded as the project progressed based on initial

interview responses. The following overall goals were developed:

Answer any questions that manufacturers have regardingpotential entry into the wind power supply chain

Increase connectedness to emerging markets, including newbusiness development

Reduce/eliminate wasted time pursuing non-viable markets Recommend improvements to increase competitive advantage Recommend suggestions to improve existing operations Assist the Workforce Alliance of South Central Kansas in

assessing possible future training needs to better serve the

regions manufacturers

Increase supply chain connectedness to other Kansascompanies

Collect preliminary information to assist the Kansas Departmentof Commerce with creation of a future online, searchable

database of Kansas manufacturers. This database could be used

to connect Kansas manufacturers better with each other, and to

provide another means for marketing services outside of the

state.


9/42


Final Report 9

Deliverables and Value to the Company and to the Region

The value to the company for the pre-assessment engagement came in

the form of learning more about wind industry opportunities, potential

cost savings, free operations improvement recommendations, tips and

ideas, as well as another contact in their rolodex for engineering and

business support. The primary deliverable to the companies was a

Preliminary Visit Assessment 1-2 page report covering, at a minimum,

the topics listed below (See Appendix D for a sample report).

1. Learning about wind opportunities During the pre-assessmentengagement the project team discussed with company

leadership about the manufacturing requirements of utility

grade wind and middle scale wind. During this face-face

meeting, the team was able to answer more specific questions

and provide greater value than at a workshop or on a phone

call.

2. Potential cost savings Getting into the wind industry is anexpensive endeavor; not only the monetary costs, but the costof resources and committed time. Contacting OEM (Original

Equipment Manufacturers) purchasing agents is extremely

difficult and getting the purchasing agents to respond to e-mails

and phone calls is even more difficult. The project team was

able to provide companies with additional information, allowing

them to make the decision to continue to pursue the industry or

to forgo utility scale wind and focus their energies on other

areas of their business.

3. Free 3rd Party Advice/Perspective The project team alsoprovided operations improvement ideas and information to thecompanies during business development meetings and while

walking through their facility.

4. Coming out of the pre-assessment engagement, AMI alsolooked to determine if moving to the next engagement level (A

GLWN Wind Capabilities Profile Assessment, see Appendix E) is

warranted from an investment perspective.

5. Networking AMIs value statement far exceeds that of just asupply chain partner for the wind industry. The companies now

have another potential resource to call on to assist them with

engineering, business and manufacturing issues.

6. The region, upon completion of the grant award, is beingprovided with a summary report of all companies contacted,

visited and the outcomes of those interactions.


10/42


Final Report 10

Methodology

The following steps were followed throughout the project to perform all

pre-assessments.

Selection of respondents

To initiate the project, AMI met with each county/community economic

development leader to discuss the project, develop a contact strategy

and finalize the company list. This ensured that the right companies and

right contacts were obtained for companies specifically interested in

seeking new opportunities.

Based on GLWN/AMIs collective understanding and insights of the

general supply chain needs of the wind industry, AMI worked with

regional economic development leaders to preliminarily identify and

categorize the pool of potential wind industry manufacturers in the

following 14 Kansas counties:

Butler Chautauqua

Cowley Elk

Greenwood Harper

Harvey Kingman

Marion McPherson

Reno Rice

Sedgwick Sumner

AMI began with a preliminary list of prospective manufacturers filtered

by NAICS codes and, in collaboration with the county and communityeconomic development leaders, created a preliminary ranked list of

prospective manufacturers to develop a contact strategy. This list was

used for each respective county in order to initiate contact and schedule

an introductory call/pre-assessment meeting. AMI also developed a

single marketing brochure (print and electronic) that briefly described

the regional initiative, recognized regional partners, conveyed

engagement information, and provided relevant links to industry

information. This marketing piece was provided to regional partners for

distribution (see Appendix B for the brochure) and was also made

available to companies during site visits.

Questionnaire development

A standard set of questions was developed by AMI to be asked during

each plant visit. These questions were created based on AMIs

knowledge of wind supply chain requirements and labor training needs

of the Wichita Workforce Center. Appendix C lists these questions.


11/42


Final Report 11

Contacting the companies

After targeted companies were identified in each county, economic

development leaders sent an introductory letter to the companies in

their county (reference Appendix A). This letter explained the goals of

the project and AMIs role.

If a company was interested in a pre-assessment, a meeting was

scheduled and a confirmation e-mail was sent to the company and their

associated economic development leader. The economic development

leader was also invited to accompany AMI on the visit if interested.

Each pre-assessment visit took approximately 1-1/2 hours to complete.

The company representative first answered the survey questions, and

then a brief tour of the facility was conducted. A short meeting was

then held after the tour to answer any final questions the company had

regarding the project.

Company Pre-Assessment

AMI contacted targeted prospective manufacturers (Appendix F) to

gage their preliminary awareness/interest and schedule an on-site

meeting where more information was shared about the wind industry,

questions were answered, and a pre-assessment was performed. This

pre-assessment engagement included questions poised at two areas:

Wind Industry Readiness General Company Operations

The wind industry component of the pre-assessment engagement

focused on the needs of the industrys OEMs with regard to:

Financial and Operational Stability Quality Control System Management Operational Functions, Capabilities and Capacities Facility Cleanliness and Lighting

The pre-assessment served as a preliminary look at the company

through the eyes of the OEM and what they require to be a preferred

supplier in the wind industry. The company was to be pre-assessed

based on the needs of the utility scale (1 MW and higher) wind OEMs.

This pre-assessment also led to evaluation of the company for middle

scale (100 KW to 1 MW) wind. While the middle wind market is not yet

defined and is moving slower than the demand for utility scale, Kansasmanufacturers are well poised to compete in this market, which is why

it was included in the study.

The general company operations component of the pre-assessment

engagement focused on a preliminary evaluation of the companys

general manufacturing performance with regard to:

Operational and throughput issues


12/42


Final Report 12

Current internal projects and status Company culture

The topics that were addressed during an assessment led to additional

questions that begin to get at the heart of the needs of the company

allowing the project team to fully understand and grasp the needs of

the company instead of just throwing inappropriate solutions at them.

The general company pre-assessment questions were largely derived

from the company overview and facility tour. More specific questions

based on the companys current industries and products were

developed during this phase.

Post-visit follow-up

The pre-assessment was a preliminary look at the company through the

eyes of the OEM and what the OEM requires to be a preferred supplier

in the wind industry. It should be noted that each company was pre-

assessed based on the needs of utility scale wind OEMs (1 MW and

higher). The pre-assessment may also have led AMI to evaluate the

company for middle scale (100 KW to 1 MW) wind.

The value to the company for the pre-assessment engagement has

already been described briefly on page 9. Apart from the benefits

already described in the previous section as noted above, the company

received additional benefits as follows:

A preliminary visit assessment 1-2 page report covering, at a minimum,

the topics listed in the previous section. A copy of the visit assessment

for each company was also provided to the economic development

leaders for each county. A sample report is shown in Appendix D.

Resource access AMI provided another potential resource to call on to

assist companies with engineering, business and manufacturing issues.

AMI also offered ideas and information to companies during the on-site

meeting and as AMI staff walked through their facility.

Go/No-go decision for next engagement level. Coming out of the pre-

assessment engagement, AMI looked to determine if moving to the next

engagement level (a GLWN Wind Capabilities Profile Assessment) was

warranted from an investment perspective.

Potential viable suppliers to the wind industry; recommendmaking an investment in a complete GLWN Wind Capabilities

Profile which will enable them to identify 1) potential parts tomanufacture, 2) operational gaps that need to be closed and 3)

prospective customers to market to, based on their capabilities

and readiness.

Companies with no interest in the wind industry will be includedin a future pilot supply chain development program. Specific

near-term opportunities will be followed up on a case-by-case

basis.


13/42


Final Report 13

Report Organization

The project findings report is divided into eight sections. All information

collected and reported in each of these sections has been reported in

the aggregate form in order to ensure the privacy of each participant.

Section I describes briefly the demographic and geographic details of

the respondents. Section II describes the capabilities of respondents.

This section aggregates information on core competencies of the

companies, the biggest recurring problems faced, major hurdles to

growth and outsourcing patterns of the companies.

Section III summarizes a brief description of company qualifications and

existing products and markets. Section IV overviews the

manufacturing/operation functions, capabilities and capacities of

participating companies. Section V characterizes the quality control

systems of pre-assessed companies. Section VI describes the skill set

certification, training and labor requirements of the companies in the

region. Section VII was completed for only those companies that wereinterested in the wind industry and describes briefly their qualifications

to enter the wind industry. The last section, section VIII provides an

analysis of the finding and recommendations for follow up with

participating companies.

The questions in the survey are mapped to different sections of the

report based on the report layout (sections) and question mapping

chart described as follows.

Report layout and question mapping

Section I Demographics

Section II General company informationBiggest recurring problem

Core competencies

Looking for new market opportunity

Major hurdles to growth

Outsourcing

Interest in Wind

Section III Company qualifications and existing products/markets

Aerospace and automotive work

Staff qualifications

Job shop or production shop

Primary source of sales lead generation or component sourcingSection IV Manufacturing/operation functions, capabilities & capacities

Maximum part size processed

Maximum weight processes

Materials processed

Product integration

Facility cleanliness/lighting

Section V Quality control system


14/42


Final Report 14

In-house quality system

CMM capabilities

Section VI Skill set certification, training and labor requirements

Current certifications

Skill improvement

Labor shortageSection VII Wind

5S

Continuous improvement

External machine shop or fabrication resources

Comfort with ductile iron

Section VIII Analysis and Recommendations


15/42


Final Report 15

Section I Geographic Details

This section briefly describes the demographics and geography of the

survey respondents. The section describes the companies and the

industry they serve and are currently in. The project was undertaken in

the following 14 Kansas counties:

Butler Chautauqua

Cowley Elk

Greenwood Harper

Harvey Kingman

Marion McPherson

Reno Rice

Sedgwick Sumner

For this project, initially 114 companies were contacted and 56 agreed

to a pre-assessment visit while 58 declined the pre-assessment process.

Total companies contacted 114

Total companies visited 56

Total companies declined a visit 58

The following table shows number of companies visited for pre-

assessments by county.

County Number of

companies

visited

Number of

companies

declined a visitSedgwick 22 36

Reno 5 5

Butler 1 0

Cowley 0 0

Harvey 6 2

McPherson 5 4

Sumner 3 0

Marion 3 1

Rice 3 1

Kingman 1 3

Greenwood 3 3Harper 3 1

Chautauqua 1 1

Elk 0 1

Total 56 58


16/42


Final Report 16

Map showing survey respondents across Kansas


17/42


Final Report 17

Section II General Company Operations Information

Biggest recurring problem

The most frequently reported recurringproblem is finding a trained workforce with

good work ethics and willingness to work in

an industry requiring technical knowledge.

Other reported concerns were the current

downturn in the economy and the uncertain

future of industry. In addition, there were

concerns about increasing global competition,

especially from China, and difficulty in finding

and expanding the customer base. Lack of

capital, both in the long and short term, was another problem reported

by many companies.

Note: Word Cloud Diagrams such as the above are used throughout the

report. The diagram indicates key words that participants used in their

responses. The size of the word indicates the frequency of the word

use. Larger words were used more frequently.

Core competencies

A majority of companies reported their core

competency as being able to produce high quality

products, timely delivery of products and high

quality customer service. Some companies had

the capability to work with high precisionmachining, perform precision work, work in

plastics, injection molding, welding and turn-quick

response jobs.


18/42


Final Report 18

Looking for new market opportunity (n=56)

A majority of the respondents (49 out of 56 companies) reported that

they are looking for new market opportunities.

The majority of companies who reported they are looking for new

market opportunities were interested in industries such as wind,

aerospace, agriculture related products, and transportation industry.

Major hurdles to growth

Lack of skilled labor force and lack of marketing and in-house sales

were reported as being the major hurdles to growth by majority of

companies.

Other hurdles to growth identified were a lack of in-house engineering

services, especially related to product design and support and

preparation of design and technical specifications for future products.

47%

2%

22%

35%

8%

31%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Other

Technical Assistance

Finance

Skilled Workforce

Knowledge of Market

Marketing & Sales

Major Hurdles to Growth

88%

12%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Yes

No

Looking for New MarketOpportunity


19/42


Final Report 19

Outsourcing (n=53)

About 51% of companies outsource for various

products, material and/or processes outside Kansas.

A majority of these companies reported that they

were outsourcing the work outside of Kansas

because that product, material and/or process wasnot available within the state.

The work being outsourced varies from large

machining and turning jobs to special aerospace

processes. Some of the companies were using out-of-

state labs for testing, as local labs were not providing

the required testing process. Other companies

reported higher cost was a factor contributing to

outsourcing, along with the lack of knowledge of

local sources for various materials and/or processes.

Interest in Wind (n=56)

More than half of the companies reported that

they were interested in the wind industry.

Although the companies were interested in the

wind industry, they lacked the information and

knowledge about the industry and what it takes to

be a part of the wind supply chain.

57%

43%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Yes

No

Interested in Wind

49%

51%

48% 49% 50% 51% 52%

Yes

No

Outsource outside Kansas


20/42


Final Report 20

Section III Company Qualifications and Existing Products/Markets

Aerospace and automotive work (n=54)

A majority of companies (48%) reported that less than onepercent of their work is aerospace and/or automotive. About

22% of the companies reported they work exclusively in the

aerospace or automotive industry, about 16% had between

5%-50% percent of their work in the aerospace and/or

automotive industry, and another approximate 16% reported

that between 50% 99% of their work is in aerospace and/or

automotive industry.

Staff qualifications (n=54)

About 57% of the companies reported that they had

engineering staff on board that hold some kind of engineering

degree. The remaining 43% did not report having any degreed

engineers on staff.

Job shop or production shop

When asked if the company considered itself as a job shop or

production shop, a majority of respondents (19 companies)

said they consider themselves job shops, 15 companies

considered themselves production shops, 18 considered

themselves as both a job shop and a production shop, and 13considered themselves OEMs.

48%

6%

~2%

~2%

6%

4%

6%

6%

22%

0% 20% 40% 60%

Less than 1%

2-5%

6-10%

11-25%

26-50%

51-75%

76-90%

91-99%

100%

Percentage of

Aerospace/Automotive Work

57%

43%

0% 20% 40% 60%

Yes

No

Degreed Engineers on Staff

35%

28%

33%

24%

0% 20% 40%

Job-shop

Production shop

Both

OEM

Type of Facility


21/42


Final Report 21

Primary source of sales lead generation or component sourcing

Word-of-Mouth seems to be the primary source for sales lead

generation and component sourcing for small Kansas companies. Along

with that, dealer networks and tradeshows were major sources that

help companies find new customers and suppliers.


22/42


Final Report 22

Section IV Manufacturing/Operation Functions, Capabilities, & Capacities

Maximum part size processed (n=42)

A majority of companies (75% of the respondents) had thecapacity to process parts measuring over a 6 cube size.

Maximum weight processes (n=42)

Although a majority of companies could process large part

sizes, only about 21% could process heavy parts weighing over

11,000 lbs. The majority of the companies could process parts

weighing in the lower weight range (up to 220 lbs.).

Materials processed

Most companies process steel and aluminum materials,

followed by plastics.

29%

26%

24%

21%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40%

0-220 lbs

220 - 2,200 lbs

2,200 - 11,000 lbs

Over 11,000 lbs

Maximum Part Weight

Processed

5%

10%

10%

76%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

2' Cube

4' Cube

6' Cube

Over 6' cube

Maximum Part Size Processed

17%

69%

64%

38%

21%

29%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

Cast &/or Ductile Iron

Steel

Aluminum

Plastic

Composites

Other

Type of Material Processed


23/42


Final Report 23

Product integration (n=42)

About half of the companies perform product integration at a

complex assembly level that involves electrical, hydraulic and

other processes. About 31% of the companies do simple

product integration and the remaining 19% do not perform

product integration.

Facility cleanliness/lighting (n=42)

About half the companies had clean and well-lit shops,which generally indicate a well-run business. The

remainder had varying degrees of cleanliness and

lighting.

19%

31%

50%

0% 20% 40% 60%

None

Simple assembly

Complex assembly

(with electrical,

hydraulics, other)

Product Integration Level

42%

30%

20%

8%

50%

28%

22%

0%

0% 20% 40% 60%

Excellent

Good

Fair

Bad

Facility Cleanliness and Lighting

Lighting

Cleanliness


24/42


Final Report 24

Section V Quality Control System

In-house quality system (n=42)

A majority of the companies (79%) reported the presence ofan in-house quality system.

While 33 companies have an in-house quality system in place,

only 26 (78% of those with a quality system) reported havingcertification for their quality system.

A majority of firms had quality certifications such

as AS9100, ISO9000, ISO9001 and NADCAP.

CMM capabilities (n=38)

A majority of companies (61%) do not have CMM capabilities.

The companies who reported CMM capabilities said they have

either a laser CMM, Faro Laser Tracker, Flat Sheet Scanner or

other CMM.

79%

21%

0% 50% 100%

Yes

No

In-house Quality System

Present

62%

38%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

Yes

No

Quality System Certification

39%

61%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

Yes

No

CMM Capabilities Present


25/42


Final Report 25

Section VI Skill Set Certification, Training & Labor Requirements

Current certifications

A majority of companies (23 out of 40) reported their workersare required to have some form of certification, either in-

house or from an external agency. Seventeen companies

reported no need for worker certifications. The word cloud

shows the types of certifications used within companies.

Skill improvement

Quality Control was the biggest skill area that the

companies said they need to improve followed

by lean manufacturing. Safety related skills and

general mechanical, electrical and hydraulicmaintenance skills improvement need was

reported by 11% of the companies.

The other areas that companies reported need

improvement in their skills set are depicted in

the word cloud.

Labor shortage

Most companies reported a shortage of hard-working

employees with good work ethics and a good attitude. The

word cloud depicts the main labor skill areas that companies

are often in need of.

40%

11%

34%

3%

11%

63%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

Quality Control

Safety

Lean Manufacturing

Airfoils & Composite Repair

General Mechanical, Electrical

& Hydraulic Maintenance

Other

Skills Sets Missing or Need Improvement


26/42


Final Report 26

Section VII Wind

5S (n=24)

Only 24 companies responded to this question. Out of those,20 companies (83%) reported that they do not have a 5S

program in place. Only 4 of the 24 companies (17%) reported

having a 5S program in place.

Continuous Improvement (n=26)

A majority of the companies (62%) reported they

have a continuous improvement system in place in

their company. Another 27% reported that they

believe in continuous improvement and are

planning to adapt that in the near future. The

remaining 12% were not interested in a continuous

improvement system at this time.

External machine shop or fabrication resources (n=16)

Only 16 companies responded to this question. Thirteen

companies have an external machine shop and/orfabrication resources, and three said they do not have

any external resources.

17%

83%

0% 50% 100%

Yes

No

5S Program Present

62%

27%

12%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

Have a continuous

improvement system in

place

Believe in continuous

improvement systems

and planning to adapt

Not interested in

continuous improvement

systems

Company's Cultural Attitude towards

Continous Improvement

81%

19%

0% 50% 100%

Yes

No

External Machine Shop and/or

Fabrication Resources Present


27/42


Final Report 27

Comfort with ductile iron (n=10)

Only ten companies responded to this question. Out of these

ten companies, seven reported that they were comfortableworking with ductile Iron (a primary material used in the wind

industry). The remaining three said that they were not

comfortable working with ductile Iron.

Sales (n=18)

Employees (n=34)

44%

22%

11%

11%

11%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Upto 5 Million

6-10 Million

11-15 Million

16-20 Million

More than 20 Million

Average Annual Sales (USD)

50%

18%

9%

9%

6%

0%

3%

3%

3%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Upto 40

41 - 80

81 - 120

121 - 160

161 - 200

201 - 240

241 - 280

281 - 320

More than 320

Number of Employees

70%

30%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

Yes

No

Comfortable working withDuctile Iron


28/42


Final Report 28

Section VIII Analysis and Recommendations

During the course of this project, a significant amount of

information was shared with regional companies as well as

collected for immediate and future use (for example: a pendingonline, searchable database of Kansas manufacturers). This

collected information includes company demographics, general

qualifications, manufacturing and operation functions, quality

control system, skill set certification and qualifications specific to

the wind industry.

The most frequently reported recurring problem is finding a

trained workforce with good work ethics and willingness to work in

an industry requiring technical knowledge. A majority of the

respondents also reported that they are looking for new market

opportunities in industries such as wind, aerospace, agriculture,

and transportation.. Lack of marketing and in-house sales werealso reported as hurdles to growth by majority of companies.

About 51% of companies outsource for various products, material

and/or processes outside Kansas because that product, material

and/or process is not available within the state. The work being

outsourced varies from large machining and turning jobs to special

aerospace processes.

A majority of companies (48%) reported that less than one percent

of their work is aerospace and/or automotive. About 22% of the

companies reported they work exclusively in the aerospace or

automotive industry. About half of the companies perform product

integration at a complex assembly level that involves electrical,

hydraulic and other processes.

Nearly half the companies had clean and well-lit shops, which

generally indicates a well-run business. The remainder had varying

degrees of cleanliness and lighting.

While 33 companies have an in-house quality system in place, only

26 (78% of those with a quality system) reported having

certification for their quality system. A majority of firms had quality

certifications such as AS9100, ISO9000, ISO9001 and NADCAP.

As companies were contacted and visited, their labor training

needs were also reviewed in an effort to assist the Workforce

Alliance of South Central Kansas in assessing possible future

training needs to better serve the regions manufacturers. In

general, many companies considered themselves self-sufficient and

could not identify external training needs. Those that reported

training needs listed quality control and lean manufacturing as

primary external training needs. Additional skills that required

improvement included engineering design and job-specific skills

KEY TECHNICAL FINDINGS

A majority of Companies:

Consider themselves

job shops

Reported Word-of-

Mouth as the primary

source for sales lead

generation andcomponent sourcing

Have the capacity to

process parts

measuring over a 6

cube size

Could process parts

weighing in the lower

weight range (up to

220 lbs.)

Process steel and

aluminum materials Need improvement in

Quality Control

Do not have a 5S

program in place


29/42


Final Report 29

training (e.g. machining, sheet metal work and assembly).

At the company site visits, questions were answered regarding each

companys potential entry into the wind power supply chain. More than

half of the companies reported that they were interested in the wind

industry. Although the companies were interested in the wind industry,

they lacked the information and knowledge about the industry andwhat it takes to be a part of the wind supply chain. For most companies

that initially indicated an interest in supplying to the wind industry, after

AMIs pre-assessment, most companies determined that the utility-

scale wind sector was not a fit for them. Reasons for this included

undersized equipment, lower margins for wind work compared to

aerospace work, no interest in machining ductile iron (the primary

material machined for wind components) and lack of a continuous

improvement and 5S programs.

At the conclusion of each facility visit, a follow-up letter was sent

describing potential improvements to operations and their facility

(Appendix D). These suggestions were both general in nature and wind-industry-specific. If a company indicated an interest in supplying to the

wind industry, additional information was provided to assist them with

pursuing that industry.

It should be noted that the companies visited as part of this project are

only a small sampling of companies from the 14 county region and likely

do not represent manufacturing as a whole within that region. This fact

needs to be kept in mind as the results are reviewed. Of the 114

companies contacted, 56 companies were visited and the remaining 58

companies declined an assessment following a phone interview.


30/42


Final Report Appendix 30

Appendices

APPENDIX A INTRODUCTION LETTER

Dear (company contact name),

In our continuing effort to support the growth of (county name) Countys manufacturing community,

(name of county economic development group), along with a coalition of economic development

organizations in South Central Kansas, has engaged the Advanced Manufacturing Institute (AMI) at

Kansas State University to conduct Supply Chain Pre-Assessmentsthroughout the region. The purpose

of the pre-assessments is to assist interested companies increase their connectedness with other Kansas

companies to pursue opportunities in existing or new markets (e.g. wind energy, clean technology,

biosciences, and other).

This service is being offered to a limited number of manufacturers who are interested in pursuing new

growth opportunities outside their existing markets. In addition to evaluating capabilities for new

markets, AMI will use company-provided information to connect Kansas companies with each other

based on needs, capabilities, and opportunities. Note the pre-assessment details for each company

will be confidential, and AMI will request permission to use general capability information to connect

individual companies with other prospective suppliers or customers.

AMIs pre-assessments will last one hour, and will identify general core competencies/capabilities.

During the assessment, AMI will also provide general suggestions for improvement of your companys

operations to increase your competitive advantage. Topics to be reviewed during the company pre-

assessment include the following:

General company qualifications and existing products/markets Manufacturing/operation functions, capabilities & capacities Quality control systems Skill set certification, training, and labor requirements Management structures

To help AMI understand your company, please visit

http://www.zoomerang.com/Survey/WEB22BC5XARLDS/ to fill out a brief survey (it will take ~5 minutes

to complete). Your participation in the survey is voluntary, and all responses will be kept anonymous. In

addition, the survey results will not be published or shared with anyone.

A representative from AMI will contact you (when) to discuss the potential for a plant visit. If youd like

to learn more about AMI, please visit their website at www.amisuccess.com.

We at (name of county economic development group) are pleased to offer this opportunity to our

manufacturing community, and believe it will be beneficial to all who participate. If you have any

questions about this, please contact me.

Sincerely,

(Name & contact info for county economic development group)
http://www.zoomerang.com/Survey/WEB22BC5XARLDS/http://www.amisuccess.com/http://www.amisuccess.com/http://www.amisuccess.com/http://www.zoomerang.com/Survey/WEB22BC5XARLDS/


31/42



APPENDIX B AMI BROCHURE FOR FACILITY VISITS


32/42



APPENDIX C QUESTIONNAIRE FOR FACILITY VISITS

Company:

Visit date:

Contact name:

Phone/e-mail:

DUNS:

Section A. General Questions1. What are your biggest recurring problems with sustainability of your existing business? (ones

you might need assistance with)

2. What are your core competencies?3. Are you looking for new market opportunities?

Yes No

In what industries?

4. What are your major hurdles to growth? (e.g. Technical Assistance, Finance, Skilled Workforce,Knowledge of Market, Marketing & Sales)

5. Do you outsource outside of KS that youd prefer to have in KS?Yes No

Why are you outsourcing outside KS?

6. Interested in wind?Yes NoIf Yes, complete Section F.

Section B. General company qualifications and existing products/markets7. Can you give me general company literature along with list of your shops machine/process

capabilities?

8. What percentage of your work is aerospace and/or automotive?9. Do you have degreed engineers on staff?

Yes No

10.Would you classify yourself as a job-shop or production shop?Job-shop b. Production shop c. Both d. OEM

11.Who are your major competitors? What are your primary sources of sales lead generation orcomponent sourcing? (e.g. Globalspec, Thomas Register)


33/42



Section C. Manufacturing/operation functions, capabilities & capacities12.What is the maximum part size you are comfortable processing?

2 cube

4 cube

6 cubeOver 6 cube

13.What is the maximum part weight you are comfortable processing?0 220 lbs

220 2,200 lbs

2,200 11,000 lbs

Over 11,000 lbs

14.What materials do you commonly process?Cast &/or ductile iron

Steel

Aluminum

Plastic

Composites

Others

15.How much integration of your products do you perform?None

Simple assembly

Complex assembly (with electrical, hydraulics, other)

16.Observe facility cleanliness/lightingCleanliness Excellent Good Fair Bad

Lighting Excellent Good Fair Bad

17.Material Handling (in-process & between processes)WIP

Setup reduction

Quality system (process checks, poka-yoka, other)

Safety

KPI postings

5S

Section D. Quality control system18.Do you have an in-house quality system?

Yes No

19.Does your quality system have certification?


34/42



Yes No

If so, what type of certification? (ISO, AS, etc.)

20.Do you have any CMM capabilities? (portable, laser tracker, gantry for wind)Yes No

Section E. Skill set certification, training & labor requirements21.What certifications do your workers currently have?22.What skill sets would your company like to improve on or are missing?

Quality Control

Safety

Lean Manufacturing

Airfoils & Composite Repair

General Mechanical, Electrical & Hydraulic Maintenance

Other (Open ended)

23.What type of labor is your facility short on?Section F. Wind (only if company is interested in being evaluated for Wind)

24.Do you practice and/or have a 5S Program in place?Yes No

25.What is the companys cultural attitude towards continuous improvement like LeanManufacturing?

Have a continuous improvement system in placeBelieve in continuous improvement systems and planning to adapt

Not interested in continuous improvement systems

26.Do you have external machine shop (or fabrication) resources?Yes No

Distance and their respective capabilities?

27.Are you comfortable working with ductile iron in your machine shop?Yes No

28.Average annual sales? ($10 million typical minimum for wind)29.How many employees? (40 typical minimum for wind)


35/42



APPENDIX D SAMPLE RESPONSE LETTER SENT AFTER COMPANY VISIT

Dear John Doe,

Thank you for taking time out of your busy schedule to visit with me last week regarding your workforce

training needs and company qualifications. I also appreciated the opportunity to tour your shop. It was

good to see the following things youre doing that positively affect your business:

Implementation of continuous improvement techniques, including set-up reduction ofyour forming dies

Aggressive implementation of lean manufacturing, 5S, setup reduction, cellularmanufacturing, and continuous improvement.

ISO 9000, ISO 13485, ISO14000, AS9100, ASQ, ITAR, Nadcap & NCCER certifications ASTM Amusement Ride Safety certification HAZWOPER certification SEA (Supplier Excellence Alliance) member AWS and ASME certified welders Black Belt certified employees ASNT NDT level II certified inspectors NEMA certified electricians Tracking of raw materials and their associated certifications throughout their processing

in the plant

Power-sweeping of your floors on a regular basis to keep the floors clean Implementation of an off-the-shelf computerized information system to improve

scheduling & tracking of work in the shop

Use of touch-screens with your computerized information system in all shop work areasto improve efficiency & reduce paperwork

Use of overhead cranes and rolling carts to optimize material handling of beams & pipesin your shop.

Good overhead lighting & building ventilation (your walls & ceiling were very clean for aweld shop!)

A very clean & orderly shop with good overhead lighting & building ventilation Participation in the ISNetworld database to increase visibility for existing & potential

customers

Participation in the PICS database to increase visibility for existing & potential customers KPI postings for your employees Implementation of a good safety program

During my visit, we briefly discussed lean manufacturing, 5S and setup reduction. Here are some

resources to consider regarding those topics:

A book I recommend for setup reduction is A revolution in manufacturing: the SMEDsystem by Shigeo Shingo. It illustrates many good techniques for setup reduction that

you could implement in your shop. The book discusses setup reduction for changing

dies; however, many of the techniques & tools can also be used for machine setups in

general. After youve read that book, let me know if you have any questions about setup


36/42



reduction that I can answer. Benefits of improving your setup reduction for machines

include time & cost savings for setups, increased responsiveness to customer orders,

removal of process bottlenecks, ability to decrease economical lot sizes, and reduction

of work-in-process within the plant.

Another book I recommend is Lean manufacturing for the small shop by Gary Conner(published by SME). Also FYI, attached is a short presentation on lean manufacturing

that you might find interesting. The goal of lean manufacturing is to reduce/eliminate

the 7 deadly wastes, which include:

o Defectso Overproduction of things not demanded by actual customerso Inventories waiting further processingo Over-processing (e.g. relying on inspections instead of improving the process)o Transportation and handling of goodso Motion of employeeso Waiting for an upstream process to deliver

To help reduce clutter in your shop, you might want to further investigate implementation of 5S

techniques. There are 5 primary phases of 5S: sorting, straightening, systematic cleaning, standardizing,

and sustaining. Many resources are available on the Internet to illustrate 5S; however, here is a quick

summary of 5S:

Sorting: Eliminate all unnecessary tools, parts, & materials in the plant. Keep only essentialitems and eliminate what is not required, prioritizing things and keeping them in approachable

places. Everything else is stored or discarded.

Straightening or setting in order / stabilize: There should be a place for everything andeverything should be in its place. The place for each item should be clearly labeled or

demarcated. Items should be arranged in a manner that promotes efficient work flow. Workers

should not have to bend repetitively to access materials. Each tool, part, supply, or piece of

equipment should be kept close to where it will be used. Sweeping, shining, cleanliness, systematic cleaning: Keep the workplace tidy and organized. At

the end of each shift, clean the work area and be sure everything is restored to its place. This

makes it easy to know what goes where and ensures that everything is where it belongs. A key

point is that maintaining cleanliness should be part of the daily work not an occasional activity

initiated when things get too messy.

Standardizing: Work practices should be consistent and standardized. Everyone should knowexactly what his or her responsibilities are for adhering to the first 3 S's.

Sustaining the discipline or self-discipline: Maintain and review standards. Once the previous 4S's have been established, they become the new way to operate. Maintain focus on this new

way and do not allow a gradual decline back to the old ways. While thinking about the new way,

also be thinking about yet better ways. When an issue arises such as a suggested improvement,

a new way of working, a new tool or a new output requirement, review the first 4 S's and make

changes as appropriate.

Safety: A sixth phase, "Safety", is sometimes added. While it is reasonable to assume that aproperly planned and executed 5S program will improve workplace safety, some argue that

explicitly including this sixth "S" ensures that workplace safety is given at least a secondary

consideration.


37/42



Also during my visit, we briefly discussed the issue with smoke & oil fumes in your plant. You mentioned

that you have to replace your building insulation every few years because of deterioration caused by

smoke & fumes. In a nutshell, here are some steps Id recommend you take to reduce the amount of

smoke and oil fumes in your shop:

Close all the doors in your building to prevent air from flowing into the building, and thenmeasure your internal building pressure using an inexpensive manometer. One end of themanometer should have a long hose attached that goes outside, and the other end should be

open to the atmosphere in the shop. If you detect a negative building pressure, listed below are

some steps you can take to resolve the problem.

Review the fan curves for your exhaust fans to see how the exhaust CFM changes with staticpressure. The pressure you measured in step 1 can be used with these curves to see how

efficiently the fans are operating. If the pressure you measured in step 1 is larger than the

maximum static pressure the fans can overcome, then the fans are running (wasting energy) but

not exhausting any air.

Install additional makeup air capacity to reduce the negative building pressure when all thedoors are closed. Sizing of this equipment should be based on the expected CFM of your exhaust

fans with the addition of the makeup air. Ideally, your building pressure should be zero tomaximize the exhaust capacity of your exhaust fans.

While I was at your facility, you mentioned that you were interested in pursuing the utility-scale wind

industry as a potential component supplier. Attached for your information is a wind manufacturing

supplier handbook that you may find useful. As you continue looking at the wind industry, you might

want to keep in mind the following websites as you search for potential customers in that industry:

GLWNs interactive WIND supply chain GIS map at www.glwn.org The list of exhibitors from the recent AWEA Windpower annual expo show at

www.windpowerexpo.org. You may also wish to attend this show in May 2012 to learn more

about your potential fit for the wind industry.

As we discussed during my visit, some major challenges your company may have to overcome to beconsidered as a supplier to the wind industry include the following:

Creation of an in-house quality system (ISO9000 certification or compliance) Implementation of lean manufacturing and 5S AWS D1.1 certification of welders Lease/purchase of a portable laser CMM to validate part dimensions Overhead cranes under roof capable of handling large fabrications (5 ton minimum; the wind

industry prefers use of permanent bridge cranes inside a facility instead of using mobile cranes)

The pricing structure of aerospace parts versus that of the wind industry (much lower margins) The long process for becoming a qualified supplier in the wind industry (typically takes 12-18

months for this)

For workforce issues, keep in mind the following resources that are available to assist you:

Greater Wichita Economic Development Coalition (www.gwedc.org) Wichita Workforce Center (http://workforce-ks.com/) KansasWorks (www.kansasworks.com) for posting jobs in the state of KS
http://www.glwn.org/http://www.windpowerexpo.org/http://www.gwedc.org/http://workforce-ks.com/http://www.kansasworks.com/http://www.kansasworks.com/http://workforce-ks.com/http://www.gwedc.org/http://www.windpowerexpo.org/http://www.glwn.org/


38/42



As a side note, AMI recently created an online questionnaire with supplemental questions for the KDOC

database. It should take only 5 minutes or so for you to complete these additional questions. When you

get a chance, please click on the following link to those questions:

http://www.zoomerang.com/Survey/WEB22BC5XARLDS/

If you have any future needs for engineering or manufacturing assistance, please keep AMI in mind as a

potential resource. Thanks again, and have a good day!

Sincerely,

Rick Windholz

AMI Senior Engineer
http://www.zoomerang.com/Survey/WEB22BC5XARLDS/http://www.zoomerang.com/Survey/WEB22BC5XARLDS/


39/42



APPENDIX E WIND CAPABILITIES PROFILE PROCESS

The Wind Capabilities Profile Process developed by GLWN and performed by AMI is an additional and

separate phase from the work performed as part of this project, and is included as reference only. If a

company elected to have AMI perform a Wind Profile for them, the process flow for a wind profile is

outlined below:

Pre-AssessmentCompleted

Wind ProfileScheduled out 3-4

Weeks

Profile Agreement/Contract sent to

Company

Company signsand returns

agreement to AMI

AMI generatesInvoice to

company for$5,000

Company sendsAMI monies for

profile

AMI sendscompany thequestionnaire

Questionnairecompleted bycompany &

returned to AMI

AMI receivesquestionnaire min.of 1 week prior to

Profile visit

AMI onsite forprofile visit

Half Day for

Profile Visit

AMI leavescompany with

information & data

AMI generatesfinal report and

sends to company

AMI hasfinalization

conference call todiscuss report

Strong windcandidate

OEM purch agentcontacts given

Gaps too largeto overcome?

AMI offers to workwith company toovercome gaps

AMI offers to workwith company toimprove business

operations

YesNoNo

Yes

The GLWN Wind Capabilities Profile Assessment is an integrated data collection/half-day on-site process

that asks the company deeper and more pointed questions about their manufacturing operations. It is

based on a proprietary Pre-Visit Assessment Tool, listed in the above flow-chart as questionnaire,

developed by the Great Lakes WIND Network with input from five (5) major wind OEMs as well as input

from AMI. The questionnaire asks questions regarding the financial stability, quality systems,

management, capabilities, capacities, and many others. The purpose of the Wind Capabilities Profile is

to identify any potential gaps that exist that would need to be addressed before a potential wind OEM

visit.


40/42



APPENDIX F COMPANY LIST BY COUNTY

Companies Contacted and Visited

Butler

D-J Engineering

Prokleen

STM Plastics (Seeber Thermoforming)*

Vornado Air, LLC

Chautauqua

Beeson Mfg.

Economy Manufacturing*

Elk

Kelly Manufacturing

Greenwood

ABZ Manufacturing

Gator Manufacturing*

Invena*

Midwest Mill Modernization*Schlotterbeck Machine

Tool 21

Harper

Celco*

Cox Machine*

Harper Industries*

Prairie Belting

Harvey

BMG of Kansas

Full Vision*

Industrial Metal Fabrication*Mackey & Sons*

Manufacturing Solutions

Martin Machine & Welding*

Millennium Machine*

Unruh Fabricators*

Kingman

Cannonball Engineering

FabPro

Karatzis*

Neville Welding

MarionCircle D Corp

Hillsboro Industries*

Marion Die and Fixture*

Marion Manufacturing*

McPherson

Aero Transportation Products (ATP)

American Maplan*

Central States Marketing & Mfg.

Femco*

Ferguson*

Mid Kansas Machine*

Mid West Industries

Moridge Manufacturing

Welco Services*

Reno

Airgas

Collins Bus Corp

Eaton

Electrex*Haven Steel Products*

J&J Drainage

Midwest Iron and Metal

Shield Agricultural Equipment*

Superior Boiler Works (Superior Holding

Inc)*

TSW Products

Rice

Farley Machine Works

Hoelscher Inc.*

Jims Machine Shop*Lyons Manufacturing*


41/42



Sedgwick

AAR Composites

Burnham Composite Structures

Carlson Company

CECO*

Center Industries*

Central Plains Steel*

Century Instrument Corp

Chance Rides*

Cox Machine

Cratetech

D&H Machine & Tool

Fiber Dynamics*

Fiberglass Systems*

Global Engineering & Technology

Harlow Aerostructures

ICM*

IpecoiSi Environmental*

JMT Industries*

Kansas Gun Drilling

KMG Tool & Machine

Leading Edge Aerospace

Lee Air

Leonard's Metal Inc (LMI)*

Manufacturing Services

Martin Interconnect Services

Martin K Eby Construction

McGinty Machine Company*Metal Finishing Company*

Metal Improvement Company*

Metal Pros

Mid-Central Manufacturing

Milling Precision Tool Corp

MPM Inc

MPM LLC (on GWEDC list)*

Nance Manufacturing

Nex-Tech Aerospace

Nex-Tech Processing

North American Aviation*

Perfekta

Plastic Fabricating Company

Powdertech*

Precision Pattern

Premier Processing*

R&R Aerospace*

Rapid Processing Solutions

Rickman Machine

Senior Aerospace Composites*

SFB Plastics

SONACA*

Tect Aerospace*

Terracon

Triumph Structures

Universal Avionics

Vermillion Inc.

WASI

Wichita Sheet Metal Supply*

Wilko Paint

Sumner

Kansas Plastics*

Kiser Manufacturing*

Pro Machine Engineering*

* Companies visited for the pre-assessments


42/42

AMI: The Advanced Manufacturing Institute at Kansas State University

provides innovative engineering and business solutions. Comprised of

experts in engineering, product design, manufacturing and business,

AMI offers assistance with business planning and research, engineering

and economic development to help entrepreneurs and businesses be

more competitive in the marketplace.If you have a new product, new service offering or are entering a new

market, AMI can help you allocate resources, better understand the

market you are competing in and plan your strategy. AMI provides

design and engineering services to help develop products, validate

product performance, optimize equipment design and improve

manufacturing efficiency. AMI also offers economic development

services to help companies and communities identify business growth

opportunities including new business ventures, products and services.For more information call800-292-4186or visit www.amisuccess.com.

GLWN is an industry-led organization of manufacturers and suppliers

whose mission is to increase the domestic content of North Americas

wind turbines and to grow the supply chain for the wind industry. GLWN

works with wind turbine OEMs and developers, identifies critical needs

and connects manufacturers and suppliers with new customers.

Launched in 2007 as the Great Lakes WIND Network GLWN is now a

global network comprised over 1,500 suppliers to the wind industry.
http://www.amisuccess.com/http://www.amisuccess.com/http://www.amisuccess.com/

Documents

Renewable Energy-Clean Technology Supply Chain Pre Assessment Program Final Project Report