AMOS · Project

Repair Expensive Aerospace Parts Instead of Replacing Them Using 3D Printing

manufacturingTestedTRL 4

Imagine your car engine has a cracked part — instead of buying a brand-new engine, someone prints fresh metal right onto the damaged spot, good as new. That's basically what AMOS figured out for aircraft turbine blades and landing gears. They tested two different ways of depositing metal layer by layer onto worn-out aerospace parts, compared the results, and built simulation tools to predict exactly how the repair will hold up. The goal is to stop throwing away expensive components when they could be fixed at a fraction of the cost.

By the numbers

consortium partners involved

countries represented (FR, SE, UK)

project deliverables completed

50%

industry partners in the consortium

DED systems compared (powder-based and wire-based)

The business problem

What needed solving

Aerospace companies spend enormous sums replacing damaged turbine blades, landing gears, and other high-value components that could potentially be repaired. Current repair methods are often manual, inconsistent, and lack the simulation tools needed to guarantee repaired parts will perform as well as new ones. There is no standardized way to compare different metal deposition repair techniques or predict their long-term reliability.

The solution

What was built

The project delivered a proof-of-concept repaired part with generic DED procedures, a comparative study of powder-based vs. wire-based deposition systems, defect geometry mapping methods, automated hybrid machining strategies, and a DED process simulation platform — totaling 15 deliverables across a 4-year research program.

Audience

Who needs this

Aerospace MRO companies repairing turbine engines and landing gearAerospace OEMs looking to extend component lifecycles (e.g., GKN Aerospace, Pratt & Whitney)Metal additive manufacturing service bureaus entering aerospace repairDefense contractors maintaining aging aircraft fleetsEnergy sector turbine operators needing blade repair solutions

Business applications

Who can put this to work

Aerospace MRO (Maintenance, Repair, Overhaul)

enterprise

Target: Aircraft engine and landing gear maintenance providers

If you are an MRO company spending heavily on replacement turbine blades and landing gears — this project developed proof-of-concept Direct Energy Deposition repair techniques validated across both powder-based and wire-based systems. Their comparative study across 4 consortium partners helps you pick the right repair method for each component type, potentially cutting parts replacement costs significantly.

Aerospace OEM Manufacturing

enterprise

Target: Turbine blade and structural component manufacturers

If you are an aerospace OEM like GKN or Pratt & Whitney dealing with high scrap rates on expensive components — this project built simulation and design optimization tools that reduce component weakness at the design stage. By connecting repair strategies with original design, you can prolong component lifecycles and reduce warranty costs.

Additive Manufacturing Services

SME

Target: Metal 3D printing service bureaus specializing in repairs

If you are an AM service provider looking to expand into aerospace repair — this project validated both powder-based and wire-based DED systems with 15 deliverables including defect geometry mapping methods and hybrid machining strategies. Their proof-of-concept parts and generic DED procedures give you a tested playbook for offering certified repair services.

Frequently asked

Quick answers

What would it cost to adopt these DED repair techniques?

The project does not publish specific cost figures. However, DED repair of high-value aerospace components like turbine blades is inherently cheaper than full replacement since you only add material where needed. The comparative study of powder-based vs. wire-based systems helps you choose the more cost-effective method for your specific parts.

Can this scale to production-level repair volumes?

The project produced proof-of-concept parts and generic DED procedures, meaning the techniques are validated but not yet at full production scale. The involvement of major OEMs (GKN, PWC, HDI) in the 4-partner consortium suggests strong industry pull toward scaling. Automated and hybrid machining strategies developed in the project are specifically designed to enable higher throughput.

Who owns the IP and can I license these techniques?

The University of Sheffield coordinated this project with 4 partners across 3 countries. IP ownership typically follows the Horizon 2020 grant agreement, where each partner owns the results they generate. Contact the coordinator at Sheffield to discuss licensing of specific simulation tools or DED procedures.

Does this meet aerospace certification requirements?

The project focused on understanding material integrity through DED processes and establishing accuracy and limitations of deposition. While the research provides the data needed for certification arguments, achieving full airworthiness certification would require additional qualification steps with relevant aviation authorities.

How long before we could implement this in our repair shop?

The project ran from 2016 to 2020 and produced 15 deliverables including proof-of-concept parts. The generic DED procedures and simulation platform provide a foundation, but integration into a certified repair workflow would require adaptation to your specific components and regulatory environment.

Can this work with our existing CNC and inspection equipment?

Yes — the project specifically developed hybrid DED and post-deposition machining strategies, meaning the repair process is designed to integrate with subtractive manufacturing equipment. Defect geometry mapping methods were also developed, which can work with standard inspection sensors.

Consortium

Who built it

The AMOS consortium is compact but well-balanced: 4 partners across 3 countries (France, Sweden, UK) with a 50-50 split between industry and university. The University of Sheffield, a recognized leader in advanced manufacturing research, coordinates. Having 2 industrial partners — and the objective naming OEMs like GKN, PWC, and HDI as end-users — means the research was shaped by real repair challenges, not just academic curiosity. The 1 SME in the consortium adds agility. For a business looking to adopt these results, this tight consortium means fewer parties to negotiate with and clearer IP lines than a 15-partner mega-project.

THE UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELDCoordinator · UK
ECOLE CENTRALE DE NANTESparticipant · FR
GKN AEROSPACE SWEDEN ABparticipant · SE

How to reach the team

The University of Sheffield (UK) coordinated this project — their Advanced Manufacturing Research Centre is the likely contact point for licensing or collaboration.

Order a report on this consortium See THE UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD profile →

Next steps

Talk to the team behind this work.

Want an introduction to the AMOS team to discuss DED repair techniques for your components? SciTransfer can arrange a direct connection with the right researchers.

Order a report on this topic More in Manufacturing & Industry 4.0