Robotics, advanced manufacturing and national security: Q&A with Chinedum Okwudire
University of Michigan Engineering’s Okwudire and Dawn Tilbury are providing expertise for a new Special Competitive Studies Project commission.
University of Michigan Engineering experts are serving on a new commission formed by the Special Competitive Studies Project (SCSP), a nonpartisan think tank, that seeks to meld robotics and artificial intelligence (AI) to ensure that U.S. manufacturing capacity becomes a “durable national security asset against our adversaries.”
Chinedum Okwudire, a professor of mechanical engineering, is serving as a member of the Commission on Robotics for Advanced Manufacturing. Dawn Tilbury, the Ronald D. and Regina C. McNeil Chair of Robotics, will serve as an advisor on the panel. Representatives from robotics companies, academia, the auto industry and computer chip manufacturers will also be involved.
Okwudire was recently named director of the new University of Michigan Advanced Manufacturing Institute (UMAMI), and he brings the vision that guides this institute to the commission. UMAMI aims to develop actionable approaches for human-centered, resilient and sustainable manufacturing. It integrates engineering, behavioral science and organizational design to address automation, supply chain and climate change. It also seeks to create a symbiotic ecosystem for translating basic research to the manufacturing industry.
Here’s what he had to say about the new commission and its charge.
Why focus on manufacturing and robotics as a national security issue?
Manufacturing is critical to national security because it can ensure the production of necessary goods and materials, particularly in times of conflict when supply chains are disrupted.
Rare earth minerals are a good example. Robots often feature multiple motors that are produced with magnets made from rare-earth minerals. As relations between countries change, our access to these materials can be jeopardized, putting our ability to manufacture robots at risk. Lithium, key to battery production, is another item we don’t produce here in the U.S.
What SCSP commissions like ours aim to do is look across different technologies—everything from biotech to electric vehicles and beyond—to assess how well the U.S. is competing with other nations. The primary competitor they’re looking at is China. In robotics and advanced manufacturing, the focus of our commission, China is beginning to surpass us technologically.
How does U-M, particularly you and your expertise, connect with the goals of the commission?
We were brought on board, in large part, due to the efforts of U.S. Sen. Elissa Slotkin, (D-Michigan), because of work we’re already doing to bolster the nation’s manufacturing through UMAMI.
The institute has laid out two main goals. First, we encourage convergence, or interdisciplinary research, to develop holistic, human-centered, and resilient manufacturing solutions. Second, we translate academic research into industrial impact through a retooled Doctor of Engineering program and a work-study program for undergraduate and master’s students.
We’re bringing together folks from across U-M to add their expertise—social sciences, environmental sciences, and business—so we can look at advanced manufacturing holistically. And U-M has invested in a state-of-the-art physical space to support these efforts.
What is the commission’s approach to improving American competitiveness in advanced manufacturing?
The commission has a four-pillar approach. The first is to build a national framework to align public and private investment and to begin scaling U.S. robotics for advanced manufacturing. The second focuses on upskilling the U.S. workforce and growing the number of specialized technicians and robotics engineers.
Strategic targets are next, including benchmarks for integrating robotics and modernizing our supply chains. And the last is creating an ecosystem to secure U.S. leadership in robotics hardware, software, and the underlying supply chain.
What is the vision guiding these strategies?
The whole idea is to develop a national framework for strengthening our leadership in robotics for advanced manufacturing. One of the key areas of interest is how we integrate AI into our manufacturing without weakening the workforce and maintaining a level playing field as best we can.
While a competitor like China is a strong motivator, we’re not looking to duplicate their approach. We have a different system and, because of the democratic values that underpin it, we want American manufacturing to draw from the talents of many rather than concentrating power in the hands of a few.
What pitfalls are there?
With the arrival of new technologies, small and medium-sized enterprises can be squeezed out. Bigger operations with the financial means to do so can dominate and create billionaires, while leaving the smaller ventures behind. Those smaller ventures make up about 98% of manufacturing firms.
What we need is a holistic solution—one that pushes to advance technology and makes our manufacturers the best they can be, with dynamic competition among enterprises of different sizes, fueled by the right number of skilled workers. If we get this right, we won’t just advance technology, we’ll build a manufacturing future that works for people, strengthens communities, expands opportunity across the entire ecosystem, and serves as a foundation for enduring economic prosperity and national security.