RSO-AMPO-Automation_and_Robotics-RFI_Robotic_Sheet_Metal_Forming.pdf

CAPABILITY REQUEST FOR INFORMATION

RSO-AMPO- Automation and Robotics

Robotic Sheet Metal Forming

Notice Type: Request for Information

NAICS Code: 333517 - Machine Tool Manufacturing (Secondary: 333999 - All Other

Miscellaneous General Purpose Machinery Manufacturing)

Size Standard: Unrestricted

This is a Capability Request for Information (CRFI) issued solely for information and planning purposes. It does not constitute a Request for Proposal (RFP) and does not commit the

Government to contract for any supply or service. Responses to this notice are not offers and cannot be accepted by the Government to form a binding contract. No reimbursement will be made for any costs associated with responding to this notice.

1 . BACKGROUND and OBJECTIVE

The United States Air Force Rapid Sustainment Office (RSO) is conducting market research analysis to identify existing solutions for an on-demand, dieless robotic sheet metal forming capability. This capability is intended to produce structural components, brackets, panels, skin sections, and spare parts for support equipment, and aircraft at depot, maintenance, or factory-level facilities.

Traditional manufacturing of sheet metal parts relies on heavy, expensive tooling, dies, and presses that require long lead times, high upfront costs, and physical storage. Robotic sheet metal forming—utilizing dual-sided or single-sided synchronized robotic arm manipulators equipped with generic, interchangeable forming styli—offers a flexible, software-defined alternative.

The objective of this research is to identify commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) or rapidly adaptable solutions capable of being integrated into standard industrial manufacturing and maintenance facilities. This capability is aimed at reducing reliance on traditional supply chains, eliminating the need for part-specific hard tooling, and dramatically accelerating low-volume manufacturing and prototyping cycles.

Submitters are encouraged to highlight existing commercial technologies and details on how their hardware and software solutions can be integrated into industrial DoW facilities.

Submitters may also identify optional services, such as operator training, technical support, tooling/stylus consumables, and system maintenance.

2. PROPRIETRY MATERIALS PROTECTION

CRFI responses, which contain information that is marked as “proprietary,” will be protected as proprietary information. Proprietary information must be clearly marked on the outside container and on the materials inside. The Government shall not be liable for or suffer any consequential damages for any proprietary information not properly identified. Such information will be reviewed by a team comprised of Government as well as contractor support personnel hired to provide technical assistance to the Government. All members of the team will be reminded of their obligation to protect such information to the maximum extent permitted or required by the

Economic Espionage Act, 18 U.S.C. 1831 et. seq., and other applicable statutes or regulations.

Additionally, Government members will be reminded of their obligations to afford protection under the Trade Secrets Act, 18 U.S.C. 1905. All Contractor members are required to protect the information by the terms of their contracts. Responders are advised that employers of commercial firms under contract of the Government may be used to process responses, provide technical assistance, and/or other administrative duties requiring access to other Contractor’s proprietary information. These support contracts include non-disclosure agreements prohibiting

Contractor employees from disclosing any purpose other than which it was furnished.

3. KEY CAPABILITY REQUIREMENTS

The Robotic Sheet Metal Forming system should be capable of the following:

1. Supply Chain & Compliance

• DCMA & NDAA Alignment: Hardware, control components, and software architectures must align with Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) guidelines and comply with NDAA FY2020 Section 848.

• Foreign Exclusion: No critical components, control systems, robotic manipulators, software, or raw materials may originate from covered nations (see 10 U.S.C. § 4872).

• Strict adherence to FAR telecommunications prohibitions is required.

See section 5 of this document for more Supply Chain information.

2. Material Compatibility & Processing

• Aluminum Alloys: The system must have the demonstrated capability to form one, multiple, or all of the following aerospace-grade aluminum alloys:

o Al 2024 (e.g., in annealed 'O' or tempered 'T3' conditions) o Al 7075 (e.g., in annealed 'O' or tempered 'T6' conditions) o Al 6061 (e.g., in annealed 'O' or tempered 'T6' conditions)

• Alternative Materials (Steel & Titanium): The Government is highly interested in understanding the limits and technical approaches for forming other structural metals, specifically:

o Commercial and high-strength Steels (e.g., Stainless Steel 304/316, Mild Steel) o Titanium alloys (e.g., Ti-6Al-4V)

• Sheet Thickness Range: Capable of forming sheet metals into a range of thicknesses

3. Software Autonomy & Independent Operation (CAD-to-Part)

• Vendor Independence: The system must be capable of being operated completely independently by Government or facility operators. Generating robotic path plans, executing forming programs, and post-processing must not require the ongoing services, proprietary cloud-reachback, or direct manual intervention of the vendor.

• Ease of Use (Automated Path Planning): The software suite must feature an intuitive

CAD-to-Path workflow. Operators should be able to directly import standard 3D CAD files (e.g., STEP, IGES) or drawings, and the software must automatically:

o Analyze geometry and verify formability.

o Generate collision-free robotic toolpaths, tool orientations, and synchronized arm movements.

o Apply automated springback compensation and localized deformation algorithms to meet specified dimensional tolerances.

• Open System Software: Software interfaces should support open standards and allow integration with third-party software, local calibration routines, or auxiliary metrology equipment.

4. Physical Footprint & Facility Integration

• Industrial Footprint: Optimized for a standard industrial shop environment. The cell configuration (robotic arms, safety enclosure, frame, control console, and material loading area) should fit within standard industrial ceiling clearances and floor loading capacities.

• Power & Utilities: Compatible with standard industrial facility power architectures (e.g., 480V 3-phase, 60 Hz). The system should utilize standard shop utilities (e.g., standard compressed air and cooling systems).

• Work Envelope: Provide a generous forming work envelope (X/Y sheet dimensions and

Z-axis draw depth) suitable for fabricating medium-to-large structural brackets, ribs, spars, and skin panels.

5. Precision & Quality Control

• Dieless Precision: Capable of forming structural geometries to high dimensional tolerances without part-specific hard dies.

• In-Situ Metrology: Integration of scanning, visual, or force-feedback sensors to monitor part geometry during or immediately after the forming process for real-time validation and adjustment.

4. CONTRACTOR CAPABILITY SURVEY

Companies electing to participate in this data call should submit a White Paper that includes the following information for Part I – Business Information and Part II – System Description, Capabilities, and Experience. Please provide responses in Microsoft Word compatible documents, Microsoft PowerPoint compatible presentations, Adobe .pdf files, Microsoft Excel compatible Spreadsheets and/or a combination thereof.

Submit electronic copies via email to: matthew.thaxton@us.af.mil & andrew.gross.4@us.af.mil at any point prior to the deadline of 27 OCT 2026, 1600 Eastern Time. The title of the e-mail in the subject line should be as follows: “<company name> RFI RESPONSE TO RSO Robotic

Sheet Metal Forming”

Part I – Business Information

Please limit your Part I response to a page count of 1 page. Provide administrative information in

Section One of your response. Address at least the following in Section One:

− Company Name:

− Address:

− CAGE Code and UEI:

− Point of Contact (Name, Title, Email, Phone):

− Website:

− Business Size and Socioeconomic Status under NAICS 333517 (Machine Tool

Manufacturing) or related automation/machinery manufacturing codes.

Part II – Capabilities and Experience:

Please respond to each item below with capabilities and experience in enough detail to be evaluated by the Government. Limit the Part II response to 10 pages.

Respond to each item below with sufficient detail to allow the Government to evaluate your system's applicability. Ensure your responses directly align with the Key Capability

Requirements outlined in Section 3.

A. Technical Approach & System Capabilities

1. Robotic Architecture & Dieless Mechanism:

a. Describe your physical robotic architecture (e.g., dual-arm synchronized, single-arm with supporting frame, etc.). How does your system react and control the high localized forces needed to deform structural metal?

b. Detail the physical footprint of the standard installation and the maximum sheet dimensions (X/Y) and draw depth (Z-axis) the system can process.

2. Material Compatibility & Formability:

a. Detail your system’s capabilities to form Al 2024, Al 7075, and Al 6061. Specify the maximum thicknesses and heat-treat tempers (e.g., -O, -T3, -T6) successfully formed.

b. Provide technical details, testing data, or ongoing research regarding your system's capability to form Steel alloys and Titanium (e.g., Ti-6Al-4V). Note any requirement for thermal assistance (localized heating) or specialized lubricants.

3. Software Autonomy & Ease of Use:

a. Describe your CAD-to-Path software workflow. Explain step-by-step how an operator imports a STEP/IGES file and generates the final robotic toolpath.

b. Clarify how your software functions independently of vendor support. Can the software run completely on a local network (offline) without requiring a cloud connection or recurring vendor-executed path-planning services?

c. Detail how the software calculates and corrects for material springback and geometric deformation.

4. Facility Requirements & Integration:

a. Detail the facility requirements for your system (e.g., electrical power peak and sustained draw, compressed air pressure/volume, floor loading requirements, and ambient temperature/humidity constraints).

5. Technology & Manufacturing Readiness:

a. Identify the current Technology Readiness Level (TRL) and Manufacturing

Readiness Level (MRL) of your hardware and software solutions.

B. Experience

1. Dieless Sheet Metal Forming Applications:

a. Provide case studies or examples of components formed using your technology

(especially structural panels, aerospace brackets, or double-curvature skins).

Include material type, thickness, achieved dimensional accuracy

($\pm\text{mm}$), and processing cycle times.

2. Software Deployments and Operator Autonomy:

a. Provide examples where customer operators have been trained to fully own the path-planning and manufacturing pipeline without reaching back to your engineering team for parts generation.

3. User Interface and Skill Level Requirements:

a. Describe the typical profile and training duration required for an industrial technician or machinist to become proficient in uploading files, setting up the blanks, and operating your system.

4. Compliance and Certification:

a. Detail your system’s compliance with relevant industrial safety and machinery standards (e.g., RIA robotic safety standards, OSHA compliance, CE, UL, or ISO standard certifications).

5. SUPPLY CHAIN

The Government is conducting market research in part to assess the domestic availability of robotic metal sheet forming technologies. To assist the RSO in evaluating market capabilities and potential supply chain vulnerabilities, respondents should provide a detailed breakdown of the country of origin for all major components.

Please complete the following table as applicable and answer the subsequent questions in your submission:

System / Component Primary

Manufacturer

Model /

Part No.

Country of

Manufacture

Location of Final

Assembly /

Integration

Primary Robotic Arm

Robot Controller &

Teach Pendant

Operational Software /

Firmware

Forming End-

Effectors / Tooling

PLC/Controller

Stylus

Safety Enclosures &

Sensors

Other Major

Subcomponents

Supplemental Supply Chain Questions:

1. Domestic Alternatives: Is the primary robotic arm or controller manufactured outside the

United States? If so, please state whether a U.S.-manufactured alternative can be integrated into your system.

2. Software Development Origin: Where was/would the core path-planning, control, and user-interface software developed? Where are the software support/updates managed?

3. Restricted Foreign Sources: Confirm that no components, firmware, or software are designed, manufactured, or maintained by entities domiciled in, or owned/controlled by, a covered foreign nation identified in 10 U.S.C. § 4872 (the Democratic People’s Republic of North Korea; the People’s Republic of China; the Russian Federation; the Islamic

Republic of Iran).

6. RESPONSES

Interested parties are requested to respond to this RFI with a white paper not to exceed 11 pages

(Part I – 1 page; Part II – 10 pages) using 12-point Times New Roman font. White papers are due no later than 27 OCT 2026, 1600 Eastern Time. Unclassified responses shall be submitted via secure e-mail or secure website to the technical point of contact (TPOC), Matthew Thaxton

(matthew.thaxton@us.af.mil) and the contracting officer, Andrew Gross

(andrew.gross.4@us.af.mil). Classified responses will not be accepted. Responses should be marked, if applicable, with the appropriate Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) caveats.

7. QUESTIONS and INDUSTRY DISCUSSION

Questions regarding this announcement shall be submitted to the TPOC, Matthew Thaxton

(matthew.thaxton@us.af.mil) and contracting officer, Andrew Gross (andrew.gross.4@us.af.mil).

Questions shall NOT contain proprietary or classified information. The U.S. Government does not guarantee questions received after 15 OCT 2026, 1600 Eastern Time, will be answered in time for the white paper submittal deadline. If warranted, U.S. Government representatives may consolidate and disseminate general feedback to all respondents after white papers are submitted.

Follow-on discussions with individual interested parties may be coordinated. The intent of any such discussions would only be to obtain additional clarification of potential capabilities to meet

U.S. Government requirements and further identify risks.

8. CONTACT INFORMATION

For questions concerning this announcement, please contact:

Contracting Technical

Andrew Gross Matthew Thaxton Contracting Officer Lead Engineer andrew.gross.4@us.af.mil matthew.thaxton@us.af.mil mailto:regina.anderson.3@us.af.mil mailto:matthew.thaxton@us.af.mil