Modernising composite materials regulations
In April 2017, a report was published calling for industry and government to work together to tackle the constraints on the use of composite materials in construction and offshore engineering.
‘Modernising composite materials regulations’, published by the University of Southampton, claims that inappropriate standards and regulations are holding back an approach that could be worth £4bn by 2030 if ‘barriers to innovation’ were removed'.
The first-of-its-kind study was carried out by a multi-disciplinary team from the University of Southampton, and its findings are supported by a number of leading organisations, including the Composites Leadership Forum and Composites UK.
The report recognises that the UK is a global leader in the research and development of composite materials and structures, but points out that bringing new products to market could be made much easier.
It proposes modernising the current regulations to enable industry to migrate from current systems of assurance, based on material ‘equivalence’, to a performance-based system. This would harmonise the regulatory regime for composite materials across all sectors, and galvanize manufacturing in the UK.
The global market for composite products was $68bn in 2013 and this is predicted to grow to $105bn by 2030. The UK’s current market share is £2bn.
Professor Ole Thybo Thomsen, head of the infrastructure research group at Southampton and co-author of the position paper, said:
“Advanced polymer composite materials have a huge potential to shape the modern world. The use of composites in aerospace and automobile design is now the norm, but they have much broader potential for use in other sectors such as in building and bridge construction, railway and rail infrastructure, as well as marine and offshore. In aerospace alone, 52% by weight of the latest generation of aircraft are now composed of composite materials.”
Professor Simon Quinn, director of the university’s Research Institute for Industry (RiFi) and the lead researcher of the paper, said:
“In the UK there is currently very limited coordination and centralisation of the codes and standards data associated with new composite materials. There is neither a coherent development of certified testing facilities, nor a formal process for different sectors to share information and best practice. These factors have reduced productivity, discouraged research and development and innovation, and significantly increased the time to market for new composite products.”
To download the executive summary of the report, go here.
[edit] Find out more
[edit] Related articles on Designing Buildings Wiki
Featured articles and news
Airtightness in raised access plenum floors
New testing guidance from BSRIA out now.
Picking up the hard hat on site or not
Common factors preventing workers using head protection and how to solve them.
Building trust with customers through endorsed trades
Commitment to quality demonstrated through government endorsed scheme.
New guidance for preparing structural submissions for Gateways 2 and 3
Published by the The Institution of Structural Engineers.
CIOB launches global mental health survey
To address the silent mental health crisis in construction.
New categories in sustainability, health and safety, and emerging talent.
Key takeaways from the BSRIA Briefing 2024
Not just waiting for Net Zero, but driving it.
The ISO answer to what is a digital twin
Talking about digital twins in a more consistent manner.
Top tips and risks to look out for.
New Code of Practice for fire and escape door hardware
Published by GAI and DHF.
Retrofit of Buildings, a CIOB Technical Publication
Pertinent technical issues, retrofit measures and the roles involved.
New alliance will tackle skills shortage in greater Manchester
The pioneering Electrotechnical Training and Careers Alliance.
Drone data at the edge: three steps to better AI insights
Offering greater accuracy and quicker access to insights.
From fit-out to higher-risk buildings.
Heritage conservation in Calgary
The triple bottom line.