A cost comparison of automated fibre placement and filament winding for composite pressure vessel manufacturing

Filament winding (FW) is traditionally used for composite pressure vessel (CPV) manufacturing. However, its inability to cut and restart the fibre tow during winding restricts the possible layup configurations and its selective reinforcement capability. Automated fibre placement (AFP) addresses this limitation, but is more complex, slower, and has higher material and capital costs. In this paper, a Monte Carlo simulation was used to find the relative cost difference between FW and AFP for manufacturing CPVs sized for a car, bus/truck, and tube trailer at 10,000 vessels/annum, with input data collected from literature and industry consultation. Costs associated with the composite material, consumables, layup process, curing, polar boss, and labour were considered. In the most optimised process configuration, AFP was at a minimum 1.77 times more expensive than FW, owing to the high cost of the slit tow prepreg required. Based solely on manufacturing costs, AFP would need to enable a 57.39–63.22 % mass reduction from the FW baseline, which was deemed technically infeasible. • Automated fibre placement (AFP) cost at least 1.77 times more than filament winding. • Composite material formed most of the cost in all pressure vessel designs analysed. • It is unlikely that AFP can enable enough mass savings to reach cost parity. • Cure batching had the greatest impact on reducing vessel cost.