What changed when an aerospace shop doubled a glue cell and cut scrap from 15 percent to 3 percent

October 1, 2026 · 3 min read

Tool Gauge in Tacoma ran a glue dispensing assembly with four operators making about 200 units a day and high scrap from hand fatigue. A UR5 now picks each end cap, runs it through the dispenser and places it for one operator to inspect. Output went to 400 a day and scrap fell from 15 percent to 3 percent, per the vendor.

The short answer

A 25 to 50 person aerospace components shop replaced a four operator glue cell with one operator and a collaborative arm, doubling daily output and cutting scrap on the glue application from 15 percent to 3 percent. A second cobot took over unloading delicate copper parts from a CNC chute, which the vendor says saved 9,000 dollars on the very first order. The account below is the maker's own case story, so read every number as the vendor published it, not as an audited result.

What the job looked like before

Operators picked end caps for a plastic extruded panel and dispensed glue into a channel so narrow that the shop saw hand fatigue, injury risk and high scrap. Four operators produced about 200 units a day. Separately, a journeyman machinist was spending his time doing nothing but picking easily damaged copper parts off a CNC chute, rinsing, drying and boxing them. The general manager had been trying to hire as many as 100 people who were not available locally.

What they put in

A Universal Robots UR5 that picks each end cap, carries it through a glue dispenser and places it into a clamping actuator on a table, where one operator inspects the glue and removes the part. A UR3 that picks copper parts off the chute on a proximity sensor signal, dips them in a rinse bath, holds them to a dryer and boxes them into a grid with the built in palletizing wizard. No vision on either robot.

What changed, in their numbers

Glue cell output from about 200 units a day with four operators to 400 a day with one operator plus the UR5. Scrap on the glue application from 15 percent to 3 percent. Labor cost savings of up to 75 percent. A 9,000 dollar saving on the first order through the UR3 cell. Payback expected under one year for both robots, published by the vendor and explicitly worded as an expectation, against an initial internal assumption of three to four years. The need for 100 new hires described as cut in half. All figures published by the vendor.

What this does not tell you

It does not publish the cell cost or cycle times, so the payback cannot be reconstructed, and it is written as expected rather than measured. An operator still inspects and unloads every glued part, so this reduced a four person station to a one person station rather than removing it, and any similar quote should be priced that way. The injury claim reduction is asserted without a figure.

What to verify in your own plant

Your current scrap rate on the dispensing step, because the 15 to 3 move is the number to chase and it only exists if your baseline is high. Whether your parts can be presented by a chute or a fixture without vision, which is what kept this cell simple. And whether the station is the constraint, or whether the inspection step after it becomes the new one.

Sources: https://www.universal-robots.com/case-stories/tool-gauge/

If you have a dispensing or pick and place station with scrap you can name, describe it to Joe, the concierge on this site. It is free, and it will ask for your baseline before it talks about a robot.

Related on this site

Both sides of the before and after are stated here, which is rare: four people at 200 a day became one person plus a robot at 400 a day. Measure your own scrap baseline first; a shop at 4 percent has little to recover.

Put it to the test on your own job

Tell Joe what you are running and he will apply this to your numbers, including telling you when a robot is the wrong answer.

More notes