MMLV Design and

Comparative LCA Study

TEXT AND OTHER MATERIALS AREA

Research Objectives

Lightweight Material and Science

LIGHTER CLEANER

AFFORDABLE Development and Manufacturing Efficiency

Efficiency and Sustainability

LOGO OF THE PRESENTER IN CENTER

Project Goals and Implications

• Demonstrate mass reduction potential of C/D segment vehicle

• Deploy materials and methods suitable for high volume manufacturing -- 250,000 vehicles per year

• Maintain safety and performance relative to 2013 MY production vehicle

• Utilize currently available and previously demonstrated materials and manufacturing technologies

METHODOLOGY

16% Reduction in CO2

23.5% Lighter

DELIVERABLES

Vehicle Mass Reduction of 363 kg (23.5%)

Body Interior (45kg) CF Seats

CF IP Beam Foamed Plastics

Bumpers (11kg) Al Roll Form

Closures (29 kg) Al Sheet PH Steel

Mg Die Cast

BIW (77kg) Vacuum Die Cast Al

AHSS & Al Sheet

Body Exterior (55kg) Al Sheet

Chassis (98 kg) Al Subframes

Hollow Steel, FRC & Ti Springs Cast Al thermal sprayed brake rotors

Powertrain (73kg) Al & CG Block Mg Valve Body

CF FEAD and Oil Pan

Glazing (12kg) Polycarbonate Backlight

Chemically Toughened Glass

Tires & Wheels (39kg) Narrow Tires

CF and Al Wheels

Electrical (10kg) Li Ion Battery

Wiring

Inner/Outer Body Panels – Aluminum Sheet

Rear Floor, Rear Half • 5000 series / 1.5 mm Dash Upper

• 6000 series / 1.27 mm Dash Lower

• 6000 series / 1.6 mm

Side Quarter • 6000 series / 1.0 mm

Package Tray • 5000 series / 1.0 mm

Panel Roof Outer • 5000 series / 1.0 mm

Front Door • 6000 series outer / 1.0 mm • 5000 series inner / 1.2 mm

Rear Door • 6000 series outer / 0.8 mm • 5000 series inner / 1.0 mm

Deck Lid • 6000 series outer / 0.9 mm • 5000 series inner / 0.9 mm

Rear Floor, Front Half • 5000 series / 1.27 mm

Front Floor • 5000 series / 1 27 mm

Major Body Panels 55 kg mass reduction from baseline (40%)

Mass Reduction = 106 kg of 363 kg

Body-in-White (BIW) 77 kg mass reduction from baseline (23.5%)

■ ALUMINUM SHEET ■ ALUMINUM EXTRUSION ■ ALUMINUM CASTING ■ MAGNESIUM CASTING ■ STEEL ` ■ HOT STAMPED BORON STEEL

Closures 29 kg mass reduction from baseline (29.7%)

63% Al

37%Steel

77% Al

22%Steel

1% Mg

Mass Reduction = 363 kg mass reduction

Bumpers 11.4 kg mass reduction from baseline (30.9%)

Chassis - Subframes 27 kg mass reduction from baseline (47.4%)

100% Al

■ ALUMINUM CASTINGS ■ ALUMINUM EXTRUSION ■ ALUMINUM SHEET ■ OTHER (bushings …. etc.)

80%

16%

4%

96% Al

Multimaterial Joining Technologies

RivTak™ Technology

Self-pierce Rivet (SPR)

BIW and Chassis Joining Technology

Joining Technologies

Flow Drill Screw

Powertrain and Suspension, 143kg (42%)

Suspension – 70 kg mass reduction

Tall, Narrow Tires P155/70R19 Wheels 5J x19, carbon fiber Deleted Spare Tire/Wheel Al Brake Rotors, spray coated Coil Springs

– Fiber reinforced composite – Tubular micro alloy steel, internal

shot peening Hollow Stabilizer Bars - front and rear

– high strength steel, internal and external shot peening

Powertrain – 73 kg mass reduction 1.0l three 3 cyl. GDTi vs 1.6l 4 cyl. GDTi

Interior & Glazings, 57 kg (23%)

Interior - 45 kg mass reduction Front & Rear Seats

• Carbon fiber seat structures • Reduced seat cushion foam

Instrument Panel Beam • Carbon fiber

Air Duct • Chemically foamed plastics

Glazing - 12 kg mass reduction Windscreen & Movable Glazing

• Chemically toughened hybrid laminate Backlight

• Polycarbonate

5 Full Vehicle Safety Tests, 2 Vehicles

Safety-A

Low Speed Damageability

Side Impact Test (Pole FMVSS 214 )

RHS

IIHS Front ODB 40% Offset 40mph

√ √

NCAP Frontal 35 mph rigid wall

Offset Rear Impact, 70% offset, 55mph

Rear √

Safety-B

√

Vehicle-level Testing Pass/Fail Test Description Corrosion MPG R-343 Low Speed Damageability IIHS Front Offset Deformable Barrier, 40% Offset 40 mph Side Pole Test (FMVSS 214) NCAP Frontal 35 mph rigid wall 70% Offset Rear Impact (FMVSS 301) Wind Tunnel Rough Road Interior Noise, Engine & Tire Noise NVH, Ride & Handling

Pass/Fail Test Description BIW - NVH Modes BIW MPG Modal Frequency & Global/Local Stiffness Structural Durability Square Edge Chuckhole Test Engine dynamometer testing Lithium-Ion starter battery load testing Tire Patch Door Deflection Coil Spring Fatigue FRC Wheel, Scratch and Weathering Stabilizer Bar Fatigue (failure @ 90% of vehicle life) Brake Rotor Durability (failure @ 85% of vehicle life)

Passed 10 of 12 Tests

Passed ALL Tests

Component-level Testing

Validation Testing

Life Cycle Analysis

Primary Goal Compare the lightweight auto parts of the MMLV Mach-I (1.0l I3) vehicle design to the more conventional auto parts of the baseline 2013 Ford Fusion (1.6l I4), both built and driven for 250,000 km in North America;

Primary Intended Application To report the environmental performance associated with the MMLV Mach-I midsize vehicle mass reduction and resized powertrain;

Primary Interested Parties US DOE, Province of Ontario, Ford Motor Company and Magna International;

External Communication Third party critical review of LCA Report completed as per ISO 14044

Goal Definition

Life Cycle Inventory

Data Collection Activity data: 1. Auto part name, number of constituent parts per vehicle sub-system, assembly and sub-assembly, mass per auto part in kilograms, material composition, fabrication process, sleeves and fasteners, and adhesives - Ford Motor Company; 2. The US EPA CFE of the 2013 Ford Fusion- www.fueleconomy.gov. LCI data: 1. North American and global metals and other material industry associations; 2. North American auto manufacturers; and 3. North American and global industry-supported public and commercial LCI databases such as the US LCI database and ecoinvent 2.2, GREET-1 2013, and GREET-2 2012. Data Calculation 1. ISO 14044:2006 and CSA Group 2014 LCA Guidance for Auto parts Allocation Rules 1. “Mass”- deemed as the most appropriate physical parameter for allocation; 2. End-of-life recycling approach (avoided burden).

Multimaterial Joining Technologies

... address the environmental aspects and potential environmental impacts (e.g. resource use and environmental consequences of releases) throughout a product's life cycle from “cradle-to-grave”. Production Phase

raw material acquisition through production

Use Phase operation during useful life

End-of-Life treatment and disposal of materials

Life Cycle Assessment

[ISO 14040:2006]

Primary raw material production

Prod

uctio

n st

age

Semi-finished product, alloy, plastics and composite material

manufacturingTransport

Auto part fabrication

Transport

Auto part assembled in the vehicle

Use stage(including maintenance, repair and

replacement- if applicable) Use

stag

e

EOL processing (e.g. collection, dismantling, shredding, sorting)

Process scrap recycling and

transport(if applicable)

EOL disposal (e.g.landfilling, waste incineration, conversion to

energy)

EOL

stag

e

Outputto air, water

and land

Input material,

energy flows

Transport

Avoided primary

production

“Cradle-to-grave” system boundary

EOL scrap recycling and

transport(if applicable)

Net EOL avoided primary

production

Scrap collection and pre-treatment

(including home scrap)

Avoided burden of recovered

energy

Scope Definition: Cradle-to-Grave System Boundary

Scope Definition: Vehicle Description

Vehicle Description Baseline MMLV design 2013 Ford Fusion (Mondeo)

2014 MMLV Mach I

Engine type 1.6 liter, 4 cylinder, gasoline 1 liter, 3 cylinder, gasoline

Aspiration mode Turbocharged, Direct Injection (redubbed SIDI, spark ignition direct injection)

Transmission type Automatic transmission, 6-speed

Vehicle fuel economy (CFE) miles per gallon (liters per km)

28 mpg (8.4 L/100km) www.fueleconomy.gov

6.94 L/100km https://greet.es.anl.gov/greet/index.htm

US EPA vehicle size class Midsize sedan

Curb weight (kg) 1559 1195

Life Cycle Inventory: Use Stage

2013 Ford Fusion CWF = 1,559 kg (curb weight)

LTDDV of 250,000 km CFEF = 8.4 L/100 km (www.fueleconomy.gov) MMLV - with engine adaptation

CwM = 1,195 kg (curb weight) FCP = 0.40

CFEM = CFEF - (CwF - CwM) × FCP × 0.01 = 8.4 – (1,559 - 1,195) × 0.40 × 0.01

= 6.94 L/100 km https://greet.es.anl.gov/greet/index.htm Total Life Cycle - fuel consumption 2013 Ford Fusion: 21,000 L (8.40 L/100 km × 250,000 km/100) MMLV: 17,358 L ( 6.94 L/100 km × 250,000 km/100) ======================================================== Fuel Savings 3,642 L (1.46 L/100 km × 250,000 km/100)

Material Matrix: Production & End of Life Stages

Material 2013 Fusion MMLV Delta (kg) (kg) (kg)

AHSS 417.5 66.9 (350.6) Conventional steel 413.7 289.8 (123.9) Cast iron 50 19.6 (30.4) Paint, fluid, adhesive 72.1 60.5 (11.6) Glass, Ceramics 38.3 27.2 (11.1) Stainless steel 19.1 9.7 (9.4) Forged iron 16 10 (6.0) Batteries 14 8 (6.0) Copper 33.7 29.3 (4.4) Cold-rolled aluminum 12.8 143.8 131.0 CFRP, GFRP 0 57.6 57.6 Extruded aluminum 15.6 66.9 51.3 Magnesium 2.3 16 13.7 Forged aluminum 0 9.8 9.8 Titanium 0 3.3 3.3 Die-cast aluminum. 146.4 147.7 1.3

Total Vehicle 1559 kg 1195 kg (364) kg

Scope Definition: Main Fabrication Technologies

Fabrication Technology 2013 Ford Fusion MMLV

Casting – Al Chassis, Powertrain Body, Chassis, Powertrain

Extrusion - Al Chassis Body, Interior, Chassis, Powertrain

Stamping - Al Body, Powertrain Body, Powertrain

Forging -Al n/a Chassis

Stamping - Steel Body, Interior, Chassis, Powertrain Body, Interior, Chassis, Powertrain

Casting - Iron Chassis n/a

Forging - Iron Powertrain Powertrain

Casting - Mg n/a Body, Chassis, Powertrain

Draw - Copper Interior, Powertrain, Electrical Interior, Powertrain, Electrical

Molding - CFRP n/a Interior, Chassis, Powertrain

Molding - GFRP n/a Chassis

Molding - Plastic and Rubber Body, Interior, Chassis, Powertrain, Electrical

Body, Interior, Chassis, Powertrain, Electrical

Glass Body, Interior Body, Interior

Scope Definition: Functional Unit and Reference Flow

Vehicle sub-

systems

2013 Ford Fusion MMLV Mach-I

LTDDA

FR= LTDDV

/ LTDDA

LTDDA FR=

LTDDV/ LTDDA

Body 250,000 1 250,000 1 Interior 250,000 1 250,000 1 Chassis 250,000 1 250,000 1 Tires 64,000 4 64,000 4 Powertrain 250,000 1 250,000 1 Energy storage

84,000 lead-acid

3 125,000 lithium-

ion 2

Electrical 250,000 1 250,000 1

Functional unit: The transportation service of auto parts that:

• Have undergone mass changes in the Mach-I, enabling engine downsizing, relative to the 2013 Ford Fusion, due to material composition, manufacturing technology, or part geometry, while maintaining performance and vehicle configuration

• Manufactured and intended for use in North America for 250,000 km

• Engineered to meet NHTSA and IIHS 5-star safety criteria

• Design Criteria equivalent performance to 2013 Ford Fusion baseline vehicle. stiffness, noise, vibration, and harshness (NVH) performance, and durability.

Life Cycle Inventory: Aluminum and Steel LCI

Aluminum product

(cradle-to-gate)

Input scrap (kg/kg Al product)

Carbon dioxide (kg/kg

Al product)

Steel product (cradle-to-gate)

Input scrap (kg/kg steel

product)

Carbon dioxide

(kg/kg steel product)

Al casting 0.883 2.520 HDG 0.439 2.054

Al extrusion 0.426 5.854 PHRC 0.198 2.111

Al CRC 0.649 4.792 CRC 0.177 2.076

Al primary 0 7.875(1) EG 0.064 2.428

Al recycling ingot (100% scrap)

1.045 0.634 ES 1.011 0.676

Secondary ingot (primary metal and

alloy added)

0.978 1.134 Steel primary (BOF slab) (theoretical

value)

0 1.92

Steel secondary

(EAF slab) 1.092 0.386

Life Cycle Inventory: EOL Allocation for Steel and Aluminum

EOL recovered scrap factor: 0.94 kg/kg auto part for both Steel and Aluminum scrap Fabrication Scrap factor: 0.34 kg/kg auto part for both Steel and Aluminum stamping

LCA Indicators and Results

LCIA and LCI Indicators

Indicator units

Cradle-to-grave total net change

Acidification potential, AP kg SO2-eq -11.8 Eutrophication potential, EP kg N water-eq - 0.06 Global warming potential, GWP kg CO2–eq -10,817 Photochemical ozone creation potential, POCP kg O3-eq -266 Human health particulate potential, HHPP kg PM2.5-eq -0.83 Depletion potential of stratospheric ozone layer, ODP kg CFC-11-eq -1.05E-03 Total Primary Energy, TPE MJ -156,197 Non-renewable, fossil, NRF MJ -157,345 Non-renewable, nuclear, NRN MJ -83 Non-renewable, biomass, NRB MJ 0.004 Renewable, hydropower, RH MJ 1,422 Renewable, solar, geothermal, wind, unspecified, RSGW MJ 166 Renewable, biomass, RB MJ -357 Use of non-renewable material resources, NRMR kg -933 Use of renewable material resources, RMR (CO2 in air, N2 in air, O2 in air, wood)

kg 7.00

Cradle-to-Grave Total Net Change

Impact

category

Indicator units

Total Net Change

Production

stage

Use stage

EOL stage

AP kg SO2 eq -11.8 1.0 -9.3 -3.50 EP kg N eq -0.06 2.47 -0.35 -2.18

GWP kg CO2 eq -10,817 513 -11,071 -259 POCP kg O3 eq -266 0.49 -228 -39 HHPH kg PM2.5 eq -0.83 1.28 -1.27 -0.84 ODP kg CFC-11 eq -1.05E-03 -1.06E-03 -4.26E-07 9.03E-06 TPE MJ -156,197 6,624 -154,618 -8,203

NRMR kg -933 -2076 0 1143 RMR kg 7.0 10.5 0 -3.4

LCA Results- Significant Factors The total net change of Production Stage

1) The high MMLV full vehicle mass reduction (total of 364 kg), dominated by the iron and steel based material reduction; 2) The high and moderate-to high amount of input scrap for NA semi-fabricated aluminum and steel products which has contributed to an improved environmental profile of these products; 3) The 75% hydro based (clean) electricity grid mix used by aluminum smelting facilities in North America, which has contributed to an overall improved environmental profile of NA aluminum products. The total net change of Use stage The overall 364 kg (23%) full vehicle mass reduction, enabled engine downsizing, which resulted in a combined fuel economy of 34 mpg (6.9 l/100 km) compared to 28 mpg (8.4 l/100 km) for the 2013 Ford Fusion. The total net change of EOL stage The high North American EOL recycling rate of both steel and aluminum products and the EOL recycling approach.

Scope Definition: Mass Reduction per Vehicle Sub-system

Vehicle 2013 Fusion Mach I Mass Reduction Percent sub-system (kg) (kg) (kg) (%)

Body 525 400.4 (124.6) (24%) Chassis 355 260 (95.0) (27%) Powertrain 337 263.1 (73.9) (22%) Interior 260.4 202.7 (57.7) (22%) Electrical 57 49.5 (7.5) (13%) Assembly 25 19.5 (5.5) (22%) Total Vehicle 1559.4 1195.2 (364.2) (23.2%)

Normalization of cradle-to-grave total

LCA and LCI

Indicators

Indicator units

Cradle-to-grave LCA of MMLV

Cradle-to-grave LCA

of 2013 Ford

Fusion

Total net savings (in absolute basis)

Total net savings (in percentage basis)

AP kg SO2-eq 74.3 86.1 -11.8 -14%

EP kg N water-eq 13.2 13.3 -0.06 -0.4%

GWP kg CO2–eq 57,629.5 68,446.3 -10,817 -16%

POCP kg O3-eq 1,375.5 1,641.6 -266 -16%

HHPH kg PM2.5-eq 9.2 10.1 -0.83 -8%

ODP kg CFC-11-eq 5.5E-03 6.5E-03 -1.05E-03 -16%

TPE MJ 829,893 986,090 -156,197 -16%

NRMR kg 2,331 3,264 -933 -29%

RMR kg 88.1 81.0 7.0 9%

Mass Enabled CO2 Reduction RESULTS DO NOT INCLUDE “SECONDARY BENEFITS” ASSOCIATE WITH ENGINE DOWNSIZING

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

0 100 200 300 400 500Red

uctio

n C

O2

( gr

ams/

mile

)

Mass Reduction (kg)

Source: Argon National Laboratory GREET Model comparative LCA Study of Lightweight Auto parts of MMLV Mach-I Vehicle as per ISO 14040/44 LCA Standards and CSA Group 2014

22g/mi

9.4g/mi

30 mpg

29 mpg

28 mpg

Mass Enabled CO2 Reduction

138% ADDITIONAL CO2 SAVINGS DUE TO MASS INDUCED ENGINE DOWNSIZING

0,00

10,00

20,00

30,00

40,00

50,00

60,00

70,00

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500

Red

uctio

n C

O2

( gr

ams/

mile

)

Mass Reduction (kg)

52g/mi

22g/mi 30 mpg

34 mpg

28 mpg

Source: Argon National Laboratory GREET Model Source: Comparative LCA Study of Lightweight Auto parts of MMLV Mach-I Vehicle as per ISO 14040/44 LCA Standards and CSA Group 2014

RESULTS DO NOT INCLUDE “SECONDARY BENEFITS” ASSOCIATE WITH ENGINE DOWNSIZING

The authors thank our colleagues in Magna International and Ford Research & Advanced Engineering who have assisted with the design and research for the MMLV. Over 100 research scientists and engineers have contributed to this project. Finally the authors thank the U.S. Department of Energy, Vehicle Technologies Office for support and ongoing guidance and reviews. This material is based upon work supported by the Department of Energy National Energy Technology Laboratory under Award Number No. DE-EE0005574. This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither Magna International, Ford Motor Company, the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. Such support does not constitute an endorsement by the Department of Energy of the work or the views expressed herein.

Acknowledgement