polyurethane foam in automotive seats-bachelor year project

AUTOMOTIVE APPLICATION OF POLYURETHANE FOAM

BY

M. Osama Adil PP-30

Rabia Raza Khan PP-19

Noureen Naz PP-37

Group-8 Department of Polymer & Petrochemical Engineering

In Collaboration With:

BASF-The Chemical Company

Internal Advisor: M. Raza Khan External Advisor: M. Abbas Ameer Meerani

http://www.presentationload.de/

• Overview

03/12/2012 Automotive application of polyurethane foam 2

Introduction

Polyurethane Foam and their Chemistry

Application’s Selection

Aims and Objectives

Mold and Tools Designing

Experiments

Testing Results and Comparison

Profit Estimation

Conclusion and Future Work


• Introduction

Foam

Classification of f oam

o Open cell foam

o Closed cell foam



• PU Foam and their Chemistry


Polyurethane Foam

o versatile comparing with all polymer foams

o can be manufactured between two extremes of softness and

hardness

o resist bacterial growth

o availability of raw materials at cheap rate

o can be classified as

a) rigid polyurethane foam

b) flexible polyurethane foam



Applications of Flexible Polyurethane Foams




Polyurethane Chemistry

o Reactants are:

1) Polyol

1) Isocyanates




Reactions

o Blow reaction




Reactions

o Gel reaction



• Application’s Selection


Major automotive applications of PU Foam we discussed

1. Tyres 2. Headliners 3. Seats

SEATS Final Selection

Car Seats Bike Seats



• Application’s Selection

Motorbike Seat Car Seat

1. Product divisions 1 Part: Seat 4 Parts: Seat base,

Backrest, Headrest

and Armrest

1. Additional Parts Nothing Supports

1. Cost 800-2000 PKR More than 3000 PKR

Comparison between bike seat and car seat

So after doing general feasibility analysis, bike seat was

selected to proceed our project



• Aims & Objectives

Depending on selection of automotive application of PU foam,

aims of this proposal are:

o To significantly reduce the density of PU foam without

disturbing its mechanical properties

o To reduce the production cost of PU foam for bike seats



• Tools & Stirrer Designing

Mold Designing

o Sample seat of OEM’s product – Master Foam CD-100 Seat

o Reverse engineering

o CAD Models

o Fabrication



CAD Model

o Front View




CAD Model

o Top view





Fabrication of study mold





Stirrer Designing

o CAD Model



Stirrer

o Before fabrication, workshop concluded that discussed model of stirrer would

be failure due to wings instability during mixing which can break it.

o Workshop proposed another 3D stirrer(beater) having following properties

Speed Switch 3-Speed

Revolution: 700-1050 rpm

Switches: 700rpm, 875rpm and

1050rpm

Weight: 0.45 Kg

Dimensions (H×W×D): 12.2×8.0×18.4 cm




• Experiments

Composition of reactants

Composition of Polyol Composition of Isocyanate

Components Parts by weight

Polyol 70.000

Co-polymer polyol 30.000

Silicon Surfactant 1.000

Water, Blowing agent 4.2000

Dimethanol Amine,

Pure, Chain Extender 1.700

Amine Catalyst 0.1

Tin Catalyst 0.5

Component Parts by weight

ELASTOFLEX

Diphenylmethane-

4,4'-diisocyanate

(MDI)

90

Polymeric MDI (P-

MDI)

10



Formulations

• Experiments

Sample No Polyol

(A) (gm)

Isocyanate (B)

(gm)

Mixing

time (sec)

Curing time

(min)

Mixing

Speed (rpm)

Foam

Weight

(gm)

Density

(lb/ft3)

A/B Ratio Remarks

A1 30 15 5 4 700 27.00 3.8095 2 Polyol remains in

bottom

A2 30 16 5 4 700 26.21 3.7813 1.87 Still Polyol remains

in bottom

A3 30 17 5 4 700 25.73 3.6319 1.76 Polyol odor in foam

A4 30 18 5 4 700 25.10 3.5471 1.66

A5 30 19 5 4 700 24.81 3.4988 1.57

A6 30 20 5 4 700 24.55 3.4539 1.5

A7 30 21 5 4 700 24.06 3.3947 1.42

A8 30 22 5 4 700 23.56 3.3242 1.36

A9 30 23 5 4 700 23.71 3.3453

1.30

A10 30 24 5 4 700 24.7 3.4850

1.25

A11 30 25 5 4 700 26.13 3.6868

1.20

A12 30 26 5 5 700 27.45 3.8730

1.15

A13 30 27 5 5 700 27.82 3.9252

1.11 Unstable

A14 30 28 5 7.8 700 28.1 3.9647 1.07 Unstable, yellowish,

isocyanate is visible

A15 30 29 5 9 700 28.26 3.9873 1.03 Fail, Settling time is

very high, unstable

A16 30 30 5 Infinity 700 28.49 4.0198 1 Fail, Iso everywhere

un-reacted



Formulations

• Experiments

Sample No Polyol (A)

(gm)

Isocyanate (B)

(gm)

Mixing time

(sec)

Curing time

(min)

Mixing Speed

(rpm)

Foam Weight

(gm)

Density

(lb/ft3)

A/B Ratio Remarks

B1 30 15 3 4 875 25.97 3.6642 2 Polyol remains in

bottom,

B2 30 16 3 4 875 25.49 3.5965 1.87 Still Polyol

remains in bottom

B3 30 17 3 4 875 24.85 3.5062 1.76 Polyol odor in

foam

B4 30 18 3 4 875 24.67 3.4808 1.66

B5 30 19 3 4 875 24.41 3.4441 1.57

B6 30 20 3 4 875 24.25 3.4215 1.5

B7 30 21 3 4 875 24.02 3.3891 1.42

B8 30 22 3 4 875 23.91 3.3736 1.36

B9 30 23 3 4 875 24.55 3.4639 1.30

B10 30 24 3 4 875 25.46 3.5922 1.25

B11 30 25 3 4 875 26.93 3.7997 1.2

B12 30 26 3 4 875 27.38 3.8632 1.15

B13 30 27 3 6 875 28.08 3.9619 1.11 Unstable

B14 30 28 3 8.5 875 28.23 3.9831 1.07 Unstable,

yellowish,

isocyanate is

visible

B15 30 29 3 Infinity 875 28.57 4.0311 1.03 Fail, Settling time

is very high,

unstable

B16 30 30 3 Infinity 875 28.74 4.0550 1 Fail, Iso-

unreacted



Formulations

• Experiments

Sample No Polyol (A)

(gm)

Isocyanate (B)

(gm) Mixing time

(sec)

Curing time

(min)

Mixing

Speed (rpm)

Foam

Weight (gm)

Density

(lb/ft3)

A/B Ratio Remarks

C1 30 15 3 4 1050 26.47 3.7348 2 Polyol remains

in bottom,

C2 30 16 3 4 1050 25.81 3.6416 1.87 Still Polyol

remains in

bottom

C3 30 17 3 4 1050 25.36 3.5781 1.76 Polyol odor in

foam

C4 30 18 3 4 1050 24.72 3.4878 1.66

C5 30 19 3 4 1050 24.51 3.4582 1.57

C6 30 20 3 4 1050 24.27 3.4243 1.5

C7 30 21 3 4 1050 24.02 3.3891 1.42

C8 30 22 3 4 1050 23.87 3.3679 1.36

C9 30 23 3 4 1050 23.92 3.3750 1.30

C10 30 24 3 4 1050 24.01 3.3877 1.25

C11 30 25 3 4 1050 25.67 3.6219 1.2

C12 30 26 3 4 1050 26.74 3.7729 1.15

C13 30 27 3 6 1050 27.32 3.8547 1.11 Unstable

C14 30 28 3 8.5 1050 27.65 3.9012 1.07 Unstable,

yellowish

isocyanate is

visible

C15 30 29 3 Infinity 1050 27.92 3.9393 1.03 Fail, Settling

time is very

high, unstable

C16 30 30 3 Infinity 1050 28.13 3.9690 1 Fail, Iso- un-

reacted



Observations

• Experiments

3

3.5

4

4.5

15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

De

nsi

ty (l

b/f

t3 )

Isocyanate (gm)

Graph of A Series Samples -Iso (gm) vs. Density (lb/ft3)

at 700 rpm

3

3.2

3.4

3.6

3.8

4

4.2

15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

De

nsi

ty (l

b/f

t3 )

Isocyanate (gm)

Graph of B Series Samples -Iso (gm) vs. Density (lb/ft3)

at 875 rpm

3

3.2

3.4

3.6

3.8

4

4.2

15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

Den

sity

(lb

/ft3 )

Isocyanate (gm)

Graph of C Series Samples -Iso (gm) vs. Density (lb/ft3) at 1050 rpm



• Testing Results & Comparison

Foam testing is quite different than plastic testing

There were 4 tests conducted to analyze mechanical properties

o Density

o Indentation force deflection

o Compression force deflection

o Tear resistance



Density


3 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9

4

Sample 1

Sample 2

Sample 3

Average

OEM foam

Altered foam



Indentation force deflection (IFD) test

IFD Comfort Factor


0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900

1000

IFD@25% IFD@65%

lbf/

50

in2

OEM's Foam

ALTERED FOAM

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

Comfort Factor

OEM's Foam

Altered Foam



Compression force deflection (CFD) test


0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

CFD

(K

g f)

OEM's Foam

Altered Foam

Comparison of CFD Values



Compression force deflection (CFD) test


0

1

2

3

4

5

6

Rec

ove

ry t

hic

knes

s d

iffe

ren

ce

(mm

)

OEM's Foam

Altered Foam

Comparison of recovery thickness after CFD test



Tear resistance


0.25

0.26

0.27

0.28

0.29

0.3

0.31

Tear

Str

engt

h (

N/m

m)

OEM's Foam

Altered Foam

Comparison of tear resistance



• Profit Estimation

Comparison of OEM FOAM vs. ALTERED FOAM on basis of

density

OEM’s FOAM ALTERED FOAM

1. Density 3.85 lb/ft3 3.34 lb/ft3

1. Seat Weight 1.76 lbs 1.53 lbs

1. Seat Volume 0.458 ft3 0.458 ft3

1. Polyol/Iso Ratio 1/0.85 1/0.73



• Profit Estimation

Profit estimated with respect to material’s cost price

Weight difference 0.23 lbs

Weight difference (%) 13.07 %

Material Saved 13.07%

Cost Price of material for OEM/Product X

Price of Material Saved 0.13X

Material’s Cost Price per seat reduced X-0.13X

Profit in producing higher density PU foam Y

Production Profit using Altered Foam Y+0.13X



• Conclusion

Successfully reduced foam density

Better mechanical properties of reduced density foam are

achieved



• Future Work

Our Limitations and recommendations for future work

o RIM

o Molecular level research

o Blended reactants


polyurethane foam in automotive seats-bachelor year project

Documents

introduction polyurethane

isocyanates pu foam

density of pu foam

production cost of pu

cad model o

polymer foams o

cheap rate o

mechanical properties