reinventing automotive steel - california air resources board · reinventing automotive steel...

Reinventing Automotive Steel

California ARB Lightweighting Workshop – May 18, 2010

Jody Shaw - U. S. Steelwww.worldautosteel.org 2

WorldAutoSteel

automotive group of the worldsteel

Ansteel Hyundai-Steel SumitomoArcelorMittal Kobe ThyssenKruppBaosteel Nippon Steel USIMINASChina Steel NUCOR U. S. SteelCorus-Tata POSCO voestalpineJFE Severstal

www.worldautosteel.org 3

AISI Steel Market Development Institute

Partner Funding$6, 627,000

68%

Automotive Applications CouncilAK Steel

ArcelorMittal Dofasco

ArcelorMittal USA

Nucor Corporation

Severstal North America

United States Steel Corporation


•Past steel projects and impact on vehicle structures

•Future Steel Vehicle - The new drivers of materials selection- New capability of steel.- Objectives- Performance criteria- Design methodology- Preliminary results

Today’s Presentation


ULSABUltraLight Steel Auto Body

ULSASUltraLightSteel Auto Suspensions

ULSAB -AVCAdvanced VehicleConcepts

www.worldautosteel.org

ULSACUltraLight Steel Auto Closures

Steel Industry Investment in Automotive Lightweighting

More than

$60 Million


70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

Elo

ngat

ion

(%)

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000Tensile Strength (MPa)

Mart

DP, CP

TRIP

HSLA

CMnBH

IF -HSIF

Mild

Automotive Steel Grades



22% to 32% Weight Reduction

Source: Auto/Steel Partnership

Lightweight Front End Structures - 32% mass reduction - At no additional cost

Future Generation Passenger Compartment-30% mass reduction - Improved crash performance- At no additional cost

Lightweight Rear Chassis - 24% Mass reduction - At no additional cost

Lightweight Closures- 22% Mass reduction - At no additional cost

Light Weight Control Arm- Same mass as aluminum baseline- At 66% of the cost



Body Structure Weight vs. Gross Vehicle Weight

(a2mac1 database 2001-2008 production vehicles)

450 Kg

400

350

300

200

150

250

1000 Kg

Body Structure: W/O Closures + IP Beam + Engine Cradle

1500 2000 2500 3000Gross Vehicle Weight

2001-2003 Steel BIW2004-2008 Steel BIW2004-2008 Top 10 Steel BIW

Impact of AHSS Solutions

-21%




450 Kg

400

350

300

200

150

250

1000 Kg



2001-2003 Steel BIW2004-2008 Top 10 Steel BIWAluminium

-28% -9%



Source: Ducker Worldwide


050

100150200250300350400450

2000 2005 2007 2009 2020

AHSS (other)TRIP, CP,RAMartensiteBoronDP

AHSS - Fastest Growing Automotive Material

Pou

nds

per

Veh

icle




450 Kg

400

350

300

200

150

250

1000 Kg



2001-2003 Steel BIW2004-2008 Top 10 Steel BIWAluminium



ULSABUltraLight Steel Auto Body

ULSASUltraLightSteel Auto Suspensions

ULSAB -AVCAdvanced VehicleConcepts

www.worldautosteel.org

ULSACUltraLight Steel Auto Closures



Why Future Steel Vehicle? –The New Drivers

Source: International Council on Clean Transportation

USA

JapanEurope

Australia

China

100

60

80

120

160

140

180

200

220

260

240

280

Gra

ms

CO

2 /K

m (E

quiv

alen

t)

2003 2006 2009 2012 2015 2018 2021 2024 2027 2030Source: International Council on Clean Transportation

USA

JapanEurope

Australia

China

100

60

80

120

160

140

180

200

220

260

240

280

Gra

ms

CO

2 /K

m (E

quiv

alen

t)

2003 2006 2009 2012 2015 2018 2021 2024 2027 2030

Automotive CO2 Emissions Regulation.


Honda Clarity FCX

Mercedes F cell Mercedes E cell Plus

Early Introductions of Dedicated PlatformAdvanced Powertrain Vehicles

Why Future Steel Vehicle? –The New Drivers




450 Kg

400

350

300

200

150

250

1000 Kg



2001-2003 Steel BIW2004-2008 Top 10 Steel BIWAluminiumSLC (Super Light Car)

SLC states 35% mass reduction ( = €7.80 / kg)

1.

SLC is 20% less than avg. of best 10 steel ( = €14.20 / kg)

2.

Why Future Steel Vehicle? – The New Drivers

www.worldautosteel.org 16www.worldautosteel.org

Future Steel vehicle willaddress:

•Future emissions regulations

•Advanced powertrains vehicles

•Competitive material solutions

for 2015 to 2020

Why Future Steel Vehicle? – The New Drivers


What is New in Steel?FSV’s Steel Portfolio

Expanded range of steel gradesdenotes steel included in ULSAB-AVC

Mild 140/270 DP 350/600

BH 210/340

BH 260/370 SF 570/640 DP 700/1000

IF 260/410 MS 950/1200

IF 300/420

DP300/500

DP 500/800

HSLA 350/450 TRIP 450/800

MS 1250/1500

HSLA 490/600

denotes steel grades added for FSV

Mild 140/270 DP 350/600 TRIP 600/980

BH 210/340 TRIP 350/600 TWIP 500/980

BH 260/370 SF 570/640 DP 700/1000

BH 280/400 HSLA 550/650 CP 800/1000

IF 260/410 TRIP 400/700 MS 950/1200

IF 300/420 SF 600/780 CP 1000/1200

DP300/500 CP 500/800 DP 1150/1270

FB 330/450 DP 500/800 MS 1150/1400

HSLA 350/450 TRIP 450/800 CP 1050/1470

HSLA 420/500 CP 600/900 HF 1050/1500

FB 450/600 CP 750/900 MS 1250/1500

HSLA 490/600


Conventional StampingLaser Welded Blank

Tailor Rolled BlankHigh Frequency Induction Welded Hydroformed TubesLaser Welded Hydroformed Tubes

Tailor Rolled Hydroformed TubesHot Stamping (Direct & In-Direct)Laser Welded Blank Quench Steel

Tailor rolled Blank Quench SteelRoll FormingLaser Welded Coil roll FormedTailor rolled Blank Roll Formed

Roll Form with QuenchMulti Walled Hydroformed TubesMulti Walled Tubes

Laser Welded Finalized TubesLaser Welded Tube Profiled Sections

What is New in Steel?

FSV’s Manufacturing Options


Donor Vehicle

Donor Vehicle Rail

A/SP LWB Concept

TWTConcepts

Mass Reduction

22.4%

32%

45%

FSV Pilot Program

Topography Optimization

FSV PilotProject

What’s New in Design?

Design Optimization


Lightweighting technologies

•Expanded materials portfolio

•Expanded manufacturing technology portfolio.

•Aggressive design optimization technologies

What is New in Steel?


Manufacturing Cost

Future Steel Vehicle Performance Criteria

$www.worldautosteel.org 22

Source: Argon National Lab

Mass Reduction


Source: International Council on Clean Transportation

USA

JapanEurope

Australia

China

100

60

80

120

160

140

180

200

220

260

240

280

Gra

ms

CO

2 /K

m (E

quiv

alen

t)

2003 2006 2009 2012 2015 2018 2021 2024 2027 2030Source: International Council on Clean Transportation

USA

JapanEurope

Australia

China

100

60

80

120

160

140

180

200

220

260

240

280

Gra

ms

CO

2 /K

m (E

quiv

alen

t)

2003 2006 2009 2012 2015 2018 2021 2024 2027 2030

for fuel economy and emissions reduction


Source: Argonne National Lab

Vehicle Carbon Footprint



Effect of powertrain and fuel efficiency improvements

24www.worldautosteel.org

Source: UCSB Model

0

10,000

5,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

9% 10% 12% 13% 20%

24



Design Performance Criteria

•Manufacturing cost

•Mass reduction

•Vehicle’s carbon foot print



FSV 1

4-door hatchback

3700 mm

PHEV20

Electric Range: 32km

Total: 500km

Max Speed: 150km/h

0-100 km/h 11-13 s

BEV

Total Range: 250km

Max Speed: 150km/h

0-100 km/h 11-13 s

FSV 2

4-door sedan

4350 mm

PHEV40

Electric Range: 64km

Total: 500km

Max Speed: 161km/h

0-100 km/h 10-12 s

FCEV

Total Range: 500km

Max Speed: 161km/h

0-100 km/h 10-12 s

Vehicle Size & Powertrain Configurations

What is Future Steel Vehicle?

•Common front end•Common front wheel drive traction motor

Range based on UDDS cycle


T1

T6

T5T4

T3

T2 Linear-StaticTopology

Optimization

GaugeOptimization

Final DesignConfirmation

Phase1Technology Assessment

Packaging

Non-Linear Dynamic Topology Optimization

(LF3G)Sub-System3G Optimization

Detail Design

Styling & aerodynamic

DesignConfirmation

Phase 2Report

Future Steel Vehicle –Design Methodology


T1

T6

T5T4

T3


Optimization

GaugeOptimization



Packaging



Detail Design


DesignConfirmation

Phase 2Report


T1


T1

T6

T5T4

T3


Optimization

GaugeOptimization



Packaging



Detail Design


DesignConfirmation

Phase 2Report


T1


T1

T6

T5T4

T3


Optimization

GaugeOptimization



Packaging



Detail Design


DesignConfirmation

Phase 2Report


T1


T1

T6

T5T4

T3


Optimization

GaugeOptimization



Packaging


(LF3G)Sub-SystemTopographyOptimization

Detail Design


DesignConfirmation

Phase 2Report

Future Steel Vehicle – Design Methodology

T1

T2


T1

T6

T5T4

T3


Optimization

GaugeOptimization



Packaging



Detail Design


DesignConfirmation

Phase 2Report

T2



T1

T6

T5T4

T3


Optimization

GaugeOptimization



Packaging



Detail Design


DesignConfirmation

Phase 2Report

T2


T3




T1

T6

T5T4

T3


Optimization

GaugeOptimization



Packaging



Detail Design


DesignConfirmation

Phase 2Report


T3


T1

T6

T5T4

T3


Optimization

GaugeOptimization



Packaging



Detail Design


DesignConfirmation

Phase 2Report


T3T4


T1

T6

T5T4

T3


Optimization

GaugeOptimization



Packaging



Detail Design


DesignConfirmation

Phase 2Report

T4


Detailed Steel Alternative Solutions for Critical Load Paths


LWB

TRB

Blanks

ConventionalStamping

RollForming Hydroforming

HotStamping



T1

T6

T5T4

T3


Optimization

GaugeOptimization



Packaging



Detail Design


DesignConfirmation

Phase 2Report

T4


Detailed Steel Alternative Solutions for Critical Load Paths


T1

T6

T5T4

T3


Optimization

GaugeOptimization



Packaging



Detail Design


DesignConfirmation

Phase 2Report

T4

Future Steel Vehicle –Design MethodologySubsystem Optimization


HF3GTechnologyAssessment

High Volume Manufacturing

Feasibility

Sub-System Mass (kg)

Manufacturing

Cost ($)

LCA CO2Savings

(kg)

Baseline B ST Stamping Conservative 10.26 19.99 0

ST Stamping Conservative 10.95 21.33 53

ST TRB Stamping TRB Mid-Term 10.52 24.18 16

ST LWB Stamping LWB Conservative 10.47 27.86 30

HST Hot Stamp Conservative 9.80 24.98 -37

HST TRB Hot Stamp TRB Mid-Term 9.66 27.68 -47

HST LWB Hot Stamp LWB Mid-Term 9.66 31.60 -37

RF Roll Form Conservative 7.98 14.18 -183

RF TRB Roll Form TR Coil Aggressive 7.95 16.47 -189

RF TWC Roll Form TW Coil Conservative 8.07 15.66 -177

HF HydroForm Conservative 7.05 22.80 -248

HF LWT Hydroform LWT Mid-Term 6.96 27.89 -245

HF MWT Hydroform MWT Aggressive 6.96 23.91 -255

Aluminum AL Extrusion Mid-Term 7.53 39.70 -204

HF3GManufacturing Interpretation

Stamping Solution( HEEDS Mass)

Hydroform(HEEDS Mass)

Roll Form(HEEDS Mass)

FSV – Rocker Cost, Mass & LCA CO2 eq Assessment

Subsystem Optimization - Rocker


$10

$15

$20

$25

$30

$35

$40

$45

Co

st ($

)

4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.00 9.00 10.00 11.00 12.00

Mass (Kg)

IncreasingValue

Rocker Technology Options(Mass vs Cost Value)

Parallels of Constant Value ($9.39/kg)

FSV – Mass Paradigm Shift



$10

$15

$20

$25

$30

$35

$40

$45

Cos

t ($

)

Al

HF LWT

HF

RF

RF TWC

HF TRB

RF TRB

HS LWB

ST TRB

HS TRB

ST

ST LWBHS

4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.00 9.00 10.00 11.00 12.00

Mass (Kg)

IncreasingValue



FSV – Rocker Cost & Mass Assessment




Parallels of Constant Value ($9.39/kg)LCA CO2 eq. Saved (Kg) vs. Cost ($)

$10

$15

$20

$25

$30

$35

$40

$45

Cos

t ($

)

Al

HF LWT

HS LWB

ST TRB

HS TRB

HF

RF

RF TWC

ST

ST LWBHSHF TRB

RF TRB

B ST

4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.00 9.00 10.00 11.00 12.00

Mass (Kg)

IncreasingValue

-300 -250 -200 -150 -100 -50 0 50 100

LCA CO2 Saved (Kg)LCA CO2 eq. Saved (Kg)

FSV – Rocker Cost & LCA CO2 eq Assessment


Shotgun Technology Options(Mass vs Cost Value)


$10

$20

$30

$40

$50

$60

4.00 4.50 5.00 5.50 6.00 6.50 7.00

Mass (Kg)

Co

st ($

)

ST TRBHST TRB

HST LWB

AL

ST

ST LWB

HST

50 75 100 125 150 175 200

LCA CO2 Saved (Kg)

LCA CO2 eq. Saved (Kg) vs. Cost ($)

-300 -250 -200 -150 -100 -50 0 50 100

LCA CO2 Saved (Kg)LCA CO2 eq. Saved (Kg)

FSV – Shotgun , Cost & LCA CO2 eq Assessment

Subsystem Optimization - Shotgun




ST LWB

HST LWB

HF

HF LWT

HF TRT

AL

ST

ST TRBHST

HST TRB

RF

RF TRBRF TWC

B ST

$10

$15

$20

$25

$30

$35

$40

$45

6.00 7.00 8.00 9.00 10.00 11.00 12.00

Mass (Kg)

Cos

t ($)

increasingvalue

Rocker Technology Options(LCA CO2 reduction, Cost & Value)

Parallels of Constant Value ($100/tonne)

AL

ST TRB

ST LWB

HST

HST TRB

HST LWB

RF

HF LWT

HF TRT

RF TRB RF TWC

HFB ST

$10

$15

$20

$25

$30

$35

$40

$45

-400 -350 -300 -250 -200 -150 -100 -50 0 50

LCA CO2 Saved (Kg)

Cos

t ($)

increasingvalue

FSV – Rocker, Cost, Mass & LCA CO2e Assessment


FSV – Shotgun, Mass & LCA CO2e Assessment


T1

T6

T5T4

T3


Optimization

GaugeOptimization



Packaging



Detail Design


DesignConfirmation

Phase 2Report

T4

FSV – Structural Subsystem Technology Assessment


T1

T6

T5T4

T3


Optimization

GaugeOptimization



Packaging



Detail Design


DesignConfirmation

Phase 2Report

T4T5

FSV – Structural Subsystem Technology Assessment

Strong, Safe, Sustainable

Thank you for your attention

reinventing automotive steel - california air resources board · reinventing automotive steel...

Documents