• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
2009 feb sae_govmtg_pres
 

2009 feb sae_govmtg_pres

on

  • 148 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
148
Views on SlideShare
148
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    2009 feb sae_govmtg_pres 2009 feb sae_govmtg_pres Presentation Transcript

    • Aluminum-Intensive Vehicles: Fuel Efficient, Safe and Affordable Randall Scheps Aluminum Association’s Auto and Light Truck Group
    • Aluminum-Intensive Vehicles: Fuel Efficient, Safe and AffordableTopics: Reducing CO2 Emissions Performance Advantages Impact On Fuel Efficiency Building Safer Vehicles 1
    • Aluminum’s Performance Advantages Mass Better Fuel Economy Reduction Infinitely Reduced Recyclable Emissions EnhancedPerformance Improved Safety 2
    • Automotive Aluminum Is Everywhere Aluminum growth has risen for nearly four decades. Average vehicle today contains over 320 pounds of aluminum. 3
    • Global Megatrends Stock of Light -Duty Vehicles1 billion global LV populationby 2020Emerging markets growthUrbanization Liquid Fossil Fuel ConsumptionGrowing fuel consumptionCO2 concern Transport is 2/3 of the growthEfficiency of transport mustimprove 4
    • Lightweighting With Aluminum Is Part Of Solution 30 25Aluminum saves CO2 net of its 2.4 kg of CO2 per kg of aluminum 20production energy vs. steel 15 25.3 22.9 10 5 0 Savings in Aluminum Net Savings perHuge CO2 and fuel reduction Operation Production (Net) kg of aluminumpotential = Billions of Metric TonsHighly complimentary with 10% reduction possibleadvanced drivetrainsImproves safetyCost effective 5
    • 5-7% Fuel Savings For 10% Weight Reduction Ricardo Inc. Study Objectives: • Quantify impact of vehicle weight reduction (5%, 10%, 20%) o Fuel economy o Performance • Quantify impact of weight reduction with engine downsizing o Maintain vehicle performance level • Evaluate weight reduction with different engine types o Gasoline o Diesel Source: 6
    • Vehicle Selection • From five vehicle classes o Representative range of vehicle weights and engines o Passenger and light-duty truck • Vehicle class / comparator vehicleSmall Car/Mini Cooper Mid-Size Car/Ford Fusion Small SUV/Saturn Vue Large SUV/Ford Explorer Truck/Toyota Tundra 7
    • Simulation Model• Physics-based for each configuration o Vehicle o Engine o Driving schedule• Simulates accelerator and/or braking to achieve driving schedule• Runs on a millisecond-by-millisecond basis• Simulates speed and fuel usage• Industry standard drive cycles (EPA & ECE) 8
    • Vehicle Performance Matching• Matched Wide Open Throttle (WOT) performance• All fuel economy simulations were performed at ETW• Accounted for additional cargo weight• Engines were downsized to give equivalent performance 9
    • Model Validation• Simulation results compared to published data for comparator vehicle o No attempt to “calibrate” models Simulation Simulated Fuel Economy vs. Comparator (% diff) Roadload Force VEHICLE Maximum Variation vs. EPA City EPA Highway Combined Comparator Small Car 0.2% 2.5% -0.6% 1.3% Mid-Size Car 2.5% 0.2% -1.4% -0.4% Small SUV 1.1% 1.8% -4.4% -0.4% Large SUV 1.7% 5.9% -1.1% 3.5% Truck -1.3% 2.2% -1.9% 0.7% 10
    • Equivalent Performance With Less Horsepower Mid-Size Car 3.0L-4V Gas Engine with Variable Intake Cam Timing 11
    • 20% Weight Reduction Gives 14.3% MPG Improvement Mid-Size Car 3.0L-4V Gas Engine with Variable Intake Cam Timing 12
    • Fuel Economy Universally Improved Gasoline 15 % Fuel Economy Improvement 13 11 9 AIV RESIZED 7 AIV 5 3 PART SUB. 1 0 5 10 15 20 25 % Weight Reduction Small Car - Resized Engine Mid Size Car - Resized Engine Small SUV - Resized Engine Large SUV - Resized Engine Truck - Resized Engine Small Car - Baseline Engine Mid Size Car - Baseline Engine Small SUV - Baseline Engine Large SUV - Baseline Engine Truck - Baseline Engine 13
    • Weight Saving Potential With AluminumBaseline Vehicle 10% Weight Reduction 20% Weight Reduction 3500 lbs. 3150 lbs. 2800 lbs. 14
    • Possible Fuel Economy Savings Up To 14.3%• Fuel economy improvement of 5-7% is expected with 10% reduction in weight• Excellent correlation between simulation and actual vehicle• Similar results for gasoline and diesel engine vehicles• What about hybrids and advanced powertrains? Source: 15
    • Weight And Alternative Powertrain EquationFuture offers lighter,cleaner vehicles for allconsumers. Chevy Tahoe (Hybrid Electric) Chevy Volt Honda FCX Clarity Toyota Prius (Plug-In Hybrid) (Fuel Cell) (Hybrid) 16
    • More Cost Effective To Reduce Mass 17
    • Maximizing Powertrains In Cost-Effective Manner $300 $250 Midsize Steel HybridCost per 1 MPG increment $200 Midsize Aluminum Hybrid $150 Midsize Steel Diesel $100 Midsize Aluminum Diesel $50 Midsize Aluminum Midsize Baseline $0 Steel 0% Baseline 30% 40% 50% 60% 10% 20% Percent Increase in MPG 18
    • Key Takeaway:Aluminum Is Fuel-Efficient Solution• Use of aluminum boosts fuel economy o 5 % to 7% fuel saving can be realized for every 10% weight reduction• Provides even greater benefits – including cost savings – when used as a complement to advanced powertrains o Quicker payback period for consumer 19
    • Reduce Weight, Not Size• Direct benefits: o Absorbs more energy, pound for pound, than steel o Predictable deformation o Not strain-rate sensitive o Extruded structures – design flexibility W/t = 60...80 W = width Better crash compatibility – t = wall thickness Aluminum reduce weight, not size Mass Specific EA (kJ/kg) Steel 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 t W 20
    • Building Safer Vehicles With Aluminum • Secondary benefits: o Handling (accident avoidance) advantages o Braking distance reduction • We believe aluminum can build a safer car than steel Jaguar XJ Audi A8 21
    • Studying Affect Of Weight On Safety• Objective of the DRI (Dynamic Research Inc.) Study: o - Interplay of vehicle weight vs. size in occupant protection• Methodology: o - Real-world crash data from 3500 collisions o - Car to SUV, SUV to SUV, and SUV to fixed obstacle o - NCAP pulse and NASS/CDS descriptors o - ELU (Injury Index) as proxy for occupant safety• Scenarios: o - 20% weight reduction – no length reduction o - 4 inch length increase – no weight increase 22
    • Improving Occupant Safety• Adding crush space without adding weight improves ELU 27%• Reducing weight further improves fleet safety ELU Scenarios 100 27% 85.9 28% 80 63.0 61.8 60 Other Car ELU Driver 40 20 0 Baseline Added Length Reduced Weight Constant Weight Constant Length SUV to Car Crashes 23
    • Improving Occupant Safety Total ELUs Net Benefit (%) Reduced Increased Reduced Increased Crash Number Baseline Weight Length Weight Length Type of Cases Case SUV Case SUV Case SUV Case SUV Case SUV Rollover 175 2.23 2.48 0.53 -11.2 76.2SUV Hit Object 420 2.54 1.74 0.81 31.5 68.1Driver Hit PC 1750 1.21 2.47 1.19 -104.1 1.7 Hit LTV 1155 25.97 22.03 21.61 15.2 16.8 Subtotal 3500 31.95 28.72 24.14 10.1 24.4 OV In PC 1750 28.00 9.70 16.79 65.4 40.0Driver In LTV 1155 25.99 23.40 22.09 10.0 15.0 Subtotal 2905 53.99 33.10 38.88 38.7 28.0 Overall 3500 SUV 85.94 61.82 63.02 28.1 26.7 Total + 2905 OV 20% Reduced Weight SUV and Conventional Cars 24
    • Aluminum Safety In ActionCrush Rail:• 56% mass savings vs. mild steel – ( 38% vs. HSS )• Lower peak loads• Consistent crush performance at all speeds Aluminum Rail Steel Rail 250 Crush Load (kN) 200 150 100 50 0 0 50 100 150 200 250 Crush Distance (mm) 25
    • Aluminum Safety In ActionKnee Bolster:Aluminum can play a key rolein energy management invehicle interiors• Example: o Extruded knee bolster consolidates three parts into one o 48% weight reduction vs. steel o 50th percentile male unbelted sled test passed for a N. American OEM 26
    • Key Takeaways: Weight Reduction Proves Beneficial To Safety Size – not weight – is best determinant of vehicle safety Aluminum can safely take weight out Aluminum performs as well, if not better than steel in crash Aluminum offers design flexibility and innovative solutions for energy management 27
    • Auto Aluminum Use Climbs North American Light Vehicle Aluminum Content12% 10.4% 9.6%10% 8.7% 8.8% 7.8%8% 6.9% 6.1%6% 5.1% 4.5% 3.9%4% 2.0% 2.1%2%0% 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2009 2010F 2015F 2020F Aluminum Share as Percentage of Curb Weight 28
    • All Modes of Transport Benefit Specific Savings ** (Tons of CO2 per ton of w eight save) 60 Tons CO2 per Ton Weight Saved 53 50 40 28 30 23 18 20 10 3 0 Constrained Constrained Bus - Urban Car Suburban Bus - Truck - Truck - Volume WeightPotential Weight Savings: 3000-3500 lbs 3500-4500 lbs 300-500 lbs IFEU Heidelberg study 2003 for EAA ** vs. steel 29
    • Aluminum Potential To Be GHG-Neutral 700 650 GHG Emissions 600 Transport Savings 550 500Mt CO2e 450 400 350 300 250 200 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 Potential emissions savings from transport growing faster than emissions from aluminum production 30
    • Aluminum-Intensive Vehicles: Fuel Efficient, Safe and Affordable Randall Scheps Aluminum Association’s Auto and Light Truck Group