LIGHTWEIGHT VEHICLES AND POWERTRAIN
STRUCTURES : UK OPPORTUNITIES
LIGHTWEIGHTING WORKING GROUP: SEPTEMBER 2013
This report published
with support from
“Helping to turn low carbon propulsion technology
into products developed in the UK”
CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Advanced Propulsion Centre was formed in 2013, demonstrating
the commitment between the government and automotive industry
through the Automotive Council to position the UK as a global centre
of excellence for low carbon powertrain development and production.
It is a central pillar of the Automotive Industrial Strategy created by
the Automotive Council and focuses on five strategic technologies.
The APC focuses on the four shown in green, whilst the Transport
Systems Catapult addresses the fifth, Intelligent Mobility.
1.0INTRODUCTION
2.0
MASS PRODUCTION TARGETS
2.1 Future CO2 targets
2.2 2.3
2.4 If you...
3.0
• Are a company with a prototype, innovative low carbon
OPTIONS FOR REDUCING VEHICLE MASS
4.0
OPPORTUNITIES FOR UK INDUSTRY
4.1 Context
propulsion technology.
• Want to turn your technology into an automotive product developed in in the UK.
The Advanced Propulsion Centre can help you...
4.2 4.3 Weight Save forms
Requirements to achieve objectives
5.0CONCLUSIONS
• Find partners and create a collaboration with other companies, suppliers and manufacturers.
APPENDICES
• Access industry and government funding to share the risks and opportunities when
preparing to bring your technology to market.
The APC is an industry wide collaboration with government, academia, innovators and producers of low
carbon propulsion systems. It facilitates and supports partnerships between those who have good ideas
and those who have a desire to bring them to market. The APC is also the custodian of the strategic
technology consensus roadmaps developed by the Automotive Council which inform the UK’s research
and development agenda.
Reducing CO2 emissions
The energy-based model
2.3.1 Energy required to complete a journey
2.3.2 Efficiency of motion
Calculating future weight reduction
1Calculation Methodology
for Weight Reduction Targets
2Weight Reduction Targets –
Sensitivity Studies
3
Weight Save Forms
The services provided by the APC enable projects which provide profitable growth and sustainable
opportunities for the partners involved and builds the UK supply chain. The APC’s activities will build
the UK’s capability as a Propulsion Nation and contribute to the country’s economic prosperity.
Contact
The Advanced Propulsion Centre
University Road
Coventry
CV4 7AL
info@apcuk.co.uk
02476 528 700
@theapcuk
www.apcuk.co.uk
2
3
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1.0INTRODUCTION
Vehicle Lightweighting is one of 5 ‘sticky’ technologies which were identified by the
Automotive Council in 2010 as primary opportunities for creating future industry
prosperity in the UK. Accordingly, the Council established a Vehicle & Powertrain
Lightweighting Working Group and tasked it with examining the likely future
requirements for reducing vehicle mass and identifying the manufacturing and
production options for meeting those requirements.
The UK makes around 1.5 million
cars a year. All but a handful of these
are manufactured from conventional
materials using manufacturing processes
that have not changed significantly
for many years. The average mass of
vehicles in each market segment has
grown significantly since the end of the
1970s, mainly as a result of increased
safety, functionality, and durability
requirements. This has stabilised in the
recent past and is now starting to fall
slightly due to better Computer Aided
Engineering optimisation and some
application of higher performance
materials.
This report concludes the work of that Lightweighting Working Group. The group
has studied the probable range of weight reduction targets which will be demanded
by stiffer CO2 emissions regulations across all major market segments, and it has
identified the practicable options for meeting those targets. The enabling actions
required to support the delivery of a range of successful outcomes have been
identified and a technology roadmap has been produced.
It is concluded that the UK has a number of attributes which suit it well to the
development of lightweight vehicle technologies and manufacturing processes.
However, several key enablers will need to be addressed if the potential for future
growth is to be fully realised. These include:
• Selecting and Launching Appropriate Collaborative R&D Programmes
• Developing the UK Supplier Base
• Up-Skilling Across the Entire Industry Spectrum of Disciplines
and Responsibility levels
• Investing in New Manufacturing and Production Facilities
• Migrating materials, tehcnologies and processes from the
premium sector to a wider vehicle market base.
The rate of mass reduction now being
seen in the industry is not, however,
sufficient to give confidence that
new vehicles will be able to meet
future carbon emissions targets as a
result of these mass savings alone.
Notwithstanding the probable increases
in vehicle efficiency which will be
delivered through improvements in
powertrain efficiency, and reductions
in aerodynamic drag and tyre rolling
resistance, significantly more ambitious
mass savings targets will need to be set if
the emissions targets are to be met. The
likely range of these targets is explored
in the early part of this report.
Ambitious mass savings will demand
equally ambitious changes to vehicle
design and manufacture. Lighter
structures, components, trim, and
finishes will be required. These, in
turn, might be delivered through more
optimised use of materials (better design)
and/or the more widespread use of
lighter weight materials. The options
for achieving future mass savings are
explored, and the impact of adopting
these options is assessed in the latter
part of this report.
The report considers the opportunities
which these challenges create for the
UK automotive industry and concludes
with some general observations and
recommendations for next steps.
This report provides a summary of the information available and the industry consensus
at September 2013. Any subsequent changes to weight-based targets and developments
in technology will change the picture presented here.
4
5
2.0 MASS REDUCTION TARGETS
The purpose of the work described in this chapter was to calculate the vehicle mass
reductions required to meet future CO2 targets which might be anticipated within the
EU. Likely improvements in powertrain efficiency, aerodynamics and rolling resistance
were to be included in the calculation and reference made to the work of others in
this area.
The following sections describe the method which was used. This process started with
defining the CO2 targets which must be met, and then proceeded to calculate the
required mass reductions using a simple energy-based mathematical model.
2.1 FUTURE CO2 TARGETS
The EU fleet average CO2 targets adopted for this study were discussed and agreed
by the Automotive Council Lightweighting Working Group. The trend is shown in the
chart below, starting with 143gms/km at 2010 and 130 gms/km at 2012.
160
140
CO2 Target g/km
120
1. T he energy losses between the fuel tank and the road wheels (powertrain losses).
These losses are dominated by the combustion efficiency of the engine. Other
components include gearbox efficiency, differential efficiency, and other bearing
efficiencies
2. T he energy losses between the roadwheels and the completion of the journey
(external losses). These reflect the effects of aerodynamic drag, tyre rolling
resistance, and a combination of vehicle mass and the pattern of driving (route
topology, acceleration/braking cycles, and general speed profiles). These losses can
only be calculated for a known journey under known conditions. The standard EU
emissions drive cycle (the New European Drive Cycle, or NEDC) has therefore been
used in all the work reported here.
2.3 THE ENERGY-BASED MODEL
A simple energy-based mathematical model has been developed in order to estimate
the vehicle mass reductions which will be required over the period 2010 – 2050.
Data for 127 different current vehicles covering all the EU OEM market segments was
collected and used as part of this exercise.
80
60
40
20
The general approach and key outcomes are summarised in the following sections,
but further detail of the model and its application is described in Appendices 1 and 2.
2015
2020
2025
2030
2035
2040
2045
2050
Based on these figures, targets for each market segment were then calculated by
taking 127 2010 vehicles and calculating the future emissions targets for each vehicle
using the following relationship:
Fleet Target for Year
Vehicle CO2 Target for Year = Current Vehicle CO2 x
143
The assumed distribution of vehicles across the EU market segments over the period
2010 – 2030 is shown below. It can be seen that there is expected to be little change
in segment split over this period; the most significant change is in the B-segment in
2030 which increases from 25% to 30% of market. This effectively eases the larger
segment CO2 targets by around 4.5% compared to the 2010 mix.
2010
30.0%
2015
25.0%
2020
20.0%
2.3.1 ENERGY REQUIRED TO COMPLETE A JOURNEY
This parameter is also referred to as ‘energy used per distance travelled’. It has been
calculated as illustrated in the box below.
3 FORCES TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT:
• V
ehicle mass + 100kg
(driver and passenger consideration)
• Aerodynamic Drag, CdA
• Rolling Resistance
– M
odel based on today’s
vehicles with standard tyres
– A
ll vehicles assumed to
have tyres with the same
performance and the force
varies with vehicle mass
35.0%
Percentage of European Sales [%]
The conversion of energy from fuel to journey comprises two main loss components:
This study focusses on the means of reducing component (2) through the reduction of
vehicle mass.
100
0
2010
2.2 REDUCING CO2 EMISSIONS
The CO2 emissions from a vehicle in operation are the result of burning hydrocarbon
fuels (mainly petrol and diesel). If these emissions are to be reduced, the efficiency of
energy conversion from fuel in the tank to completion of journey must be raised.
2025
NEDC DRIVE CYCLE
2030
• C
alculate the energy required to
move the vehicle over the cycle,
Wh/km
15.0%
Aero
Resistance
Mass
V(time) NEDC
Wh/km
10.0%
5.0%
6
Other Light
Commercial
Vehicles (LCVs)
Cross Over
Sports Utility
Vehicles (CUVs)
Full Frame SUVs
Sports Utility
Vehicles (SUVs)
Multi-Purpose
Vehicles (MPVs)
Pickups (PUPs)
Car E
Car D
Car C
Car B
Car A
0.0%
7
2.3.2 EFFICIENCY OF MOTION
Knowing the energy used per distance travelled, the fuel type, and the quoted mpg
for each vehicle, it is possible to calculate the ‘efficiency of motion’ for the 127
vehicles in the study. This sets the 2010 benchmark for each vehicle type.
2.4 CALCULATING FUTURE WEIGHT REDUCTION
The targets for future weight reduction were calculated for the 127 vehicles using a
2010 starting point for each vehicle considering:
• Mass
• Aerodynamic drag (CdA)
• R
olling resistance
• P owertrain efficiency (calculated from published figures for engine
specific fuel consumption and assumed figures for driveline efficiency)
• Value for the vehicle mpg
(from VCA, the UK Vehicle
Certification Agency)
For each future target year, improvements were assumed for aerodynamic drag,
rolling resistance, and powertrain efficiency as illustrated in the chart below. (This
chart is based on the information presented in Appendix 2). The vehicle mass required
to match the calculated CO2 emissions to the EU target value was then calculated
based on the predicted improvements in other parameters.
• Energy required to move the
vehicle over the cycle
• Fuel type: Petrol / Diesel
• From this, we can calculate
the efficiency of motion
Wh/km
mpg
n = Energy required to complete journey
petrol/diesel
1.00
Energy content of the fuel
Efficiency of Motion
0.95
n
The efficiency of motion for different vehicle types varies widely, as can be seen from
the examples presented in the table below. The results show that vehicle efficiencies
range from sports cars where the efficiency is as low as 12 to 14% up to 31% for an
efficient diesel engine (with stop-start and long gear ratios) and a top figure of nearly
36% for a full hybrid vehicle.
Improvement versus 2010
0.90
0.85
0.80
0.75
Rolling Resistance
0.70
Aerodynamics
0.65
Diesel
0.60
Petrol
0.55
CdA
kerb
VCA
quoted
CO2 g/km
Fiesta 1.6d Econetic
0.544
1158
98
28.8
Prius 3
0.543
1420
92
35.9
Focus 2.0 tdcid
0.677
1391
144
23.5
3 Series 318d ES
0.643
1505
123
28.5
3 Series 320d ES
0.643
1505
126
27.6
3 Series Efficient Dynamics
0.636
1495
109
31
E
5 Series 530d SE
0.64
1655
170
22
F
XJ 3.0 V6d SWB
0.72
1796
184
22.2
JS
X3 35d SE
0.85
1950
208
21.7
Segment
B
C
C/D
J
8
Model
Range Rover 3.6 TDV8
1.1552
2717
299
Efficiency
%
20.6
0.50
2010
2012
2014
2016
2018
2020
2022
2024
2026
2028
2030
Year
The following table shows the results from these calculations by segment versus
year. In the 2010 column the average vehicle mass is shown in bold along with the
maximum and minimum mass for that segment. The average CO2 emissions are
shown above the vehicle mass. For each of the future predicted years the average
emissions for that segment and average mass targets are shown.
2010
143 g/km
2012
130 g/km
2020
95 g/km
2025
80 g/km
2030
70 g/km
2050
50 g/km
A/Sub B
|
|
770
108
•
899
|
|
1055
|
|
98
•
812
|
|
|
|
78
•
702
|
|
|
|
70
•
567
|
|
|
|
69
•
549
|
|
|
|
72
•
794
|
|
B
|
|
980
118
•
1108
|
|
1253
|
|
108
•
1012
|
|
|
|
85
•
893
|
|
|
|
77
•
742
|
|
|
|
76
•
722
|
|
|
|
79
•
985
|
|
C
|
|
1185
130
•
1295
|
|
1395
|
|
118
•
1190
|
|
|
|
93
•
1065
|
|
|
|
84
•
895
|
|
|
|
83
•
873
|
|
|
|
86
•
1182
|
|
CD
|
|
1295
147
•
1491
|
|
1609
|
|
134
•
1378
|
|
|
|
106
•
1239
|
|
|
|
96
•
1056
|
|
|
|
94
•
1032
|
|
|
|
98
•
1337
|
|
DE
|
|
1650
169
•
1749
|
|
1865
|
|
154
•
1620
|
|
|
|
122
•
1459
|
|
|
|
110
•
1254.4
|
|
|
|
108
•
1227
|
|
|
|
112
•
1563
|
|
J-L Premium Utility
|
|
2041
291
•
2041
|
|
2041
|
|
285
•
1863
|
|
|
|
209
•
1712
|
|
|
|
189
•
1373
|
|
|
|
186
•
1328
|
|
|
|
193
•
1945
|
|
JmedLarge
|
|
1995
259
•
2324
|
|
2810
|
|
236
•
2014
|
|
|
|
190
•
1801
|
|
|
|
168
•
1529
|
|
|
|
166
•
1493
|
|
|
|
172
•
1956
|
|
Jsmall
|
|
1225
165
•
1618
|
|
1845
|
|
150
•
1488
|
|
|
|
118
•
1325
|
|
|
|
107
•
1118
|
|
|
|
105
•
1090
|
|
|
|
109
•
1450
|
|
M
|
|
1740
199
•
1785
|
|
1830
|
|
160
•
1646
|
|
|
|
143
•
1473
|
|
|
|
129
•
1250
|
|
|
|
127
•
1222
|
|
|
|
132
•
1597
|
|
S
|
|
1240
210
•
1537
|
|
1910
|
|
191
•
1410
|
|
|
|
151
•
1232
|
|
|
|
136
•
1046
|
|
|
|
134
•
1022
|
|
|
|
140
•
1337
|
|
F
|
|
1755
219
•
1941
|
|
2449
|
|
199
•
1785
|
|
|
|
157
•
1608
|
|
|
|
142
•
1384
|
|
|
|
140
•
1354
|
|
|
|
145
•
1721
|
|
9
Rounding all the future target data, and averaging across 2025 – 2030 yields the
following, simplified, table:
2000
2030
A/Sub B
899
812
700
550
B
1108
1012
900
725
C
1295
1190
1050
875
CD
1491
1378
1225
1050
DE
1749
1620
1450
1250
J-L Premium Utility
2041
1863
1700
1350
Jmedlarge
2324
2014
1800
1500
Jsmall
1618
1488
1350
1100
M
1785
1646
1475
1225
S
1537
1410
1225
1025
F
1941
1785
1600
1375
From this, it can be seen that a CD segment vehicle will have a weight reduction
requirement over 2012 standards of around 150kg by 2020 and around 300kg
by 2030. At today’s prices and at the current minimum cost assumption of £2/kg
weight save, this will increase the cost of the vehicle at 2030 by £600. This is a very
significant sum when compared to the current average margin of ~£800 on a £16,000
car (5% margin).
The weight reduction requirements in the large car and luxury vehicle segments
are even more demanding. Note, however, that the increased costs in meeting
these should be offset against the potential for European Commission fleet average
performance penalties.
1750
Pessimistic EV sales
Optimistic EV sales
LOW CVP
1500
1250
1000
750
500
2010
2015
2020
‘Real World’ drive cycles could replace the use of simulated drive cycle conditions (the
NEDC). It is estimated that this would have the effect of reducing emissions targets by
a further 15%. This would add further significant pressure to reduce vehicle weight.
The sensitivity study results for the CD market segment are summarised on the chart
opposite.
2035
2040
2045
2050
The results from this study have been compared to those produced by the Low Carbon
Vehicle Partnership (Low CVP) in their report titled “Influences on the Low Carbon Car
Market from 2020–2030”, produced by Element Energy. The chart above suggests the
Automotive Council results are compatible with the LowCVP data.
In reality, it must be remembered that there are multiple pathways to any given
target. A CO2 emissions level might be achieved by a large improvement in powertrain
efficiency accompanied by a small improvement in vehicle mass (for example), or by a
small improvement in powertrain efficiency accompanied by a large improvement in
mass. There will, therefore, be a very large number of possible pathways associated
with achieving each target as is illustrated below. However, it appears reasonable
to propose that none of these pathways will be delivered without some significant
savings in vehicle mass being an important part of the equation.
2010 EU
Average
Wt. 1290 kg
CdA 0.6 m2
= 21.5%
143gr CO2
Theoretical target without
Efficiency improvement
1st Tier Optimised
10% less Aero Drag
15% less Roll Resist
136gr CO2
Only -45% Wt.
Wt. 742 kg
95gr CO2
2nd Tier Optimised η
η = 28%
143gr CO2
TI
O
Further Lightening
-15% Wt.
94gr CO2
>140g
LU
More Efficient Powertrain
EU emissions targets are based on fleet average figures and the effect of new lowcarbon vehicles coming into the market will therefore, be to relieve the emissions
pressure on conventional vehicles. More bull-ish assumptions about the uptake of EV’s
(for example) leads to the possibility of weight reduction targets being significantly
reduced.
2030
Year
Because the implications of these calculations are so significant, it was considered
important to examine the sensitivity of the calculations to the base assumptions. A
series of sensitivity studies was carried out and the details are presented in Appendix
2. The key findings were as follows:
The assumption that performance improvements in the areas of powertrain,
aerodynamics, and rolling resistance will be continuous leads to some of the weight
reduction targets being reversed beyond 2025. (All the necessary emission reductions
are achieved by these other performance improvements and the need to reduce
weight is removed). This seems unlikely, so the other performance improvements were
then assumed to plateau after 2020. This has the effect of significantly increasing the
weight reduction targets post 2025.
2025
N
2020
E.g. Ford
Fiesta
O
2012
Further 3% Optimisation
η = 31%
94gr CO2
E.g. BMW Efficient
Dynamics
EV
2010
Mass [kg]
Segment
No EV sales
CD segment
<140g
<105g
<95g CO2
Lighter Vehicle Weight
= Efficiency Metric
10
11
3.0 OPTIONS FOR REDUCING VEHICLE MASS
Given the dramatic reductions in vehicle mass suggested by the analysis presented in
Chapter 2, all possible options for reducing the mass of structure, component, trims,
and finishes must be pursued. There are a large number of possible options including :
WeightSaving
Potential
(See note 1)
Difficulty
(See note 2)
Steel (Hot Stamping)
3
1
Steel Tube Hydroforming
2
2
Ultra-High Strength Steel
2
1
Metal Sandwich Materials
3
3
Aluminium Electrical Harness
3
2
Aluminium Chassis
4
4
Full Aluminium BIW
5
5
Aluminium Bolt-on Panels (2020)
4
3
Magnesium Sheet
4
4
2
2
Titanium Alloys
3
4
SMC Panels
3
1
Composite Bolt-on Panels
4
4
5
5
Lightweight Structural Plastics
3
2
Metal Matrix Composites
2
3
Seating Systems
4
2
4
4
5
4
NOTE 1: Difficulty is rated on a scale
of 1 (easy) to 5 (very difficult)
3
5
NOTE 2: Weight-saving potential is
rated on a scale of 1 = 0-2 kg to
5 = 40-50 kg
Option
Category
• Reducing vehicle specifications and equipment levels (This would reverse a clear
trend of increasing customer appeal which has been set over the past 50 years)
• Improving vehicle design methods. (This is an attractive area for study because
the UK has strength in numerically intensive computing and the Multi-Physics
simulation/optimisation methods which are required to drive further vehicle weight
reduction.
• Increasing the use of advanced forms of conventional materials (e.g. ultra highstrength steels)
• Migrating new lightweight materials and technologies from the premium OEM
segments (e.g. increased use of aluminium and advanced plastics)
Steel
• Migrating new lightweight materials and technologies from the motorsport and
aerospace sectors (e.g. adopting the use of carbon fibre technologies)
• D eveloping new and untried materials and manufacturing technologies
The UK is a good base from which to pursue these options. It has an impressive
science base in lightweight materials & structures, a thriving world-class motor-sport
industry with lightweight vehicle technology/skills, and a strong aerospace industry
with world leading lightweight technologies. Indeed, during the lifetime of the
Council’s Lightweighting Working Group, further work (beyond the scope of this
report) has already been initiated in some of these areas. Of particular relevance are
the following recent TSB programmes:
• TSB IDP 6
– Lightweight vehicle and powertrain structures
• Projects focused on achieving significant vehicle mass reduction.
• B
e innovative beyond the current state of the art,
cost-effective & scalable for mass production.
• T ake into consideration the life cycle analysis of the structure and
overall environmental impact.
Aluminium
Magnesium Castings
Lightweight
Metals
• TSB IDP 8&9
– Technology challenge 4 - lightweight vehicle and powertrain structures
• W
e are looking for projects aimed at the development of
lightweight vehicle and powertrain structures focused on
achieving significant vehicle mass reduction.
• F or example, for the C/D class, the industry through the
automotive council has identified that a weight reduction
of at least 150kg is required by 2020 with a further
reduction of 150kg by 2030.
Carbon-Fibre Body
Plastics &
Composites
• TSB IDP 10
– Technology Challenge 3 - lightweight vehicle and powertrain structures.
• “
Each project is expected to include a work package focused on
a route to production and on taking manufacturing maturity past
MRL 4 towards MRL 5 and 6 by the end of the project.”
The specific options which have been studied in this report are summarised in the
table opposite.
Roofing Systems
Ultra-Lightweight
Transmissions & Drivelines
Optimisation via Revisions
to Design Standards
12
Systems &
Assemblies
Design Processes
13
4.0 OPPORTUNITIES FOR UK INDUSTRY
The various technology options may be set out in diagrammatic form by plotting them
on a chart which shows weight-saving potential vs difficulty. Clearly, those which
have greater potential and lesser difficulty are the ones which are most likely to be
successful in a commercial sense. This suggests that those options which lie above and
to the left of the diagonal dotted line should receive the greatest attention.
Weight Saving
Potential
Design Processes
Steel
Plastics & Composites
Aluminium
Lightweight Metals
Systems & Assemblies
This chapter considers the weight targets derived in Chapter 2 and the technology
options described in Chapter 3. For each option, it identifies key enablers and gaps.
A series of required actions is developed and an industry roadmap is presented.
4.1 CONTEXT
As discussed in Chapter 2, the weight reduction trends are very demanding. It is
estimated that B segment cars will need to reduce in mass by approximately 110Kg
by 2020 compared to 2012 standards (an 11% weight reduction) and CD, small and
midsize SUV by approximately 150Kg (11%). Further reductions of similar proportions
will be required between 2020-2030.
It is tempting to start an immediate search for exotic lightweight technologies
and materials, but there are considerable costs and uncertainties associated with
this strategy. A more measured pathway would be to start by migrating materials,
technologies and processes that are relatively mature in the premium/large sector out
into the small/medium sector. Examples are found in BMW i8 and i3 (composites),
Range Rover (aluminium) and various supercars (carbon fibre). Even this approach
poses severe challenges, e.g.
• S ignificant advances in Technology Maturity Level and Manufacturing Technology
Level are required to match requirements of higher volume and lower cost.
• T he supply base capacity needs to be substantially increased.
• E ngineering and manufacturing skills need to be disseminated to a much wider
workforce.
• L arge investments will need to be made in new manufacturing facilities
Difficulty
Broadly, each technology falls into one of the following categories:
1. M
ature in premium segment (at Present or by 2020) but needs volume/cost
reduction or the introduction of new infrastructure to migrate. These technologies
could well be of interest to the Automotive Council Supply Chain Group – they
would create more volume demand for lightweight materials (e.g. Magnesium).
2. R
esearch Required. This is split into two further categories:
• V iable weight save for a particular vehicle segment in the imminent future,
but requires further research to address the technical issues or cost or both.
• Currently ineffective/unknown, but may be viable in the future after
research work (e.g. light metals & composites applied to volume products).
3. Ineffective and expensive and should not be pursued
(e.g. Harness integrated in IP structure)
It is considered that there are sufficient Category 1 items to meet the 2020 targets
for Small and Medium sized vehicles (representing a major UK growth opportunity).
For larger vehicles at 2020 and all vehicles beyond 2020, the gaps are significant and
Category 2 options become essential. This represents a major Research & Innovation
challenge for the industry.
14
Beyond this, there is an opportunity to migrate Motorsport and Aerospace technology
through the industry sectors. This will present even greater challenges, but the
opportunities for leadership are similarly greater.
It is only when these routes have been thoroughly explored that fundamental R&D
into new and exotic materials/processes should be considered.
4.2 WEIGHT SAVE FORMS
Each of the lightweighting technology options defined in Chapter 3 has been
examined in detail and the potential to migrate technologies from the premium
vehicle segments and niche specialists have been identified in the form of key enablers
and gaps. In each case, the technology option has been rated in terms of its overall
weight-saving potential and difficulty, having been assessed from the following
viewpoints:
• Technical challenges
• Supply chain challenges
• Skills development challenges
• Infrastructure requirements
The results have been written-up using a standard template which is referred to here
as the Weight Save Form. These forms are presented in Appendix 3.
15
THE ROADMAP
An industry development plan based on the Weight Save Forms has been developed
and is presented below in the form of a Roadmap. This plots each technology option
on a timeline, and suggests a sensible progression through the various levels of
weight-saving potential and difficulty of achievement.
Mass Reduction
(on 2012 mass)
200kg
SKILLS DEVELOPMENT
• Training and “up-skilling” in new Lightweight materials is required not just for
Product Development Engineers. There is a need to target all key business functions
(Purchase, Quality, Manufacturing, etc) at all levels of the supply chain. This is
required for:
435kg
Magnesium structural (castings)
Hybrid materials
• Automotive Composites & Advanced Plastics
• New to Automotive Light Metals.
• Advanced High Strength Steel automotive component manufacturing.
Metal matrix composites
Magnesium (sheet)
LW transmission & driveline
Mass Reduction
(on 2012 mass)
170kg
425kg
Alumimium (BIW bolt-on panels, chassis)
Lightweight roof systems
Lightweight seat systems
Mass Reduction
(on 2012 mass)
120kg
Training funding and support is required to develop all of the above workforce skills
and to encourage new inward investments in this area.
250kg
Sheet moulding compound panel
Lightweight structural plastics
INFRASTRUCTURE
The production of new materials and the establishment of new manufacturing
facilities require heavy investments to be made in fixed infrastructure (buildings and
plant). The following critical issues need to be addressed:
Lightweight seat systems
Steel (UHSS, tube hydroforming, hot stamping)
Aluminium thin-wall HPDC casting
EU Fleet Average
CO2 Targets (g/km)
130
2020
2025
55
TBC
Large
Medium
Real-world data (RWD) & structure health monitoring
2015
Small
Alternative lightweight vehicle architectures
Numerionally intensive computing & CAE multi-physios optimisation
General
Radical
Carbon composite BIW
Carbon composite bolt on panels
2010
SUPPLY CHAIN
• T here is a need to engage supply chain partners and to work with academia to
estimate current and future production demands, establish lightweight materials
technology capabilities, and work out how to close the gaps to OEM mass segment
requirements which have been identified.
2030
4.3 REQUIREMENTS TO ACHIEVE OBJECTIVES
The conclusions drawn from the Weight Save Forms and the Roadmapping exercise
are summarised below under the four key headings of technology, supply chain, skills
development, and infrastructure.
TECHNOLOGY
Collaborative R&D programmes are required in the following areas. These
programmes describe cases where known technologies need to be adapted for
volume applications, as well as to cases where new technologies need to be
developed from scratch.
• J oining Technology (including technology development for light-metals, composites
and mixed materials which meet with automotive structural, corrosion performance
and manufacturing requirements)
• Materials and Manufacturing Process Technologies (including advanced casting,
forming, net shape and disruptive technologies for the manufacture of lightweight
components)
• Material Characterisation (including specialised testing to support the development
of new materials and that of CAE models)
• R
ecycling/Sustainability (including enabling technology to achieve lower C02 emissions
for the automotive supply chain through the use of less refined materials thus enabling
cost reduction and increased use of lightweight materials, e.g. REAL Car)
• Investment in UK production capacity for Advanced High Strength Steel automotive
components. Most of these components today are sourced from outside the UK,
but the work in this report points to a significant increase in the HSS content in
small and medium size cars.
• Investment in UK production capacity for aluminium vehicle bodies, particularly
aimed at increasing the necessary infrastructure around the adoption of aluminium
technologies (e.g. re-cycling).
• T he establishment of R&D facilities in the UK for Sheet Moulded Compound (SMC).
Currently OEMs undertake development work with Tier 1 suppliers or the likes of
Fraunhofer ICT, both of which lie outside the UK.
• Initial investment in new facilities to support automotive R&D in composites is
already underway, but further and significant new investments will be required if
these technologies are to be available at OEM mass segment production costs and
volumes.
• Investment in the development and production of ‘New to Automotive’ light
metals. Specifically, this should include magnesium, titanium and metal matrix
composites. (Manufacturing capabilities for these new technologies could be
realised through further investment in the High Value Manufacturing Catapult).
• N
ext generation Numerically Intensive Computing and Multi-Physics design
optimisation have been identified as a significant route to lower vehicle weights
whilst maintaining vehicle performance. This is an area of natural advantage for
the UK (with its strong research and technical education base) and there is a
real opportunity for the UK to take a lead in this area. But significant investment
is required in Collaborative R&D infrastructure to realise this ambition (e.g. the
creation of massive shared computing facilities and R&D programmes).
Increasing the production capacity for all of these technologies should be treated as
an important opportunity for the Automotive Council Supply Chain Group.
• Coatings & Corrosion (including new, cost effective processes to enable high
volume application and technologies such as pre-treatments that are critical
enablers).
• M odelling & CAE (Development of CAE models for the analysis of manufacturing
processes and for predicting the structural performance of lightweight materials;
and development of advanced computing, multi-physics and multi-scale CAE
capabilities and design optimisation methods to support the development of new
lightweight materials solutions.
16
17
5.0CONCLUSIONS
The important messages to be drawn from this study are:
• A key challenge lies in achieving the required weight reduction to meet anticipated
future CO2 targets whilst maintaining or increasing functionality and without
adding to the vehicle purchase price (or, at least, maintaining cost of ownership).
• T he primary route to meeting this challenge in the next 7-10 years is unlikely to
be the widespread adoption of exotic motorsport or aerospace technologies. (This
is because the vast majority of cars manufactured in the UK are in the B, C, CD,
small and midsize SUV segments. In the short-to-medium term, these segments
will be unable to stand the material and manufacturing costs associated with such
technologies due to the need for customer affordability).
• A more practicable short-term route forward is to accelerate the trickle-down of
those materials and manufacturing technologies that are already beginning to find
their place in the premium market segments.
APPENDIX 1
Calculation Methodology
for Weight Reduction Targets
• In the longer term, both of the above options represent important opportunities for
success. However, in each case, practical implementation will need to be preceded
by significant programmes of technology development and manufacturing readiness
development.
• In addition, further resource demands will come from the need to expand the
UK supplier base; up-skill the workforce (across a range of different levels and
disciplines); and invest in new manufacturing and production infrastructure.
The UK has an impressive science base in lightweight materials & structures, a thriving
world-class motor-sport industry with lightweight vehicle technology/skills and an
aerospace industry with world leading lightweight structure capabilities. It also has a
strength in numerically intensive computing and the Multi-Physics simulation methods
which are required to drive further vehicle weight reductions through highly optimised
design. These attributes underline the potential for vehicle lightweighting to become
a world-class activity in the UK in future, but the resource demands referred to above
are not insignificant.
18
19
APPENDIX
Calculation Methodology for Weight Reduction Targets
METHOD
The calculation methodology comprises a series of discrete steps as described below:
STEP 1: SET CO2 TARGETS
Take current EU average fleet CO2 emissions targets and sub-divide them into market
segments. Project these figures forward to 2030/2050.
Calculation Methodology for Weight Reduction Targets
APPENDIX
STEP 3: CALCULATE ENERGY REQUIRED AT THE TANK
AND CALCULATE CO2 EMISSIONS
Calculate energy required at fuel tank (mpg), using powertrain efficiencies calculated
from average 2010 specific fuel consumption figures for diesel and petrol engines,
with suitable allowances for future efficiency improvements (see below).
Convert mpg to CO2 emissions (gm/km)
STEP 2: CALCULATE ENERGY REQUIRED PER JOURNEY
(ENERGY PER DISTANCE TRAVELLED)
Calculate energy per distance travelled for each market segment using the standard New
European Drive Cycle (NEDC). Energy requirement calculations allow for:
Aerodynamic Resistance: (F=0.5ρCdAv2) This is based on 2010 values for frontal area
and Cd for a selection of vehicles in the appropriate segment, plus future estimates for
efficiency improvements (See below)
Rolling Resistance: (F=mgRe) This is based on 2010 values for Michelin tyres, plus
future estimates for efficiency improvements (See below)
20
STEP 4: ADJUST VEHICLE MASS UNTIL CO2 EMISSIONS MEET TARGET
Compare CO2 emissions thus calculated with the segment target value.
Adjust vehicle mass in Step 2 in order to meet the target. Report vehicle mass.
Vehicle Mass: (F=ma) This is based on 2010 values for a selection of vehicles in the
appropriate segment. The mass is taken as the declared vehicle mass +100kg. Note that
this calculation does not use inertia test weight (ITW) categories, but an upper limit of
2270kg is used. Any vehicle mass above 2270kg is limited to 2270kg.
FUTURE IMPROVEMENTS
These forces are calculated at each time-step within the NEDC velocity-time profile and
then integrated over the distance travelled to evaluate the journey energy requirement
(Wh/km).
POWERTRAIN EFFICIENCY
The 2010 spread of calculated powertrain efficiencies for the 127 vehicles used in the
study is shown below.
21
APPENDIX
Calculation Methodology for Weight Reduction Targets
Calculation Methodology for Weight Reduction Targets
APPENDIX
From this spread, average figures for improvements to engine efficiency over the period
2010 - 2020 were estimated as follows:
Petrol Engine (benchmarked at 24% powertrain efficiency
BSFC 310g/kWh @ 2010
1.4% improvement year on year to 2020
272g/kWh @2020
Diesel Engine (benchmarked at 26% powertrain efficiency)
BSFC 290g/kWh @ 2010
2.3% improvement year on year to 2020
237g/kWh @ 2020
2010
2012
2020
2025
2030
CO2 target
143
130
95
80
70
Petrol
1.00
0.97
0.88
0.85
0.83
SFC [g/kWh]
310
302
273
264
257
Efficiency
[%]
27%
28%
31%
32%
33%
Including
Driveline
24.5%
25.2%
27.9%
28.9%
29.6%
Diesel
1.00
0.96
0.82
0.80
0.78
SFC [g/kWh]
290
279
237
232
226
Efficiency [%]
29%
30%
36%
37%
38%
Including
Driveline
26.4%
27.5%
32.3%
33.0%
33.9%
Driveline assumed to be 0.95 x 0.95
AERODYNAMIC DRAG
A study of recent vehicle aerodynamic trends shows that CdA values are slowly increasing
with time (see diagram below).
Frontal Area [m2] and Coefficient of Drag [Cd] versus Year
Looking to the future in light of the above, a cautious approach might assume that
current values for vehicle drag will continue to rise, whilst a more aggressive approach
might assume that improvements will be made. If we assume that frontal areas do not
continue to increase at the same rate in future (a bet on styling trends), it is considered
feasible to improve overall vehicle aerodynamic drag by 10%. This is the figure which has
been adopted in this study for the period 2010 to 2020.
ROLLING RESISTANCE
The improvement in rolling resistance as a function of time was based on presentation
given by Michelin: “Marc DANIEL - Multi-Scale Dynamics of Structured Polymeric Materials
December 7th, 2010 Copyright © 2010, Manufacture Française des Pneumatiques
Michelin”
Aerodynamic drag [CdA] versus Year
Breaking this data into Cd and Frontal Area shows that frontal area has increased much
faster than drag coefficient Cd has improved.
22
23
APPENDIX
Calculation Methodology for Weight Reduction Targets
Calculation Methodology for Weight Reduction Targets
APPENDIX
EV SALES
In the ‘baseline’ case, EV vehicle sales predictions were taken as follows:
•
•
•
•
0%
5% 10%
15%
EV for 2012
EV for 2020
EV for 2025
EV for 2030
This profile is shown in the following graph in blue. The EV sales were incorporated by
offsetting the CO2 target by percentage of EV sales.
APPENDIX 2
Weight Reduction Targets –
Sensitivity Studies
http://www.going-electric.org/why/electric-vehicles/sales-predictions.htm
FLEET AVERAGE CO2 TARGETS
The CO2 targets assumed for the ‘Base Case’ are as follows:
24
2010
143 (gms/km)
2012
130
2020
95
2025
80
2030
70
2050
50
25
APPENDIX
Weight Reduction Targets – Sensitivity Studies
SCENARIO 1:
INITIAL CASE
• P owertrain efficiences increase over
time as shown below
Weight Reduction Targets – Sensitivity Studies
APPENDIX
SCENARIO 2:
• Improve Aero, Rolling Resistance
and Powertrain Efficiency until
2020 then plateau to 2030.
• A
erodynamic and rolling resistance
efficiences increase over time as
shown below
• Low uptake of EV/PHEV’s
• Carbon targets as shown on table
26
27
APPENDIX
Weight Reduction Targets – Sensitivity Studies
SCENARIO 3:
OPTIMISTIC
EV SALES
Weight Reduction Targets – Sensitivity Studies
APPENDIX
SCENARIO 4:
REVISED CO2
TARGETS
(Adopted as ‘Base Case’ in Chapter 2)
• N
ew CO2 target line based on
Feb 2 mtg
• Targets extended out to 2050
• E fficiency targets plateau between
2020-2030, but steadily improve
again between 2030-2050
• Low penetration of EV/PHEV
28
29
APPENDIX
Weight Reduction Targets – Sensitivity Studies
Weight Reduction Targets – Sensitivity Studies
APPENDIX
SCENARIO 5:
• A
ssume that test procedure changes
from 2020 onwards to include real
world loads
APPENDIX 3
• Impact is effectively 15% lower
CO2 target
Weight Save Forms
The results from this study have been compared to those produced by the Low Carbon
Vehicle Partnership (Low CVP) in their report titled “Influences on the Low Carbon Car
Market from 2020–2030”, produced by Element Energy. The chart above suggests the
Automotive Council results are compatible with the LowCVP data.
30
31
APPENDIX
Title
Weight Save Forms
APPENDIX
Weight Save Forms
Title
Aluminium Chassis 2020
Aluminium BIW & Bolt On Panels
Description
Description
Adapting the Aluminium technologies currently used in Premium Segment low volume production for High Volume Manufacturers by 2020.
Adapting the Aluminium technologies currently used in Premium Segment low volume production for High Volume Manufacturers by 2020.
5
5
Whilst the cost/supply of Aluminium for High volume production is critical, technical restrictions must also be studied. This comes under the general scope of how to
adapt design and manufacturing technology from high cost low volume vehicle manufacture to cost effective high volume production.
Challenge 2
Recycling (Production and end of
life) - Improve Production scrap
recycling and the segregation of
material and grade at end of life
Start
2015
End
2020
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
Technical Development
-To study how to increase rivet
process speed and how to improve
tool maintenance
. . . . . .
2018
2020
. . .
-To study how to increase rivet process
speed and how to improve tool maintenance
-Research/Validation of existing and new
2015
2020
1)Recycling (Production and end of life) Improve Production scrap recycling and
the segregation of material and grade at
end of life recycling.
1)Expansion of REALCAR study completed
by JLR with TSB funding. Expand into
different vehicle variants and increased
volumes.
2018
2020
Formability - Panels are Deep drawn for
strength. This is difficult due to
elongation properties of
Aluminium.(higher scrap rate)
Study Material development, and increasing
elongation potential. Research best practice
2013
2020
Aluminium production, especially Heat
treatment and finishing capacity is
reaching its limits, with current volume.
Identify current limits, and predict future
requirements and make a plan to close the
gap.
2019
2020
Designers need to improve their
confidence in CAE simulation especially for
high impact strength (crash) and for
modelling of rivet and bonded joint
Research new modelling/CAE code to
improve the correlation between physical
and simulation test data
2017
2020
Improve logistics to mitigate Ageing
characteristics of the Aluminium sheet
prior to pressing
Study how to extend shelf life of bulk
material (sheet/roll)
2018
2020
Challenge 2
Challenge 3
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
2030
End
2029
Start
2028
Action to Resolve
2027
Challenge 1
2026
Joining Technology ChallengesA) Self piercing rivet process - How to
improve process time
B) Bonding/Adhesive Reliability- How to
2025
Technical Development
Skills Action
Develop cost effective coatings &
application method for High Volume
Production
2017
2020
. . . .
Supply Chain Action
Aluminium production, especially
Heat treatment and finishing
capacity is reaching its limits, with
current volume.
Route to implementation by 2030
Whilst the cost/supply of Aluminium for High volume production is critical, technical restrictions must also be studied. This comes under the general scope of how to adapt design and
manufacturing technology from high cost low volume vehicle manufacture to cost effective high volume production.
Supply Chain Action
Expansion of REALCAR study
completed by JLR with TSB funding.
Expand into different vehicle variants
and increased volumes.
Challenge 3
Corrosion - (Dissimilar Metal
Galvanic Corrosion) - Manufacture
process for application of anticorrosion coating with minimum
Value
Description of where we are now.
2024
Route to implementation by 2030
Joining Technology ChallengesA) Self piercing rivet process - How
to improve process time
B) Bonding/Adhesive Reliability-
Hardest
X
5
2023
Value
Description of where we are now.
Action to Resolve
5
2022
Hardest
Aluminium is used extensively in the Premium Segment Brands, whilst High volume manufacturers have concentrated on High Performance steels as the preferred
choice for weight reduction. The maximum weight reduction potential of these steels may be insufficient to achieve the vehicle mass reduction requirements to
realise CO2 reduction trends however.
Challenge 1
Easiest
4
Aluminium is used extensively in the Premium Segment Brands, whilst High volume manufacturers have concentrated on High Performance steels as the preferred choice for weight reduction. The
maximum weight reduction potential of these steels may be insufficient to achieve the vehicle mass reduction requirements to realise CO2 reduction trends however.
4
Easiest
3
2021
4
2
2020
3
X
1
2019
1
2
Challenge
2018
Challenge
50+
5
2017
Saving (Kg) 0 - 2
Challenge
4
50+
2016
4
Saving (Kg) 0 - 2
5
2015
3
4
2014
2
3
2013
1
2
2012
Value
1
Challenge
Value
Identify current limits, and predict
future requirements and make a plan
to close the gap.
2019
2020
. .
Research new modelling/CAE code to
improve the correlation between
physical and simulation test data
2017
2020
. . . .
Study how to extend shelf life of bulk
material (sheet/roll)
2018
2020
. . .
.
Infrastructure Requirements
Skills Action
Designers need to improve their
confidence in CAE simulation
especially for high impact strength
(crash) and for modelling of rivet
Infrastructure Requirements
Improve logistics to mitigate
Ageing characteristics of the
Aluminium sheet prior to pressing
32
33
APPENDIX
Title
Weight Save Forms
APPENDIX
Weight Save Forms
Title
Aluminium Bolt On Panels (eg Hood) - 2020
Aluminium Harness - 2020
Description
Description
Adapting the Aluminium technologies currently used in Premium Segment low volume production for High Volume Manufacturers by 2020.
Adapting the Aluminium technologies currently used in Premium Segment low volume production for High Volume Manufacturers by 2020.
5
5
2
Value
Action to Resolve
Start
Expansion of REALCAR study
completed by JLR with TSB funding.
Expand into different vehicle variants
and increased volumes.
2018
To study how to guarantee quality of
part when manufacturing at
increased rates. Study cleaning
procedure of Aluminium tooling to
2018
End
2020
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
Technical Development
. . .
Route to implementation by 2030
Whilst the cost/supply of Aluminium for High volume production is critical, technical restrictions must also be studied. This comes under the general scope of how to adapt design and
manufacturing technology from high cost low volume vehicle manufacture to cost effective high volume production.
.
.
.
In conjunction with Challenge 2, include
enviromental elements as a key area of
focus.
2018
2020
.
.
.
Research to establish Design standards/best
practice.
2018
2020
.
.
.
2030
2020
2029
2018
2028
End
2027
Start
Action to Resolve
2026
Study into different orientation and joining
techniques that could be used to reduce any
impact on Harness structure.
2025
Challenge 1
Joining Technology Challenges (Harness) Joining technology will need to improve
due to location and enviromental impacts
2024
Technical Development
2023
Value
Whilst the cost/supply of Aluminium for High volume production is critical, technical restrictions must also be studied. This comes under the general scope of how to
adapt design and manufacturing technology from high cost low volume vehicle manufacture to cost effective high volume production.
Formability/Styling - Improve
process time of Bolt-on Panel
production
Hardest
2022
Hardest
Route to implementation by 2030
Challenge 2
5
Aluminium is used extensively in the Premium Segment Brands, whilst High volume manufacturers have concentrated on High Performance steels as the preferred choice for weight reduction. The
maximum weight reduction potential of these steels may be insufficient to achieve the vehicle mass reduction requirements to realise CO2 reduction trends however.
Description of where we are now.
Recycling (Production and end of
life) - Improve Production scrap
recycling and the segregation of
material and grade at end of life
4
Description of where we are now.
Aluminium is used extensively in the Premium Segment Brands, whilst High volume manufacturers have concentrated on High Performance steels as the preferred
choice for weight reduction. The maximum weight reduction potential of these steels may be insufficient to achieve the vehicle mass reduction requirements to
realise CO2 reduction trends however.
Challenge 1
3
Easiest
3
Easiest
2
2021
4
1
2020
3
Challenge
2019
1
2
X
X
2018
Challenge
50+
3
2017
Saving (Kg) 0 - 2
Challenge
4
50+
2016
4
Saving (Kg) 0 - 2
5
2015
3
4
2014
2
3
2013
1
2
2012
Value
1
Challenge
Value
Challenge 2
Corrosion - Improve protection against
enviromental elements
Challenge 3
Durability - Howto ensure fatigue life of
harnesses that are exposed to vibration or
movement (eg. Door harness)
Supply Chain Action
2020
. . .
Skills Action
Challenge 3
Infrastructure Requirements
Supply Chain Action
Aluminium production, especially
Heat treatment and finishing
capacity is reaching its limits, with
current volume.
Identify current limits, and predict
future requirements and make a plan
to close the gap.
2019
2020
. .
Study how to extend shelf life of bulk
material (sheet/roll)
2018
2020
. . .
Skills Action
Infrastructure Requirements
Improve logistics to mitigate
Ageing characteristics of the
Aluminium sheet prior to pressing
34
35
APPENDIX
Title
Weight Save Forms
Title
Composite bolt on panels
Carbon Fibre Body
Description
Description
Design and manufacture of complete set of composite bolt on panels (fixed panels and closures)
Design and Manufacture of complete carbon fibre BIW structure at appropriate cost and rates of manufacture
Value
Value
3
4
Saving (Kg) 0 - 2
Challenge
1
5
50+
2
3
Easiest
4
5
Hardest
4
2
3
4
Saving (Kg) 0 - 2
X
Challenge
4
1
5
50+
2
3
Easiest
Value
Description of where we are now.
1
4
5
Hardest
5
Challenge
2
Challenge
1
APPENDIX
Weight Save Forms
X
5
Value
Description of where we are now.
Technology exists to make some closure panels in non-structural composites and is limited for structural panels
CRP bodies deployed today in hypercars/supercars. Typical cost of bodyshell is £20k +. Cost mainly driven by material and process time.
Route to implementation by 2030
Route to implementation by 2030
36
.
.
.
2013
2018
.
.
.
.
.
.
Varcity as phase 1, follow up actions to
provide capability for high £/kg payback cars
2012
2018
.
.
.
.
.
.
R&D of 2nd generation Automotive
material&new processes aimed at volume
manufacture
2016
2020
.
.
.
.
.
Highly innovative new low cost
Architectures & procesess, building
onPhase 1 lessons learnt
R&D to Develop and validate highly
innovative architectures to meet mass
market needs
2017
2024
.
.
.
.
No automotive T1 in composites & No
material developer/supplier in UK
UK Supply chain development programme.
Attract Global Material supplier to UK
2013
2018
.
.
.
.
.
.
Dedicated UK Automotive composites skills
programme needed urgently
2013
2018
.
.
.
.
.
.
Fund National Composites Centre to grow
this capability
2012
2015
.
.
.
Challenge 3
2014
2018
.
.
.
.
.
Designing for the material (New
architecture and integration)
.
New materials for new low cost processes
- potentially to include renewables
Challenge 4
2017
2022
.
.
.
.
.
Challenge 5
2014
2022
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Supply Chain Action
UK Supply chain development programme.
Attract Global Material supplier to UK
2012
2018
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
2030
R&D programme to develop new processes
optimised for reduced cycle time and cost Phase 1
New processes to manufacture at right
cost and rate
.
2029
.
2028
.
2027
.
2026
.
2025
.
2024
Run a long term programme to deliver highly
advanced multifuncytional solutions
.
2018
2017
2023
Integrated materials/ process/ design
programme to deliver low cost solutions
2017
2012
2030
2029
2028
2027
2026
2013
2022
R&D to develop application specific
designs/proceeses for initial high return
applications
2013
Skills Action
Dedicated UK Automotive composites skills
programme needed urgently
2013
2018
.
.
.
Infrastructure Requirements
No-Automotive capable composites
development facility available
Investment in new material manufacturing
technologies
2021
Develop new processes suitable for bolt-on
panels
Skills Action
Shortage of Automotive Composite skills
at all levels
Material at right price
Challenge 2
Supply Chain Action
Limited UK supply capability & No
material developer/supplier in UK
2020
generation multifunctionality (Plastic
Electronics?)
2019
Challenge 5
Maximise value add through integration of 2nd
2017
Challenge 4
Deliver weight save with renewable
materials & at low cost for all sectors
End
2016
Design and produce bolt-on panels with
required cost/value proposition
Start
2015
Challenge 3
Action to Resolve
2014
Today's processes too expensive
Challenge 1
2013
Challenge 2
2025
.
2024
.
2023
.
2022
2015
2021
2013
2020
Work with material suppliers to develop
material to bolt on panels at right cost
2019
New materials at right cost
2018
End
2017
Start
2016
Action to Resolve
2015
Technical Development
Challenge 1
2014
Technical Development
2013
Overall cost needs to come down by a factor of 10. Combination of material cost reduction & (mostly) process time reduction. New design solutions will be required to allow low cost processes
& new UK supply chain capabilities & skills will be essential sustain UK value contribution.
2012
Initially develop new materials and processes, together with designs that increase panel value by integrating functionality. 2nd phase is to look at innovative solutions, considering today's bolt-on
panels differently in new archtectures, and with 2nd generation multifunctionality
.
.
.
Shortage of skills at all levels
Infrastructure Requirements
Fund National Composites Centre to grow
this capability
2012
2015
.
.
.
.
No-Automotive capable composites
development facility available
.
37
Title
Development of metal sandwich materials into energy adsorbing applications by 2030
Lightweight Structural Plastics
Description
Description
Development of steel sandwich materials and associated technologies to enable the application of steel sandwich materials into energy adsorbing applications. These are three layer strutures with
two sheets of metal (Al or steel) seperated by a polymer layer. Current research shows that weigth savings of between 20 and 40% can be achieved over the monolithic equivalent for the same
energy adsorbtion. Total potential weight saving of 20-30 kg.
Cost effective way to reduce BIW mass. Highly recyclable. Mechanical and physical properties restrict applications.
Value
Value
Easiest
4
5
Hardest
Saving (Kg) 0 - 2
Challenge
3
50+
2
3
Easiest
Value
Description of where we are now.
1
5
4
5
Hardest
3
2
Value
Description of where we are now.
Technology demonstrated in cosmetic panels but potential for energy adsorbtion only recently realised. High volume cost competitive material production route exists. Covnvetional forming and
joining technologies (SPR) have been successfully applied to these materials.
Wide range of structural plastics (PPs, PAs) with SF & LF contents available. Overmoulded solutions available since circa 2002. Limitations of integrating parts within BIW, ie Bolt-on parts. Limited
strutuctural performance - lower stiffness, strength and fatigue performance and managament of TCE through appropriate fixation.
2020
High strain rate testing and formability trials.
Develop material models for commercial
software.
Develop technologies for recycling of
sandwich materials.
CRD - Hybrid (polymer & metallic-polymer)
composite solutions
2012
2020
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
2013
2018
.
.
.
.
.
.
CRD - hybrid composite solutions
2012
2020
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
CRD into new joining methods
2012
2020
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
New CRD into composite Thermo-Plastics
2012
2020
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Low TCE
Challenge 3
2015
2020
.
.
.
.
.
.
Joining
Challenge 4
2015
2020
.
.
.
.
.
.
Challenge 5
Supply Chain Action
Work with Steel/Al suppliers and Tier1s to
adapt current technologies.
2015
2028
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
New composite LW plastics solutions
Skills Action
Skills Action
Workforce (tech, engineer, designer) that
understands the characteristics,
advantages and restrictions.
Training activity to sit along side
collaborative R&D. Extend TAS.
Ensure capacity, price stability and low
CO2 manufacture.
Encourage investment in new capacity for
high volume production.EoL solution is
critcal step.
38
2019
CRD programme involing joining equipment
suppliers.
Supply Chain Action
Infrastructure Requirements
Low stiffness, strength prevents
integration for BIW crash relevant parts
Challenge 2
Challenge 5
Develop UK supply chain.
2018
EoL issues.
2017
Challenge 4
End
2016
CAE tools for manufacture and
performance prediction.
Start
2015
Challenge 3
Action to Resolve
2014
Develop joing technolgies for sandwich
strucutres.
Challenge 1
2013
Challenge 2
Technical Development
2012
2030
2029
2028
2027
.
2026
.
2025
.
2024
.
2023
.
2022
.
2021
2018
2020
2013
2019
CRD programme involing exisitng press shop
and toolmaker.
2018
Adapt conventional forming methods for
sanwhich materials.
2017
End
2016
Start
2015
Action to Resolve
2014
Challenge 1
2013
Route to implementation by 2030
OEM - Tier 1 supplier engagement with state-of-the-art Compression or Injection Moulding solutions
2012
Route to implementation by 2030
Major challenges are around forming, integration and end of life.
Technical Development
X
2030
3
4
2029
2
3
2028
1
X
2
2027
Challenge
50+
1
2026
Saving (Kg) 0 - 2
3
2025
5
2024
4
2023
3
Challenge
2
Challenge
1
APPENDIX
Weight Save Forms
2022
Title
Weight Save Forms
2021
APPENDIX
2015
2020
.
.
.
.
.
.
2015
Infrastructure Requirements
2015
2030
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
2012
39
APPENDIX
Title
Weight Save Forms
APPENDIX
Weight Save Forms
Title
Sheet Mg Applications by 2030
Magnesium Structural Castings
Description
Description
Development of cost effective technologies to enable BIW applications of sheet Mg by 2030. Potential weight saving 20-30 kg.
Cost effective way to reduce BIW mass, particulalrly for Premium and Large vehicles segment (D/E class and above). Increase in integration limited primarily by joining, pre-treatment and current
mechanical properties of available alloys (elongation, yield & tensile strength)
Value
Value
3
4
Saving (Kg) 0 - 2
Challenge
1
5
50+
2
3
Easiest
4
5
Hardest
4
2
3
4
Saving (Kg) 0 - 2
X
Challenge
4
1
5
50+
2
3
Easiest
Value
Description of where we are now.
1
4
5
Hardest
Route to implementation by 2030
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
2030
2025
.
2029
2024
.
2028
2023
.
2027
2022
.
2026
2021
2017
2015
Joining process for integration of large Mg
castings
CRD into Mg alloy joiing processes
2012
2020
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
E-coat painting processes creates
corrosion issues for Mg alloys and
prevents integration within BIW (ie nonbolt-on applications)
2020
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
CRD of new pre-treatment processes
2012
2022
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Tensile elastic modulus of Mg alloys is
<25% of steel.
CRD of Alloy development for high modulus,
castings or Composite Castings
2012
2030
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Thinner wall castings (<2.00mm) with
high elongation >15%
2012
2030
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Undertake CRD to extend structural Mg
casting usage within BIW
2013
2030
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Training to address skills shortage.
2012
2015
.
.
.
Development of Pre-treatment facilities for
Mg alloy parts
2015
2030
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
2023
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Challenge 4
2020
2025
.
.
.
.
.
Challenge 5
Alloy development for high modulus, high
elongation castings or Composite Casting
development for tunable properties
Supply Chain Action
Training activity to sit along side
collaborative R&D. Extend TAS.
2020
Ensure capacity, price stability and low
CO2 manufacture.
Encourage investment in Mg production
using low environmental impact processes.
(Norway)
40
2016
CRD programme involving OEM and joining
equipment suppliers
Workforce (tech, engineer, designer) that
understands the characteristics,
advantages and restrictions of Mg.
Infrastructure Requirements
.
Challenge 3
2015
Skills Action
2015
2013
Work with existing UK Mg companies and
sheet component supply chain to adapt
current technologies.
Develop UK supply chain.
End
2014
Supply Chain Action
Start
2013
Challenge 5
Action to Resolve
Challenge 2
1) develop commercial warm forming
technologies (CRD programme).2) develop
auto sheet grade Mg alloy.
High strain rate testing and formability trials.
Develop material models for commercial
software.
Challenge 1
2012
Challenge 4
CAE tools for manufacture and
performance prediction.
2020
2025
2019
2013
2018
Support current activity on Mg twin roll
casting (POSCO/Brunel)
2017
Volume production of low cost Mg sheet.
2016
End
2015
Start
2014
Action to Resolve
2013
Technical Development
Challenge 1
2012
Technical Development
Robust joining technology for Mg
Value
Route to implementation by 2030
Pre-treatment processes and Joining processes for large Mg structural castings
Challenge 3
2
High fluidity structural Mg Alloy casting suppliers currently producing alloys with with yield strengths of 100-150MPa and tensile strengths of 200-260MPa and reasonable ductility (8-10%).
Fatigue strength is a limitation. High-level of integration into BIW is limited owing to corrosion issues and joining processes available. Parts are typically 'bolt-on' items. LCA an issue. UK has a large
casting Tier supplier (Meridian) and an alloy supplier (MEL).
Need to advance currently low TRL technologies for sheet manufacture and forming as well as address develop robust joining technologies to avoid galvanic corrosion issues.
Volume forming technology for Mg sheet.
X
Description of where we are now.
Castings routinely used however no sheet applications due to cost. This is primarily associated with formability issues but there are also joining, corrosion and LCA issues.
Challenge 2
2
Challenge
2
Challenge
1
2028
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
OEM demand driven by off-the-shelf
solutions, Tier 1 resources limited
.
Skills Action
2030
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Infrastructure Requirements
2015
2030
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
OEM paint plant not compatable for
integrated Mg BIW parts (bolt-ons only0
.
41
APPENDIX
Title
Weight Save Forms
Title
Introduction of Powder Metallurgy Based Al Metal Matrix Composites (MMCs) into mainstream automotive by 2030
Vehicle Optimisation by 2030
Description
Description
Development of cost effective technologies to enable the introduction of Powder Metallurgy Based Al MMCs into mainstream automotive. Applications include engine components (high
temperature fatigue critcal applications) breaking systems (low weigth high stiffness application). Replacing steel can lead to 40% weight reduction with a total potential weight saving of 5 -10
kg.
Development of LW vehicles optimised to meet 'real world' load cases by challenging existing design standards/requirements
Value
Value
3
4
Saving (Kg) 0 - 2
Challenge
1
5
50+
2
3
Easiest
4
5
Hardest
2
X
1
2
3
4
Saving (Kg) 0 - 2
Challenge
3
50+
2
3
Easiest
Value
Description of where we are now.
1
Technology implemented in niche, autosport and demostrator vehicles. Currently high processing costs and lack of proven route for mass production means that this is not viable for mainstream
automotive.
Route to implementation by 2030
5
4
5
Hardest
3
Challenge
2
Challenge
1
APPENDIX
Weight Save Forms
X
5
Value
Description of where we are now.
Current OEM vehicle designs are developed around a series of legislative requirements and internal design standards sometimes distant from 'real world' load cases and conditions and
consequently this leads to inefficient, over-engineered designs or sub-optimal solutions w.r.t mass.
Route to implementation by 2030
.
Development of condition monitoring
(C.M.) systems to provide real-time
measurement
Low Cost Net Shape Manufacturing for
MMC components. (Press - Sinter)
CRD programme to develop C.M. systems to
reverse engineer designs to real world data
2013
2020
.
.
.
.
.
Challenge 3
Low Cost Net Shape Manufacturing for
MMC components. (ALM)
.
OEM Design Standards
OEMs to review and challenge design
standards
2018
2030
Challenge 4
CAE tools for manufacture and
performance prediction.
.
Current CAE methods cannot consider all
load cases at once and designs require
iterative approaches
2015
2025
Challenge 5
EoL issues.
Supply Chain Action
Develop UK supply chain.
Transportation KTN/Catapult to catalyse
mult-sector approach
2013
2015
.
.
.
Skills Action
Knowledge transfer of condition Monotoring
/ real-time measurement expertise
2013
2015
.
.
.
Invest in UK SET base
2015
2030
CRD programme involing PM Tier 1/2 to
develop press & sinter technology for MMCs.
CRD programme involing ALM supplier, Univ,
Catapult to develop high rate ALM
technology for MMCs
2013
2015
Develop technologies for recycling of MMC's
2016
Ensure capacity, price stability and low
CO2 manufacture.
Encourage investment in new capacity for
high volume MMC production. EoL solution is
critcal step.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
2023
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Challenge 4
2020
Work with existing MMC suppliers, PM
companies and ALM compnaies to adapt
current technologies.
2020
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Challenge 3
High strain rate testing and formability trials.
Develop material models for commercial
software.
Training activity to sit along side
collaborative R&D. Extend TAS.
42
.
Challenge 2
Workforce (tech, engineer, designer) that
understands the characteristics,
advantages and restrictions of MMCs.
Infrastructure Requirements
.
2030
.
2029
.
2028
.
2027
.
2026
2017
.
2025
2016
2017
2024
2015
2013
2023
2014
CRD programme to capture real-world duty
cycle data
2022
2013
Insufficient 'real world' load case data
2021
End
2020
Start
2019
Action to Resolve
2018
Challenge 1
Challenge 2
2012
2030
2029
2028
2027
.
2026
.
2025
.
2024
.
2023
.
2022
.
2021
2018
2020
2013
2019
CRD programme involing MMC supplier and
conventioanl supply chain
2018
End
2017
Start
2016
Taking cost out of conventional
processing. (forging, extrusion,
machining)
Action to Resolve
2015
Technical Development
Challenge 1
2014
Technical Development
2013
This will require several actions including: (i) capturing a better understanding of the real world load cases and methods to measure, model and predict these to provide suitable confidence to relax
any strenuos OEM design standard(s) that may inhibit efficient LW vehicle designs; (ii) development of condition monitoring systems for real-time predctive assessments.
2012
Inherenelty the raw mateiral costs are low and there is a general belief that once the technology is widely adopted processing costs will fall. The key techologies that need to be developed are
methods for mass production of parts. End of life solutions must also be established.
2025
.
.
.
.
.
Challenge 5
2021
.
.
.
.
.
CRD - True Multi-disciplinary Optimisation
(MDO) CAE assessments factoring real world
data, including Mult-physics solutions
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Supply Chain Action
2015
2028
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Network / share learning with other
sectors (e.g. Rail & Aerospace)
.
Pockets of knowledge/expertise exist in
UK
Skills Action
2020
2030
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Infrastructure Requirements
2015
2030
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Develop expertise in UK
.
43
APPENDIX
Title
Weight Save Forms
APPENDIX
Weight Save Forms
Title
Roofing Systems
Seating Systems
Description
Description
A wide range of roofing systems are used by all OEMs in the UK - however, no specific UK-based manufacturing capability in UK
Seating provides a significant opportunity for weight reduction and various different systems are used by all OEMs in the UK. Some UK supply chain ( e.g. JCI).
Value
Value
3
4
Saving (Kg) 0 - 2
Challenge
1
5
50+
2
3
Easiest
4
5
Hardest
4
2
3
4
Saving (Kg) 0 - 2
X
Challenge
4
1
5
50+
2
3
Easiest
Value
Description of where we are now.
1
4
5
Hardest
4
X
Challenge
2
Challenge
1
2
Value
Description of where we are now.
Growing consumer demand of large size, sunroof options including multi-panel glass, panoramic, moving panoramic). In terms of roofing systems an increase in LW materials is required for Cabriolet
Convertible vehicles and LW retractable roofing systems. Lightweighting materals include light metals for roofing frame and roof inner components and Polycarbonate for glazing which can achieve
upto 50% weight reduction over traditional materials (steel and glass).
Growing consumer demand for customisation, shaped, thinner seats provides new opportunities for the adoption of LW materials for seating systems. Additional functional integration with seating
(heating, cooling, multi-way movement, occupant comfort & massage features) have yet to be achieved. Potential lightweighting materals include light metals for seat frames. However, the
majority of frames are steel and also include light-weight structural plastics delivering affordable commodity items
CRD of toughened glazing applications, e.g. Gorilla Glass from Corning or more use of Polycarbonate for future Glasshouse applications. Need to understand wider opportunities, forming,
paintability/coating/supply chain. Leader in Polycarbonate technology is Webasto. Continue to drive systems integration. Down size mechatronics.
CRD of lightweight, package efficient, multi-functional seating solutions applicable for volume production.
Technical Development
Technical Development
Challenge 2
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
2030
.
2029
.
2028
.
Challenge 2
2012
2018
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Challenge 3
Challenge 3
Challenge 4
Challenge 4
Challenge 5
Challenge 5
Supply Chain Action
Supply Chain Action
Major roofing systems suppliers are
outside of the UK.
Majority of seating R&D outside of UK as
Seating R&D Centres outside of UK
None
Skills Action
Encourage UK suppliers to inMs
Skills Action
2013
2015
.
.
.
Infrastructure Requirements
Infrastructure Requirements
2012
44
.
2027
2020
.
2026
2013
.
2025
2018
2024
2012
2023
CRD to develop new LW seating concepts
2022
Develop efficient, multi-functional LW
seat designs
2021
.
2020
.
2019
.
2018
.
2017
.
End
2016
.
Start
2015
.
Action to Resolve
2014
.
Challenge 1
2013
.
Route to implementation by 2030
2012
.
2030
2025
.
2029
2024
.
2028
2023
.
2027
2022
.
2026
2021
EU CRD and supply chain development
2020
Development of high clarity, formable and
paintable Polycarbonate systems
2019
2025
2018
2012
2017
OEM R&D to understand suitability for
structural glazing applications
2016
End
2015
Start
2014
Develop cost effective applications of
ultra-high toughness glazing (Gorilla
Glass).
Action to Resolve
2013
Challenge 1
2012
Route to implementation by 2030
2015
.
.
.
.
45
Title
Sheet Moulding Compound (SMC) Panels
Steel - Hot Stamping
Description
Description
UK OEMs in the LWV Group are using SMC technology for Skin Panels (Horizontal & Vertical) and there is limited UK-based manufacturing (PO & MITRAS)
All OEMs in the LWV Group are using hot stamped steel parts - however, no UK-based manufacturing capability.
Saving (Kg) 0 - 2
Challenge
1
50+
2
3
Easiest
Value
Description of where we are now.
1
5
4
5
Hardest
3
1
Value
Description of where we are now.
Widespread use of SMC in both niche and volume vehicle production
Widespread use of hot stamped steel in volume vehicle production.
Challenge 2
2012
2020
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
OEMs engage Tier 1 suppliers
2013
2020
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
2020
Uncoated steel surface oxidises.
Shot blasting required, or use coated steel.
2012
2012
.
Need to get all form in one pressing,
followed by laser trim.
2012
2012
.
2012
Cycle time for single part= 20Need
to 30s
to press multiple parts in one press stroke
Challenge 5
2012
.
2030
.
2012
2029
.
Alternative energy sources?
2028
.
End
2027
2030
2029
2028
2027
.
Start
No follow-on forming or mechanical trim
operations possible.
Challenge 4
Challenge 5
Supply Chain Action
Supply Chain Action
OEMs engage Tier 1 suppliers
2013
2020
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
No automotive hot stamping production
facility in the UK.
Skills Action
Skills Action
None
None
Shortage of skilled resource with
production experience in the UK.
Infrastructure Requirements
Infrastructure Requirements
Limited SMC suppliers in UK. PO have a
satellite operation
No SMC R&D facilities within UK
No automotive hot stamping production
facility in the UK.
46
.
Action to Resolve
Challenge 3
Challenge 4
Limited SMC suppliers in UK. PO have a
satellite operation. No/limited SMC
development in UK
Challenge 1
.
The process requires high energy input high CO2 output. Is this a medium term
solution only? Will hot stamping stop after
2020?
Challenge 2
Challenge 3
Limited SMC suppliers in UK. PO have a
satellite operation. No/limited SMC
development in UK
2026
.
2025
.
2024
.
2023
.
2022
.
2021
.
2020
Tier 1 led CRD New, HS, high Stiffness, low
density SMC solutions - > CF SMC
.
2019
SMC itself is not a highly effective LW
material solution
2018
2018
2017
2012
2016
OEM material substitution for sustainable /
low VOC materials?
2015
End
2014
High Volatile Compounds associated with
SMC materials. Legislative or company
standards may impact usage beyond
2020?
Start
2013
Technical Development
Action to Resolve
2012
Technical Development
2026
Route to implementation by 2030
General trend among volume vehicle manufacturers is to increase the number of parts which are hot stamped.
2025
Route to implementation by 2030
General trend among volume vehicle manufacturers is an increase in the number of SMC parts owing to part integration and low tooling investment enabling greater model derivatives requiring a
lower total tooling investment
Challenge 1
X
2024
Hardest
4
2023
5
3
2022
Easiest
4
2
2021
3
1
2020
2
Value
2019
1
X
2018
Challenge
50+
3
2017
Saving (Kg) 0 - 2
5
2016
4
2015
3
2014
2
Challenge
1
Challenge
Value
APPENDIX
Weight Save Forms
2013
Title
Weight Save Forms
2012
APPENDIX
2012
2018
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Attract European T1 hot stamping suppliers
to UK.
2013
2015
.
.
.
Training activity to be organised, perhaps
from more experienced European T1
suppliers.
2013
2015
.
.
.
Incentivise European T1 suppliers to create
facility in UK.
2012
2015
.
.
.
.
47
Title
Steel - Ultra High Strength
Steel - Tube Hydroforming
Description
Description
Cost effective way to reduce BIW mass.
Cost effective way to reduce BIW mass.
Saving (Kg) 0 - 2
Challenge
1
50+
2
3
Easiest
Value
Description of where we are now.
1
5
4
5
Hardest
2
X
2
Value
Description of where we are now.
Challenge 2
Restricted part design freedom due to
Challenge 1.
R&D into making these steels more formable.
2012
2015
.
48
2015
Assembly is an issue.
Further develop single-sided spotwelding
techniques?
2013
2014
.
.
.
Take learning from the Hydroform Intensive
Body programme and consider next steps.
2012
2013
Adopt a low pressure hydroforming strategy.
2013
2015
.
.
.
Attract European T1 suppliers to the UK
2013
2015
.
.
.
Training activity to be organised, perhaps
from more experienced European T1
suppliers.
2013
2015
.
.
.
Incentivise European T1 suppliers to create
facility in UK.
2013
2015
.
.
.
Designing for the process (prebend/hydroform/laser trim)
.
.
Challenge 3
R&D into making these steels more formable.
2012
2015
.
Strategic links with steel suppliers for
testing and early adoption of more formable
UHSS in R&D phase.
.
.
.
Process speed.
Training to address skills shortage.
Supply Chain Action
2012
2015
.
.
.
.
Lack of T1 suppliers in the UK.
.
Shortage of skilled resource with
production experience in the UK.
Skills Action
2012
2015
.
Infrastructure Requirements
Higher press forces required compared to
conventional steel stamping.
2014
End
Challenge 5
Skills Action
2013
Start
Challenge 5
Lack of design skills taking into account
formability of UHSS.
.
Action to Resolve
Challenge 4
Supply Chain Action
.
Challenge 1
Challenge 4
More formable UHSS required from steel
suppliers.
2012
2030
2029
2028
2027
Technical Development
Challenge 2
Challenge 3
May need to be considered as an eventual
replacement for hot stamped steel, due to
high CO2 output of hot stamping process.
2026
.
2025
.
2024
.
2023
.
2022
2015
2021
2012
2020
R&D into making these steels more formable.
2019
Low formability - typically crash formed or
bent into shape.
2018
End
2017
Start
2016
Action to Resolve
2015
Challenge 1
2014
Technical Development
2013
Route to implementation by 2030
Could be considered for other BIW parts via design study with material and T1 suppliers (as per Hydroform Intensive Body programme).
2012
Route to implementation by 2030
Require steels of this strength level to be more formable.
2030
For example, tube hydroforming being used for Engine Sub-frame and A-Post/Cantrail in current volume vehicle production.
2029
Steel suppliers currently producing ultra high strength steels, with tensile strength > 1000Mpa, but with limited formability.
2028
Hardest
4
2027
5
3
2026
Easiest
4
2
2025
3
1
2024
2
Value
2023
1
X
2022
Challenge
50+
2
2021
Saving (Kg) 0 - 2
5
2020
4
2019
3
2018
2
2017
1
Challenge
Value
APPENDIX
Weight Save Forms
Challenge
Title
Weight Save Forms
2016
APPENDIX
.
.
Infrastructure Requirements
Higher capacity press lines required (already
available).
2012
2012
.
Lack of automotive tube hydroforming
production facilities in the UK.
49
APPENDIX
Title
Weight Save Forms
APPENDIX
Weight Save Forms
Title
Introduction of Ti Alloys into mainstream automotive by 2030
Ultra-Lightweight Transmission & Driveline
Description
Description
Development of cost effective technologies to enable the introduction of Ti alloys into mainstream automotive. Applications include engine components (high temperature applications) exhaust
systems (corrosion applications) and suspension springs (low modulus applications). Replacing steel can lead to 40% weight reduction with a total potential weight saving of 10-20 kg.
Delivering a step-change in transmission and driveline weight via the development of cost-effective, complimentary lightweight technologies. Taking advantage of the latest developments in
sustainable materials, coupled with novel manufacturing processes and design approaches to deliver significant weight reduction without sacraficing attributes such as vehicle NVH, drivability and
performance.
Value
Value
Challenge
Low cost production of Ti
Challenge 2
Low Cost Net Shape Manufacturing for Ti
components. (Press - Sinter)
Challenge 3
Low Cost Net Shape Manufacturing for Ti
components. (ALM)
Challenge 4
CAE tools for manufacture and
performance prediction.
Challenge 5
CRD programme involing ALM supplier, Univ,
Catapult to develop high deposition rate
ALM technology for Ti
High strain rate testing and formability trials.
Develop material models for commercial
software.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Route to implementation by 2030
New multi-material designs eg: skeleton
casing structures suitable for T&D app.
2023
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Protecting vehicle attributes eg: NVH,
drivability, performance vs weight.
.
Ensuring solutions are cost-effective and
suitable for mass production
Challenge 4
2020
2025
.
.
.
.
.
Challenge 5
Minimising the overall environmental
impact
Supply Chain Action
Develop UK supply chain.
2013
2019
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Development of robust joining techniques,
validation of new materials in T&D
environment.
2013
2020
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Development of advanced CAE analysis
capability to enable multi-parameter
optimisation
2013
2016
.
.
.
.
Conducting careful cost/benefit analysis &
engagement of tier 1 manufacturing
partners at start
2013
2016
.
.
.
.
Exploring new manufacturing techniques eg:
cold forging to reduce / eliminate waste
2013
2016
.
.
.
.
2013
2019
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
2030
End
2029
Start
Action to Resolve
.
Supply Chain Action
Work with existing PM companies and ALM
compnaies to adapt current technologies.
2015
2028
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
- Mass produced high strength 'clean'
steels
- Multi-material capability
Early engagement of materials suppliers, tier
1's & dev't of new CAE methods.
.
.
Multi-material design and analysis
capability.
Dissemination of best practice from leading
ESP's, dev't of new CAE methods.
2013
2016
.
.
.
.
.
Production infastructure for cost-effective
mass produced high strength 'clean'
steels
Early engagement of materials suppliers.
2013
2020
.
.
.
.
Skills Action
Skills Action
Workforce (tech, engineer, designer) that
understands the characteristics,
advantages and restrictions of Ti.
Training activity to sit along side
collaborative R&D. Extend TAS.
Ensure capacity, price stability and low
CO2 manufacture.
Encourage investment in new technologies
for low cost Ti production.
2020
2030
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Infrastructure Requirements
50
Development of cost-effective high strength
'clean' steels and manufacturing / finishing
proc.
2028
Challenge 1
2027
Technical Development
2026
A clean-sheet redesign of system topology, optimised using new analytical techniques and taking advantage of the latest developments in materials technology. Exploring down-sized hardware &
multi-material design opportunities for all elements of the transmission & driveline.
Challenge 3
2015
Value
Today's conventional systems utilise well known, homogeneous materials, eg; steel and aluminium and an overall system topology which has not changed significantly since the 1970's.
Down-sizing of gear and rotating parts.
.
4
Description of where we are now.
Challenge 2
2020
Hardest
X
2025
2030
2029
2028
2027
2026
2025
2024
2023
2022
2021
2020
2019
2013
.
2018
CRD programme involing PM Tier 1/2 to
develop press & sinter technology for Ti.
.
2017
2025
2016
2013
2015
End
2014
Support/Maintain watching brief on global
efforts to develop new technology for Ti
production.
Start
2013
Action to Resolve
2012
Challenge 1
5
2024
Route to implementation by 2030
Since 2000 there has been a surge of activity to lower the cost of Ti production. These programmes must be successful for Ti will be a viable material for automotive production. Low alloy
grades of Ti can be rolled to sheet using conventional steel technology hovever higher alloyed grades and complex components require process development to reducce manufacturing costs. Net
shape processing though powder metallurgy (Press/Sinter) or ALM need to be developed.
4
2023
Technology implemented in niche, autosport and demostrator vehicles. Currently high cost of raw material and in some applications lack of proven route for mass production means that this is not
viable for mainstream automotive.
Technical Development
3
Easiest
Value
Description of where we are now.
2
2022
4
1
5
2021
Hardest
X
50+
2020
5
Saving (Kg) 0 - 2
5
2019
Easiest
4
4
2018
3
3
2017
2
2
2016
1
1
2015
Challenge
50+
3
2014
Saving (Kg) 0 - 2
5
2013
4
2012
3
Challenge
2
Challenge
1
Infrastructure Requirements
2015
2030
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
51
0.0TITLE