|
Items in cart [0] |
Questions? Call 888-624-8373 |
PAPERBACK + PDF PAPERBACK PDF BOOK PDF CHAPTERS Free Resources |
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Copyright © 2009. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Terms of Use and Privacy Statement |
Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 97
CAutomotive Industry Workshop
N MARCH 12-13, 1998, the Committee on Materials Science and Engi-
neering: Forging Stronger Links to Users of the National Materials Ad-
visory Board hosted a workshop on the linkages and exchange of infor-
mation within the automotive industry. This was the third of three workshops
intended to identify (1) user needs and business practices that promote or restrict
the incorporation of materials and processes innovation, (2) how priorities in
materials selection are determined, (3) mechanisms to improve links between the
materials community and the engineering disciplines, and (4) programs (e.g.,
education, procedures, information technology) to improve these linkages. As
shown in the agenda in Box C-1, the workshop was divided into four sessions:
material selection processes, supplier perspective on alternate materials, and two
sessions on alternate materials case studies.
NEW MATERIALS DEVELOPMENT:
INCENTIVES AND BARRIERS
Automotive products are mature but will require innovative alternative mate-
rials to continue to compete in the global marketplace, and equally important, to
meet future societal and regulatory demands. The industry established a record of
responding to these driving forces during the past two decades. For example,
from 1975 to 1983 the average vehicle weight was reduced across the entire fleet
by 1,200 lbs.
The mix of materials used in automobiles has changed substantially in the
past two decades: high-strength steels have increased from 0 percent to 11 per-
cent; cast aluminum from 2 percent to 6 percent; engineering plastics from
0 percent to 10 percent; and mild steel/cast iron has decreased from 75 percent to
97
OCR for page 98
98
MATERIALS SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING
BOX C-1
Agenda for the Automotive Industry Workshop
March 1 2,1 998
8:20 a.m. Convene and Introductions, Dale F. Stein, Committee Chair
OVERVIEW: MATERIAL SELECTION PROCESSES (Ronald Shriver, Session
Chair)
8:30 a.m. Ford System, C. L. Magee, Ford
9:15 a.m. GM System, R. Heimbuch, General Motors
10:00 a.m. Introduction of New Materials into Manufacturing Operations, S.
Harpest, Honda
10:45 a.m. PNGV Materials Road Map, A. Sherman, Ford
11:30 a.m. Discussion
SUPPLIERS PERSPECTIVE ON ALTERNATIVE MATERIALS (N. Gjostein,
Session Chair)
1:00 p.m. Optimized Steel Vehicles, D. Martin, AISI International
1:45 p.m. Aluminum Intensive Vehicles, P. Bridenbaugh, ALCOA
2:30 p.m. Composite Intensive Vehicles, K. Rusch, Budd Plastics
3:15 p.m. Panel Discussion: Engineering Plastic Components, K. Browall, GE
4:15 p.m. Discussion
5:00 p.m. Adjourn
March 1 3,1 998
ALTERNATE MATERIAL R&D CASE STUDIES I (R. Wagoner, Session Chair)
8:15 a.m. Tailored Blanks, J. McCracken, TWB, Inc.
9:00 a.m. Alternate Materials for Con-Rods, J. Allison, Ford
9:45 a.m. Aluminum-MMC Disk Brake Rotors, F. Buch, DURALCAN
10:30 a.m. III-V Compound Position Sensors, J. Heremans, GM
1 1:15 a.m. Titanium Applications, S. Froes, University of Idaho
ALTERNATE MATERIAL R&D CASE STUDIES II (J. Busch, Session Chair)
12:45 p.m. Applications of Structural Ceramics, B. McEntire, Norton
1:30 p.m. Steel vs. Aluminum vs. Polymers in Auto Body Applications,
J. Dieffenbach, IBIS Associates
2:15 p.m. Discussion: Strengths and Weaknesses of Linkages in the
Automotive Industry
3:15 p.m. Discussion: Strategies for Improving Linkages in the Automotive
Industry
57 percent. The use of stainless steel, magnesium, powder-metal parts, zinc-
coated body sheet, ceramic honeycombs and sensors, Pt-Rh three-way catalysts,
micromachined silicon capacitive pressure sensors, and cathodic electrocoating
has also increased.
Workshop participants identified the following strengths of the automotive
industry that facilitate the introduction of new materials/processes:
OCR for page 99
AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY WORKSHOP
99
· highly sophisticated, computer-based design techniques (e.g., computer-
aided design, computer-aided engineering, and computer-integrated manu-
facturing) to optimize new material concepts
· rapid prototyping techniques (current and developmental) that can greatly
accelerate the introduction of new material concepts
· a huge capital investment in testing facilities
· a large supplier base that works jointly with original equipment manufac-
turers (OEMs) to develop new material concepts
· a talented engineering workforce with strong materials capabilities
· established links and joint programs with national laboratories and uni
. .
versltles
industry consortia (e.g., the U.S. Automotive Materials Partnership) to
establish a materials research and development (R&D) agenda
a federal program, Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles (PNGV),
which is developing a materials R&D road map
Workshop participants identified the following characteristics of the auto-
motive industry as barriers to the introduction of new materials/processes:
a short (three to four year) product development cycle that provides regu-
lar, but still somewhat limited, opportunities for the insertion of new
technologies
a large, established capital equipment base that is renewed only periodi-
cally, which tends to inhibit the adoption of new technologies
· a large existing base of knowledge in conventional materials that tends to
promote the status quo
· difficulty in predicting the perceived value of a new technology through
cost/benefit analyses
· a risk-averse design community that is leery of introducing new concepts
· a rigid purchasing system that is skeptical of suppliers who do not have a
track record of supplying high-quality parts in high volume
IMPROVING LINKAGES
The workshop participants considered many sources of new materials technol-
ogy, including universities, government laboratories, joint projects with govern-
ment support (e.g., cooperative research and development agreements [CRADAsi,
Advanced Technology Program [ATP] initiatives), small entrepreneurial firms,
primary material suppliers, parts fabricators, subsystem suppliers/full service sup-
pliers, and OEM R&D laboratories. Many linkages are possible and the paths from
the source of a new technology to implementation and commercial success are
intimately involved with the product development and manufacturing process,
which takes, on average, about three years. Efforts are under way to reduce the
OCR for page 100
100
MATERIALS SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING
cycle time to closer to two years. Even with the present development cycle
technology must be virtually fixed at the design phase. Thus, the validation of a
new technology must be completed before the decision is made to start a vehicle
program because opportunities to develop concepts during the program are few.
Assuming that (1) materials development takes three to five years, (2) component
testing takes one to two years, (3) manufacturing scale-up takes one to two years,
and (4) product cycle time is two to three years, the total cycle takes between 7
and 12 years.
Universities and Government Laboratories
Over the past decade, both universities and government laboratories have
been more willing to work on concepts that are more relevant to industry. The
major barrier in this linkage is the lack of a supplier infrastructure to supply
highly reliable parts in high volume. OEMs generally do not consider themselves
as developers of supplier infrastructures for new materials technology but prefer
to wait until the technology and supplier infrastructure has been developed for
other products. For example, the increase in components on passenger cars and
trucks built from engineering plastic components (e.g., interior/exterior trim and
assorted small parts) happened in this manner. The stakeholders involved in new
materials developments must also try to develop a supplier infrastructure as the
technology develops.
Parts Suppliers
Many workshop participants felt that the linkages between auto manufactur-
ers and parts suppliers are very strong and, probably, the most important links.
OEMs urge their lower tier suppliers to conduct R&D, either on incremental
improvements to existing products or on riskier new concepts.
The strongest linkages are between design and engineering activities by
OEMs and corresponding activities in supplier organizations. Linkages be-
tween OEM R&D activities and suppliers' R&D have been weak. Suppliers are
often reluctant to conduct joint R&D projects with OEMs for a number reasons,
mostly related to proprietary restrictions on research results. This situation is
changing, however, as PNGV, CRADAs, and ATP initiatives are encouraging
precompetitive joint R&D.
Primary Materials Suppliers
Primary materials suppliers of materials, such as steel, aluminum, and plastic
resins, serve both parts fabricators (at all tiers) and OEMs. In the past, primary
materials suppliers were not active participants in the design process. As the
competition for the predominant automobile body material intensifies (e.g., steel,
OCR for page 101
AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY WORKSHOP
101
aluminum, or plastic composites), suppliers of these materials have developed
their own design activities and have indicated that they want to be involved in the
OEMs' product development and design process.
FINAL DISCUSSION
The workshop participants agreed that materials and processing research
should focus on areas that will lead to lower emissions, lower cost, greater effi-
ciency, and better fuel-cell options. The PNGV program was cited as a unique
industry/government partnership working toward dramatic reductions in vehicle
weight and increases in performance. Many participants agreed that extensive use
of lightweight materials and other advanced materials and process technologies
throughout the industry will be necessary to achieve aggressive goals like those
set for PNGV. Through programs like PNGV, lightweight materials could be
made more attractive for high-volume automotive applications.
Workshop participants identified the following factors as controlling the
decision to implement a new materials technology in the automotive industry:
.
cost compared to the existing part or subassembly, including materials,
processing, tooling and facilities, and offsets for benefits realized in other
subsystems
· high-volume manufacturing process capability
· assurance that the quality, reliability, and durability will be greater than or
equal to the existing system
· availability of a supplier infrastructure that can meet the standards of
automotive purchasing organizations
Workshop participants agreed that only cost-effective and well proven con-
cepts will be integrated into vehicle programs. Several workshop participants
suggested that, even if the cost comparisons are unfavorable, new technology
might still be implemented under the following conditions:
· The new technology is a saleable customer feature that can be priced to
maintain or increase profits (this is rare for materials concepts).
· The new technology has a favorable effect on warranty that can be calcu-
lated from current warranty costs.
· The new technology is required to meet regulations (in this case, the
innovation may or may not be recovered in the vehicle price).
· The new technology is required to compete with other producers, and the
variable cost increase can be offset either in the same subsystem or by
reducing costs in other parts of the vehicle.
The new technology helps to overcome the "guzzler tax" and considers
variable cost, publicity, and effect on market share.
.
Representative terms from entire chapter:
industry workshop
