MMLV Lightweight Powertrain Long Carbon Fiber Structural Front Cover & Oil Pan

Transcription

1 MMLV Lightweight Powertrain Long Carbon Fiber Structural Front Cover & Oil Pan 2015 SPE ACCE Conference Session: Virtual Prototyping & Testing September 9-11, 2015 Ankur Bhosale - BASF Performance Materials Neal Corey - Ford Research and Advanced Engineering

2 Presentation Outline Project Background Project Challenges Design Challenges Processing/Tooling Challenges Project Results Next steps Summary

3 Presentation Outline Project Background Project Challenges Design Challenges Processing/Tooling Challenges Project Results Next steps Summary

4 Powertrain Trends Air emission & fuel economy legislation is driving new powertrain technologies Lightweighting Engine Downsizing Turbocharging Gas Direct Injection (GDI) Variable Valve Timing (VVT) Hybridization/Electrification (HEV/PHEV/EREV/BEV/Start/Stop) Higher Efficiency Transmissions (Dual Clutch, 8 & 9 Speeds) New High Performance Materials Are Needed!

5 MMLV Project Overview Team Mission: Ford and Magna/Vehma with US Department of Energy are investigating a Multi-Material Lightweight Vehicle compared to 2002 equivalent Goals: 1. Drivable Prototype Target at 25% weight save (Mach I Design) 2. Virtual Concept Vehicle at 50% curb weight (Mach II Design) Glazing PC & Toughened Aluminum/Steel Body Mach I design ( Mach II design -Composites) Closures Aluminum + Mg + AHSS Down-sized Engine Aluminum + CGI- block CF Engine Front Cover & Oil Pan Mg Valve Body Interiors CF Seats CF IP beam Foamed plastics Optimized Lt WtTires & CF Wheels Aluminum Chassis All Aluminum subframes Hollow steel, composite, titanium springs TS Coated Aluminum brake rotors

6 Project Accomplishments 33% Mass Savings 23% Mass Savings Achieved Significant Mass Savings While Meeting Performance Objectives!

7 Presentation Outline Project Background Project Challenges Design Challenges Processing/Tooling Challenges Project Results Next steps Summary

8 Project Challenges Limited Material Characterization Stress-Strain Curve Lack of Predictive Tools Processing Issues Part Performance

9 Performance Requirements Structural Front Cover Temperature: 100 C Performance Criteria: 1) Extreme Engine Mount Loads 2) Low Cycle Durability (1000 cycles) 3) Thermal Shock 4) NVH Structural Oil Pan Temperature: 120 C Performance Criteria: 1) NVH 2) Sealing 3) Thermal Shock

10 Fiber Reinforced Thermoplastics vs Metals Ultramid LCF50 Long-Carbon-Fiber PA66 50% Weight Fraction Short Fiber Long Fiber Please Note: (a)it s a Log-Log Scale *Properties at 100 C

11 NVH Assessment: PTB Modes NVH Target Modes similar to Aluminum Counterparts, w/aluminum block Elevated Temperature: 120 C Composite Design Performance Baseline LCF50 Designs ~20% below target Optimized Design - Equivalent performance vs Aluminum Equivalent System Level Performance With Ultramid LCF50!

12 Engine Mount Extreme Loads Prediction w/ultrasim Load Cases Magnitude / Axis 1 12kN in Y Axis 2 12kN in +Y Axis 3 7.6kN in Z Axis 4 7.6kN in +Z Axis Unsurpassed Accuracy vs Isotropic Material Models

13 Injection Molding Simulation In-House Flow Simulation Capability Ultramid LCF50 Melt Front Advancement Machine Selection Valve Gate Selection Ultramid LCF50 Characterized for Flow Simulations Prediction Accuracy Temperature Distribution Warpage Trends / Magnitude

14 Processing Challenges Injection Molding Screw Design Melt Temperature Override Residence Time Hot Runner / Gate Design Near-Net Shape Part (Warpage)

15 Fiber Length Measurements ~3x Longer Length Retained vs Short Glass Fiber

16 Presentation Outline Project Background Project Challenges Design Challenges Processing/Tooling Challenges Project Results Next steps Summary

17 MASS Reduction: Structural Oil Pan ~1.0 Kg Saved (~33% Lighter) Note: Compression Limiter (CL) & Brass Insert Mass ~0.350 Kg ~18% of total mass

18 MASS Summary: Front Cover ~0.83 Kg Saved (~23%Lighter) Note: Compression Limiter (CL) & Brass Inserts Mass ~0.67 Kg ~24% of total mass

19 Part Testing: Static Failure Load BASF Test Data Ultramid LCF50 Test Data within 5-10% Using ULTRASIM Predictions Failure Initiation 19

20 Durability Test Fixture Set-Up Z Direction Y Direction

21 Thermal Shock Test Set-Up Test Parameters: Cycles between -20 C to +120 C for 80 cycles (Dwell time at each temperature 1 hour) No visible degradation of the parts were observed upon the completion of the test!!!

22 Test Summary / Conclusions Fox EcoBoost I3 Engine MMLV LCF Components 1. System Level Testing: Passed100 hour Ford GLOSYS engine durability dynamometer tests 2. Component Level Test Requirements: Low Cycle Fatigue Thermal Shock o Insert Retention/Load Limiter Pullout 3. Passed Inspection Criteria

23 Presentation Outline Project Background Project Challenges Design Challenges Processing/Tooling Challenges Project Results Next steps Summary

24 NEXT STEPS / DISCUSSION TOPICS 1. Optimized Injection Molded Screw Design 2. Optimal CF Content 3. Composite Compression Limiters 4. Advanced Simulation Tools 5. Extensive High Cycle Durability Tests 6. Business Case Analysis

25 CONCLUSION / SUMMARY Successfully proved out technical viability Significant Mass Saving Structural Front Cover: 23% Structural Oil Pan: 33% LCF Fiber Length Attrition Established Injection Molding Processing Challenges