Plastic versus Steel: An Automotive Fuel Tank Case Study Using the 2013 GM Cadillac ATS Platform

Similar documents
Highly Optimized Advanced High-Strength Steel Rear Chassis

White paper: Originally published in ISA InTech Magazine Page 1

An Innovative High Strength Steel Engine Cradle Concept

FE Modeling and Analysis of a Human powered/electric Tricycle chassis

VENT SILENCER PRODUCT GUIDE

Background. The function of wear rings. Wear Rings. Throat Bushing

Development and Analysis of Rapid Prototype Parts for Classroom Applications

Fuel Tank and Lines Fuel Delivery System Component Location Item Part Number Description

Composite Long Shaft Coupling Design for Cooling Towers

Design, analysis and mounting implementation of lateral leaf spring in double wishbone suspension system

Overview. Selection of System Components VT BBK/CWH. Chart LNG Vehicle Tank and Fuel System Installation Guidelines

Dr Mark White Chief Engineer, Body Complete, Jaguar Land Rover Product Development

Micron MOTIONEERING. User s Guide. Table of Contents

Application of ABAQUS to Analyzing Shrink Fitting Process of Semi Built-up Type Marine Engine Crankshaft

TEST METHODS CONCERNING TRANSPORT EQUIPMENT

Exhibit 5. Vapor to Liquid Volume Ratio (Executive Orders VR-201-F and VR-202-F) (Healy Model 900 EVR Nozzle)

Design and Optimization of HTV Fuel Tank Assembly by Finite Element Analysis

Modern Approach to Liquid Rocket Engine Development for Microsatellite Launchers

About Steel Market Development Institute

dfdf 34.5 kv and 69 kv, Type O Plus C II Condenser Bushings Technical Guide

MCE-5 VCRi Engine: Topological and Free Shape Optimization of the VCR Control Rack

New Frontier in Energy, Engineering, Environment & Science (NFEEES-2018 ) Feb

Waste Heat Recovery from an Internal Combustion Engine

InCar the Modular Automotive Solution Kit

The Mass-Reduction Potential of Tailored Steel Products for Automobiles

Fatigue topology optimization of a crankcase

MAIN SHAFT SUPPORT FOR WIND TURBINE WITH A FIXED AND FLOATING BEARING CONFIGURATION

DuPont Vespel CR-6100 APPLICATION AND INSTALLATION GUIDE FOR CENTRIFUGAL PUMP STATIONARY WEAR PARTS

John Deere brake disc versus non-genuine brake disc

Design and Analysis of a Lightweight Crankshaft for a Racing Motorcycle Engine. Naji Zuhdi, PETRONAS Phil Carden, Ricardo UK David Bell, Ricardo UK

2011 Transit Connect Workshop Manual

Advanced Vehicle Performance by Replacing Conventional Vehicle Wheel with a Carbon Fiber Reinforcement Composite Wheel

Designing Efficient Engines: Strategies Based on Thermodynamics

Replacing Cast Aluminum Wheels with Hayes Lemmerz Flex Steel Wheels Technical and Marketing Challenges

Pre-Form Solutions for Hydroforming Challenges

Plate Girder and Stiffener

Wrinkle Removal Systems. WrinkleSTOP Scroll Roll Adjusta-Pull

FLEXIBLE HOSES AND BELLOWS CONFORMING TO FIRE SERVICE ACT

SimpliPhi Power PHI Battery

MILLTRONICS UNIVERSAL SCALE NIVERSAL SCALE Rev. 1.2

Calculation on a valve housing flange

Safety factor and fatigue life effective design measures

SFI SPECIFICATION 35.2 EFFECTIVE: DECEMBER 29, 2014 *

Design principles and Assumptions

Electric Vehicles House Select Committee on Energy Independence & Alternative Fuels Anne Tazewell Transportation Program Manager December 7, 2011

BIODIESEL. Lesson 4d Test biodiesel in a diesel generator. Developed by Engineering and Technology Curriculum Team

Exhaust System Optimization of Passenger Car for Maximizing Fuel Efficiency through HyperWorks

Plastic Ball Bearing Design Improvement Using Finite Element Method

Vibration Fatigue Analysis of Sheet Metal Fender Mounting Bracket & It's Subsequent Replacement With Plastic

Efficient and Effective bearing performance evaluation

Model TUR-200D Turbine Flowmeter

Pressure degassing systems

Portable. Storage and Transport Dewars. CL/CLPB Series, CH Series, CFN/CFL Series

Requirements regarding Fatigue Tests of a Composite Wheel with Integrated Hub Motor

Design and Analysis of Arc Springs used in Dual Mass Flywheel

Spherical Roller Bearings Units: Rexnord PT Select Series

Chapter 11 Rolling Contact Bearings

Proven Pulling Power.

Series Variable Displacement Piston Pump

FRM. Medium Pressure Regulator. Medium pressure regulator Type FRM

FUEL FLOW SENSOR INSTALLATION GUIDE

Ultra High Purity Transducer, Ex na nl Models WU-20, WU-25 and WU-26

1/7. The series hybrid permits the internal combustion engine to operate at optimal speed for any given power requirement.

AUTOMATIC GIRTH WELDERS Single and Double Sided Models

DESIGN AND ANALYSIS OF A PLASTIC DOOR MODULE FOR CAR BODY APPLICATION

w w w. a u t o s t e e l. o r g

Flow Analysis of Exhaust Manifolds for Engine

Advanced Cooling Technologies, Inc. Low-Cost Radiator for Fission Power Thermal Control NETS Conference

PIPINGSOLUTIONS, INC.

PRESSRELEASE. Technical Information. Optimization focus: Engine mechanics. Less friction in the engine reduces fuel consumption

RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING HIGHER AXLE MASS LIMITS FOR AXLES FITTED WITH WIDE BASE TYRES

Paint Resin in Thermoplastics Properties and Applications

Design and Analysis of Connecting Rod for High- Speed Application in I.C Engine

The Role of Structural/Foundation Damping in Offshore Wind Turbine Dynamics

TRANSFER OF ORGANIC COMPOUNDS INTO MOBILE TRANSPORT TANKS (Effect: 5/6/77: Rev. Effect. 7/26/00)

An Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Common Door Blast Shields

Corrigendum. Page 28 The second equation on this page following the paragraph beginning Because PMWh is a constant over time should read:

FRM. Medium Pressure Regulator. Medium pressure regulator Type FRM

TEST OF NOZZLES AT WALL OF CYLINDRICAL TANK FOR SEVERE LOADS UNDER EARTHQUAKE

More environmental friendly alternatives for biobased materials in tires. Heidi Beers Eco Efficiency specialist at Teijin Aramid

Chapter 6. Supercharging

ENTWICKLUNG DIESELMOTOREN

Maximizing Engine Efficiency by Controlling Fuel Reactivity Using Conventional and Alternative Fuels. Sage Kokjohn

TE-6300 Series Temperature Sensors

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

Guidelines for the Design of Residential and Community Level Storage Systems Combined with Photovoltaics (PV)

Fatigue Analysis of Welded Structures with ANSYS and FEMFAT

Highly Engineered Structural Solutions for the 21 st Century Autobody

Development of Noise-reducing Wheel

THE INFLUENCE OF CHARGE AIR COOLERS CHARACTERISTICS ON THE PERFORMANCE OF HEAVY DUTY DIESEL ENGINES

DESIGN AND ANALYSIS OF EXHAUST VALVE SPRINGS IN IC ENGINES

Service Bulletin No. 2916

DUAL-PHASE STEEL APPLICATION FOR HIGH VENT BACKBONE WHEEL CONCEPTS

VW Embedment Strain Gauge

Research on Lubricant Leakage in Spiral Groove Bearing

Resin Impregnated Paper Bushing, Oil to SF 6. , Type GSBK

ADSORBED NATURAL GAS PRODUCTS, INC. January 25,

Design Advisor. Estimating Secondary Mass Changes in Vehicle Design with Application to the. Donald E. Malen University of Michigan

BEIJING OPERA HOUSE - STEEL SHELL - GENERAL PRESENTATION GENERAL PAUL ANDREU ARCHITECT ADP / SETEC 06 / 01

Using the IMV s standard ECO system to improve shock capability. Optimising Vibration Test Systems for Battery Testing using ECO Technology

Transcription:

Plastic versus Steel: An Automotive Fuel Tank Case Study Using the 2013 GM Cadillac ATS Platform Eric Neuwirth Spectra Premium Industries

Case Study Review Design Requirements Design Overview Forming Analysis Manufacturability Fuel Capacity / Grade Venting Studies Mass Pressure / Vacuum Cyclic Fatigue Summary Conclusions Additional Opportunities Outline

Design Requirements Atmospheric (non-pressurized) system Steel fuel tank requirements must fit existing 2013 Cadillac ATS package space, while maintaining appropriate clearances must be formable using commercially available steel grades must be manufacturable using standard equipment must meet or exceed fuel volume of existing plastic fuel tank must have a mass that is equivalent to or less than the mass of existing plastic fuel tank must meet applicable fuel tank pressure/vacuum cycling durability requirements for an atmospheric system: 12,000 PV cycles + 50% safety factor o Pressure: 14.9 kpa o Vacuum: 7.0 kpa

Design Requirements Based on the design assumptions listed on the previous slide, two different steel tanks have been designed: Volume-Maximizing Steel Tank o Seeks to maximize usable fuel volume to a level greater than that of the plastic fuel tank while still maintaining a mass less than that of the plastic fuel tank Volume-Equivalent Steel Tank o Seeks to achieve a usable fuel volume equal to that of the plastic fuel tank while achieving a mass significantly less than that of the plastic fuel tank

Design Requirements Steel fuel tank must fit existing 2013 Cadillac ATS package space, while maintaining appropriate clearances.

Design Overview: Volume-Maximizing Steel Tank

Design Overview: Volume-Maximizing Steel Tank

Design Overview: Volume-Maximizing Steel Tank

Design Overview: Volume-Maximizing Steel Tank SECTION at Y=zero

Design Overview: Volume-Maximizing Steel Tank

Design Overview: Volume-Maximizing Steel Tank

Design Overview: Volume-Maximizing Steel Tank

Design Overview: Volume-Equivalent Steel Tank

Design Overview: Volume-Equivalent Steel Tank

Design Overview: Volume-Equivalent Steel Tank

Design Overview: Volume-Equivalent Steel Tank INTERNAL VAPOR MANAGEMENT STEEL : GREEN PLASTIC : PURPLE

Forming Analysis Steel fuel tank must be formable using commercially available steel grades.

Forming Analysis Volume-Maximizing Steel Tank

Forming Analysis: Volume-Maximizing Steel Tank Top Shell Thinning at 0.7 mm nominal

Forming Analysis: Volume-Maximizing Steel Tank Top Shell Forming Limit Diagram

Forming Analysis: Volume-Maximizing Steel Tank Bottom Shell Thinning at 0.65 mm nominal

Forming Analysis: Volume-Maximizing Steel Tank Bottom Shell Forming Limit Diagram

Forming Analysis Volume-Equivalent Steel Tank

Forming Analysis: Volume-Equivalent Steel Tank Top Shell Thinning at 0.67 mm nominal

Forming Analysis: Volume-Equivalent Steel Tank Top Shell Forming Limit Diagram

Forming Analysis: Volume-Equivalent Steel Tank Bottom Shell Thinning at 0.65 mm nominal

Forming Analysis: Volume-Equivalent Steel Tank Bottom Shell Forming Limit Diagram

Manufacturability Steel fuel tank must be manufacturable using standard equipment.

Manufacturability The following slide shows the relevant Contour II design guidelines, as published by welding equipment manufacturer Soutec. Both the Volume-Maximizing tank and the Volume-Equivalent tank adhere to these guidelines.

Manufacturability

Manufacturability Andritz Soutec AG Contour II Fuel Tank Welding Machine

Fuel Capacity / Grade Venting Studies Steel fuel tank must meet or exceed fuel volume of existing plastic fuel tank.

Grade Venting Requirements Fuel Capacity / Grade Venting Studies When filled to capacity, the fuel tank assembly must be capable of venting when the vehicle is inclined up to 30% in the four primary orientations, and up to 27% in the four secondary orientations, accounting for thermal expansion of the fuel. The fuel tank capacity used shall be the Customer Fill Fuel Capacity plus an additional 4% for fuel expansion for grades less than or equal to 6%, and 2.2% for fuel expansion for grades greater than 6% up to 30%. The fuel tank assembly shall be designed to address either a failed FLVV or GVV with the vehicle on these grades.

Fuel Capacity / Grade Venting Studies Volume-Maximizing Steel Tank

Fuel Capacity / Grade Venting Studies: Volume-Maximizing Steel Tank FRONT UP 30% STANDARD GRADES REAR UP LEFT SIDE UP RIGHT SIDE UP

Fuel Capacity / Grade Venting Studies: Volume-Maximizing Steel Tank 27% COMPOUND GRADES 0 315 45 270 90 225 180 135

Fuel Capacity / Grade Venting Studies: Volume-Maximizing Steel Tank LEVEL

GRADE VENTING Fuel Capacity / Grade Venting Studies: Volume-Maximizing Steel Tank Orientation Grade Usable Volume* Vapor Space Limiting (%) (degrees) (gallons) (%) Factor 0 Front Up 30 16.7 19.9 7.4 GVV 45 Right Front Up 27 15.1 20.1 6.4 X-connector 90 Right Up 30 16.7 18.9 12.0 X-connector 135 Right Rear Up 27 15.1 19.9 7.2 X-connector & GVV 180 Rear Up 30 16.7 19.4 9.6 GVV 225 Left Rear Up 27 15.1 19.7 8.2 X-connector 270 Left Up 30 16.7 18.8 12.5 X-connector 315 Left Front Up 27 15.1 19.8 7.9 X-connector n/a Level 0 0 19.6 8.6 GVV FLVV Shutoff Height (maximum) 19.1 * Usable volume shown is net of a 0.5-gallon contingency (design safety factor) to account for the effect of unusable fuel. Usable volume shown accounts for 2.2% thermal expansion of fuel on non-zero grades. Usable volume shown accounts for 4.0% thermal expansion of fuel at level (zero grade).

Fuel Capacity / Grade Venting Studies: Volume-Maximizing Steel Tank Usable Fuel Volume (gallons) (liters) Volume-Maximizing Steel Tank 18.8 71.2 Production Plastic Tank* 16.5 62.5 Steel Tank Advantage 2.3 8.7 * Production plastic tank volume provided by General Motors Product Engineering. Advertised volume is 16.0 gallons (60.6 liters).

Fuel Capacity / Grade Venting Studies: Volume-Maximizing Steel Tank But what if the sub-side module were serviceable? If the steel tank sub-side module were serviceable, the steel tank usable volume would be reduced by only 0.87 gallons (3.3 L), resulting in a steel tank usable volume of 17.9 gallons (67.8 L), which is still 1.4 gallons (5.3 L) more useable fuel than the plastic tank capacity. Cut-out for serviceable sub-side module

Fuel Capacity / Grade Venting Studies Volume-Equivalent Steel Tank

Fuel Capacity / Grade Venting Studies: Volume-Equivalent Steel Tank FRONT UP 30% STANDARD GRADES REAR UP LEFT SIDE UP RIGHT SIDE UP

Fuel Capacity / Grade Venting Studies: Volume-Equivalent Steel Tank 27% COMPOUND GRADES 0 315 45 270 90 225 180 135

Fuel Capacity / Grade Venting Studies: Volume-Equivalent Steel Tank LEVEL

GRADE VENTING Fuel Capacity / Grade Venting Studies: Volume-Equivalent Steel Tank Orientation Grade Usable Volume* Vapor Space Limiting (%) (degrees) (gallons) (%) Factor 0 Front Up 30 16.7 17.5 8.0 GVV 45 Right Front Up 27 15.1 17.8 6.8 X-connector 90 Right Up 30 16.7 16.6 12.9 X-connector 135 Right Rear Up 27 15.1 17.5 8.0 X-connector & GVV 180 Rear Up 30 16.7 17.3 8.9 GVV 225 Left Rear Up 27 15.1 17.5 8.4 X-connector 270 Left Up 30 16.7 16.5 13.7 X-connector 315 Left Front Up 27 15.1 17.5 8.2 X-connector n/a Level 0 0 17.4 8.9 GVV FLVV Shutoff Height (maximum) 16.5 * Usable volume shown is net of a 0.5-gallon contingency (design safety factor) to account for the effect of unusable fuel. Usable volume shown accounts for 2.2% thermal expansion of fuel on non-zero grades. Usable volume shown accounts for 4.0% thermal expansion of fuel at level (zero grade).

Mass Steel fuel tank must have a mass that is equivalent to or less than the mass of existing plastic fuel tank.

Mass: Volume-Maximizing Steel Tank Mass (pounds) (kg) Plastic Fuel Tank 17.5 7.92 Heat Shield 1.1 0.50 Total Assembly, Plastic Fuel Tank 18.6 8.42 Mass (pounds) (kg) Steel Fuel Tank 16.9 7.66 Heat Shield 0.0 0.00 Total Assembly, Volume-Maximizing Steel Fuel Tank 16.9 7.66 Mass Savings with Steel Mass (pounds) (kg) 1.7 0.76 Despite the 2.3-gallon (8.7-liter) usable fuel advantage of the Volume-Maximizing steel tank, the mass of the steel tank is still 1.7 pounds (0.76 kg) less than the mass of the production plastic tank.

Mass: Volume-Maximizing Steel Tank Flangeless Alternative If a less conventional welding method were used which would eliminate the need for a weld flange, the mass impact of removing weld flange would be a further reduction of 1.1 lbs (0.5 kg), resulting in a total mass improvement of 2.8 lbs (1.26 kg) compared to the production plastic fuel tank: Top Shell = 3.64 kg (Δ = -0.26 kg) Bottom Shell = 3.52 kg (Δ = -0.24 kg) Total = 7.16 kg (Δ = -0.50 kg)

Mass: Volume-Equivalent Steel Tank Mass (pounds) (kg) Plastic Fuel Tank 17.5 7.92 Heat Shield 1.1 0.50 Total Assembly, Plastic Fuel Tank 18.6 8.42 Mass (pounds) (kg) Steel Fuel Tank 15.5 7.03 Heat Shield 0.0 0.00 Total Assembly, Volume-Maximizing Steel Fuel Tank 15.5 7.03 Mass Savings with Steel Mass (pounds) (kg) 3.1 1.39 In the case of the Volume-Equivalent steel tank, the mass benefit is even greater. This fully functional design saves 3.1 pounds (1.39 kg) compared to the production plastic tank.

Pressure / Vacuum Cyclic Fatigue Steel fuel tank must meet pressure / vacuum cycling durability requirements for an atmospheric system: 12,000 PV cycles + 50% safety factor Pressure: 14.9 kpa Vacuum: 7.0 kpa

Pressure / Vacuum Cyclic Fatigue Volume-Maximizing Steel Tank

Pressure / Vacuum Cyclic Fatigue: Volume-Maximizing Steel Tank

Pressure / Vacuum Cyclic Fatigue: Volume-Maximizing Steel Tank Loading Details Load Optistruct Equation Location Hydro 7.23213e-6*(898-z) All elements below Z height of 898 mm Positive Pressure 14.9 kpa All internal elements Negative Pressure 7 kpa All internal elements Pre-load Z=3 mm Strap ends

Pressure / Vacuum Cyclic Fatigue: Volume-Maximizing Steel Tank Material Properties Shell Top Bottom Name EDDS EDDS Young s Modulus 210,000 MPa 210,000 MPa Yield 152 MPa 152 MPa UTS 306 MPa 306 MPa Optistruct Fatigue Parameters Sf' 607 607 b -0.116-0.116 c -0.437-0.437 Ef' 0.125 0.125 n' 0.234 0.234 K' 832.0 832.0 Nc 2.0E+08 2.0E+08

Pressure / Vacuum Cyclic Fatigue: Volume-Maximizing Steel Tank Shell Fatigue Life (cycles) Top 17,975 Bottom 19,382

Pressure / Vacuum Cyclic Fatigue: Volume-Maximizing Steel Tank Fatigue - Top

Pressure / Vacuum Cyclic Fatigue: Volume-Maximizing Steel Tank Fatigue - Top

Pressure / Vacuum Cyclic Fatigue: Volume-Maximizing Steel Tank Fatigue - Bottom

Pressure / Vacuum Cyclic Fatigue: Volume-Maximizing Steel Tank Fatigue - Bottom

Pressure / Vacuum Cyclic Fatigue: Volume-Maximizing Steel Tank Displacement (+14.9 kpa)

Pressure / Vacuum Cyclic Fatigue: Volume-Maximizing Steel Tank Displacement (-7 kpa)

Pressure / Vacuum Cyclic Fatigue: Volume-Maximizing Steel Tank Stress - Top Shell (+14.9 kpa)

Pressure / Vacuum Cyclic Fatigue: Volume-Maximizing Steel Tank Stress - Bottom Shell (+14.9 kpa)

Pressure / Vacuum Cyclic Fatigue: Volume-Maximizing Steel Tank Stress - Top Shell (-7 kpa)

Pressure / Vacuum Cyclic Fatigue: Volume-Maximizing Steel Tank Stress - Bottom Shell (-7 kpa)

Pressure / Vacuum Cyclic Fatigue Volume-Equivalent Steel Tank

Pressure / Vacuum Cyclic Fatigue: Volume-Equivalent Steel Tank PRT-00001567/AA.036

Pressure / Vacuum Cyclic Fatigue: Volume-Equivalent Steel Tank Loading Details Load Optistruct Equation Location Hydro 7.23213e-6*(898-z) All elements below Z height of 898 mm Positive Pressure 14.9 kpa All internal elements Negative Pressure 7 kpa All internal elements Pre-load Z=3 mm Strap ends

Pressure / Vacuum Cyclic Fatigue: Volume-Equivalent Steel Tank Material Properties Shell Top Bottom Name EDDS EDDS Young s Modulus 210 000 MPa 210 000 MPa Yield 150 MPa 150 MPa UTS 270 MPa 270 MPa Optistruct Fatigue Parameters Sf' 405 405 b -0.087-0.087 c -0.58-0.58 Ef' 0.59 0.59 n' 0.15 0.15 K' 445 445 Nc 2.0E+08 2.0E+08

Pressure / Vacuum Cyclic Fatigue: Volume-Equivalent Steel Tank Shell Fatigue Life (cycles) Top 36,285 Bottom 20,453

Pressure / Vacuum Cyclic Fatigue: Volume-Equivalent Steel Tank Fatigue - Top

Pressure / Vacuum Cyclic Fatigue: Volume-Equivalent Steel Tank Fatigue - Top

Pressure / Vacuum Cyclic Fatigue: Volume-Equivalent Steel Tank Fatigue - Bottom

Pressure / Vacuum Cyclic Fatigue: Volume-Equivalent Steel Tank Fatigue - Bottom

Pressure / Vacuum Cyclic Fatigue: Volume-Equivalent Steel Tank Displacement (+14.9 kpa)

Pressure / Vacuum Cyclic Fatigue: Volume-Equivalent Steel Tank Displacement (-7 kpa)

Pressure / Vacuum Cyclic Fatigue: Volume-Equivalent Steel Tank Stress - Top Shell (+14.9 kpa)

Pressure / Vacuum Cyclic Fatigue: Volume-Equivalent Steel Tank Stress - Bottom Shell (+14.9 kpa)

Pressure / Vacuum Cyclic Fatigue: Volume-Equivalent Steel Tank Stress - Top Shell (-7 kpa)

Pressure / Vacuum Cyclic Fatigue: Volume-Equivalent Steel Tank Stress - Bottom Shell (-7 kpa)

Summary: Conclusions Two different steel fuel tanks a volume-maximizing tank and a volumeequivalent tank have been designed to fit the existing 2013 Cadillac ATS package space, while maintaining appropriate clearances. These steel fuel tanks are both formable using commercially available steel grades. are both manufacturable using standard equipment. have a usable fuel volume that exceeds the usable fuel volume of the existing plastic fuel tank by up to 8.7 L (2.3 gallons). are as much as 1.39 kg (3.06 lbs) lighter than the existing plastic fuel tank, not including the additional mass avoidance with the flangeless alternative. both meet the fuel tank pressure / vacuum cycling durability requirements specified for an atmospheric system, including a 50% safety factor.

Summary: Additional Opportunities The results presented here are a work-in-progress. It is possible to continue to improve the 2013 Cadillac ATS steel fuel tank designs with the following goals: Achieve nominal gauge of 0.6 mm through further topography optimization. Design slosh baffles that are also structural, thereby allowing a further reduction in shell gauge. Further reduce mass through the use of alternative steels such as advanced high strength steels or stainless steels.

For More Information Visit: www.autosteel.org Rich Cover Program Manager, SASFT +1 (248) 762-7732 rcover@steel.org @SMDISteel Eric Neuwirth Spectra Premium Industries +1 (248) 207-5509 NeuwirthE@spectrapremium.com www.facebook.com/smdisteel

PRESENTATIONS WILL BE AVAILABLE MAY 3 Use your web-enabled device to download the presentations from today s event Great Designs in Steel is Sponsored by: