Sie sind auf Seite 1von 35

ICME 3GAHSS: DESIGN & CAE OPTIMIZATION OF

LIGHTWEIGHT VEHICLE ASSEMBLY


Eric McCarty Harry Singh
Auto/Steel Partnership EDAG, Inc.

GDIS2017
Highlights
INTEGRATED COMPUTATIONAL MATERIALS
ENGINEERING APPROACH TO DEVELOPMENT OF
LIGHTWEIGHT 3GAHSS VEHICLE ASSEMBLY
• Principal Investigator: Dr. Lou Hector Jr. (GM)
• 4+ Year Project - Feb. 1, 2013 – Mar. 31, 2017
• $8.5 Million - $6M DOE, $2.5M Cost Share
• Participants: - 5 universities - 1 national laboratory
- 3 steel companies - 3 automotive OEMs
- 2 engineering firms
2 #GDIS | #SteelMatters
Participants

Universities / National Labs Industry Consortiums


Brown University FCA US LLC Auto/Steel Partnership
Clemson University Ford Motor Company United States Automotive Materials Partnership
Colorado School of Mines General Motors Company
Pacific Northwest National Lab ArcelorMittal
Ohio State University AK Steel Corporation
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Nucor Steel Corporation
EDAG
LSTC

3 #GDIS | #SteelMatters
Steel Strength Ductility Diagram
• Two 3GAHSS steels were developed for model validation and design optimization.

Steel YS (MPa) UTS (MPa) Total Elongation


High Strength, Exceptional Ductility 750 1,200 37%
Exceptional Strength, High Ductility 1,218 1,538 20%

4 #GDIS | #SteelMatters
3GAHSS
• The two 3GAHSS alloys were used for:
Material Model Validation Forming Model Validation Design Optimization
1600

1400
Engineering stress (MPa)

1200

1000

800

600 Exp. (Uniaxial tension)


UTS (Exp.)
400 RVE1 (: 57.4%, ': 25.1%, : 17.5%)
UTS (RVE1)

200

0
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20

Engineering strain

Phase distribution

Body Side Assembly (LH &


RH) 46 Stampings
Tempered martensite (57.4 %)
Untempered martensite (25.1 %)
Austenite (17.5 %)

5 #GDIS | #SteelMatters
Task 5 – Program Requirement
Baseline Assembly
Applicants shall establish a baseline vehicle assembly for comparison. The baseline
vehicle assembly description shall include the assembly description, its materials of
construction, and weight. Baseline vehicle components shall have been available on
a similarly configured 2006 or later commercially available Light Duty production
vehicle. Light Duty vehicles include any of the following automobiles: passenger
vehicles, light duty trucks, sport utility vehicles, or passenger vans.
Weight Cost per Pound of
Vehicle Additional
System Definition (1) Reduction Weight Saved ($/lb
System Requirements
Target (2) saved) (2)
Body-in-White, Closures, Replacement
Body Windows, Fenders, & Bumpers ≥35% ≤$3.18/lb Technology must
achieve Function and
Suspension, Steering, Wheels, & Packaging
Underbody Structural Requirements of
Chassis ≥25% ≤$3.11/lb Technology to be
Components
Replaced
(2)
Note : When compared to a 2006 or Later Production Light Duty Vehicle Technologies.
6 #GDIS | #SteelMatters
EDAG - Statement of Work
Establish Baseline Assemblies:
1. Select Assemblies
2. Load Cases and Performance Targets (Stiffness, Normal Modes, Crashworthiness)
3. Prepare Detailed FEA Models
4. Cost Model

Design 3GAHSS Assemblies:


1. Design CAD Data
2. Integrate 3GAHSS Assemblies into body structure CAD models
3. Prepare Detailed FEA Models of body structure (LS-DYNA, NASTRAN)
4. Assess Performance and Optimize Design, using 3G (gauge grade and geometry)
optimization, taking advantage of increased formability of 3GAHSS
5. Cost Model
6. Final Report
7 #GDIS | #SteelMatters
Baseline Vehicle & Assembly Body-side
1. Chosen Body Structure: 2008 Mid Size
sedan, CAD data provided by GM
2. Several important joints and major load
paths (important for stiffness and crash load
cases)
3. LWB One Piece Body side inner
4. Several reinforcements in joints and
members
5. LH & RH Body Side Assemblies – Mass
approx 100 kg (30% of BIW)

8 #GDIS | #SteelMatters
LSDYNA Model for Crash Performance
No Sub System Structure
Mass (kg) Subsystem
1 BIW 331.6 represented as
2 Glass 26.2
3 BIW Adhesives 5.0 nodal masses
4 Door Front Left 28.7 (purple spots) ,
5 Door Front Right 28.7
6 Door Rear Left 26.1
constraint with
7 Door Rear Right 26.1 interpolation
8 Rear Suspension 129.7 constraints (blue
9 Front Suspension 157.8
10 Powertrain 296.1 webs)
11 Steering Column 22.3
12 IP Beam 42.8
13 Front Seat Left 25.0
14 Front Seat Right 23.2
15 Hood 16.2
16 Deck Lid 20.0
17 Fuel tank 74.2
18 Radiator 37.9
19 Rear Bumper/Fascia 17.8
20 Rear Seat System 21.0 Vehicle COG
21 Occupants 140.0 X 2827.7
22 Paint / Latches / Trims /Fenders 93.4
TOTAL 1589.8
Y 20.4
Z 514.5
Crash Model System Masses
11 #GDIS | #SteelMatters
LSDYNA – Modeling Considerations
For crash load cases, initial velocities are reduced so that the new internal energy is 70% of the total internal
energy using standard regulation velocities. This is because the model is for a BIW only (i.e., not a full vehicle
system model). The 30% energy reduction is a judgment based on experience with prior projects.

For the ICME study other sub-systems are represented by


lumped mass only (i.e., sub-system structures are NOT
Typical Crash System Model.
included in the CAE model). The speed is LOWERED to
All subsystems represented
reduce the crash energy to achieve body structure intrusions
Pole Impact Speed 20mph of similar magnitude of typical Mid-Size Sedan vehicle
Pole Impact Speed 16.7mph
12 #GDIS | #SteelMatters
FMVSS214 – Pole Impact

Target numbers:
• B-Pillar Velocity & Intrusion
20 mph 16.7 mph • Roof Rail / Rocker Intrusion at Impact

-30%

13 #GDIS | #SteelMatters
Baseline Performance Results set as Targets
CAE Load Cases

1. Side Barrier
2. Side Pole
3. Front Impact
4. Rear Impact
5. Roof Crush

1. Body Static Stiffness (Torsion /


Bending)
2. Body Normal Vibration Modes

14 #GDIS | #SteelMatters
Body Side Assembly – design iter-3
̶ Max. mass saving while meeting crash performance, by
Rocker Front Joint:
substituting 3GAHSS properties
̶ Min. gauge assumed 0.6 mm Four Stamped Parts

Body inner – two


thickness Laser
Welded Blank

Rocker Rear Joint:


Two Stamped Parts

15 #GDIS | #SteelMatters
Body Side Assembly – design iter-6
̶ Increase joint stiffness by removal of panel joints
̶ Take advantage of increased formability of 3GAHSS
Rocker Front Joint:
Replace 4 parts with 2
Laser Welded Blank
Stampings

Rocker Rear Joint:


Improved joint – iter-4
Replace 2 Parts with a
Single Laser Welded Rocker Front Joint:
LWB – iter-6
Blank Stamping Improved joint – iter-5
16 #GDIS | #SteelMatters
Iter-3 and Iter-6 Performance
Design Iteration #3 (Gauge
Reduction)
̶ Max. mass saving while meeting crash
performance, by substituting 3GAHSS
properties
̶ Min. gauge assumed 0.6 mm

Design Iteration #6 (Combined


parts)
̶ Rocker inner combined parts to increase
joint stiffness

17 #GDIS | #SteelMatters
LSOPT Setup for iter-7

Gauge optimization of all parts in


side assembly, sensitivity analysis
18 #GDIS | #SteelMatters
Change in Stiffness per Kg change in Mass

19 #GDIS | #SteelMatters
LS-OPT Setup for iter-8 (from iter-7)

Geometry optimization
20 #GDIS | #SteelMatters
Geometry Optimization Setup
• Focusing on 4 areas
− B-Pillar Reinforcement
− A-Pillar Reinforcement
− Inner Rocker
− Outer Rocker
• Will not change outer styling or
reduce packaging space

21 #GDIS | #SteelMatters
Results for iter-9
Iter-9 results –
1. Meet all performance targets
2. Further mass saving limited by
stiffness
3. Superior crash performance due
to higher strength of 3GAHSS

23 #GDIS | #SteelMatters
Final 3G Optimization - NREL
• Objective
− Mass Optimization
• Constraint
− Baseline crash and NVH targets
• Variables
− 62 Morphing points , 32 Thickness
variables, 32 Material Variables
• Job time estimate for EDAG cluster (480 CPU)
− 4.2 month @ 100% cluster utilization for
15 iterations, 189 designs per load-
case 19,845 runs for 15 iterations
• Software used
− LSOPT, LSDYNA -ICME (Explicit and
Implicit)
− Beta - ANSA ; www.ansa-usa.com

24 #GDIS | #SteelMatters
NREL HPC Setup

• CAE 3G Optimization required several ‘scripts’ for


running on the HPC – Peregrine, to transport data
between EDAG & HPC
• Proposed number of cores based on wall clock time
• Option 3 was approved to run on Peregrine HSC at
https://www.nrel.gov/esif/labs-hpc.html
NREL

25 #GDIS | #SteelMatters
Optimization Variable Setup for 3G Optimization
• 64 parts total
• Thickness
• Min = 0.55mm
• Max = 2.0mm
• Material*
• 10% Mn Steel
• 3% Mn Steel
• Geometry
• Rocker
• B-Pillar
• A-Pillar

26 #GDIS | #SteelMatters
Optimization Performance
333

330
Body side assembly
mass
BIW Mass (kg)

327

324
67.5 kg – optimized mass
321

318 70.8 kg – iter9 (LSOPT


baseline)
315
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Cycle #

29 #GDIS | #SteelMatters
Final Optimized Model
Final Model –

1. Design update based on


CAE optimization results,
2. MAT24 replaced with
ICME User Defined
3. Single step forming
4. Manual gauge adjustment
to increase mass saving

30 #GDIS | #SteelMatters
Rocker Profile Animation

Baseline
Optimized Top View

31 #GDIS | #SteelMatters
Process Driven - Technical Cost Modeling
 What it is:
— An objective way to compare technologies, designs or manufacturing methods
— An analysis of manufacturing, equipment, tooling, labor, material, and energy costs
— A process to identify cost drivers
— A method to integrate piece cost, tooling cost and capital investment.
 What it isn’t:
— A precise method to obtain commercial price
— A business case
— An analysis of non-manufacturing overhead, such as prototype costs, logistics,
engineering and development costs
 ICME Project Specific Assumption
The cost estimates used are not specific to any OEM and are based on industry
estimates. Specific OEMs will have varying estimates that include (but not limited to)
manufacturing flexibility, safety safe-guards, regional impacts, and vehicle variant
manufacturing strategy etc.

34 #GDIS | #SteelMatters
Baseline - Body Side Assembly LH Sequence

Body Side Asm LH

Assembly layout used to determine assembly


costs based on:
• Number of assembly stations
• Number of spot welding robots
• Complexity of assembly station
• Assembly cycle time
• Foot print of assembly station
• Labor requirements per assembly station

35 #GDIS | #SteelMatters
3GAHSS Cost Estimate per kg
Tubes
Tailor Multiwall
Ref Straight
Thickness (mm) Grade HDG Visible Rolled Tube Tool Line Reject
Material as
Item # Steel Grade Coil Blank Investmt Rate Rate
Price shipped
Factor Factor Factor
($/kg) Premium Premium Premium Premium Premium Premium
Min t Max t
($/kg) ($/kg) ($/kg) ($/kg) ($/kg) ($/kg)

Reference: Cold Rolled Mild 140/270


US Spot Midwest Market Price (Avg 2010-2014) (Source:
Platts. www.platts.com)

1 Mild 140/270 0.35 4.60 0.82 0.00 0.06 0.05 0.55 0.25 0.65 1.0 1.0 1.0
2 BH 210/340 0.45 3.40 0.05 0.06 0.10 0.55 0.25 0.65 1.05 0.95 1.05
3 BH 260/370 0.45 2.80 0.05 0.06 0.10 0.55 0.25 0.65 1.05 0.95 1.05
4 BH 280/400 0.45 2.80 0.07 0.06 0.10 0.55 0.30 1.10 1.05 0.95 1.05
5 IF 260/410 0.40 2.30 0.07 0.00 0.10 0.55 0.30 0.70 1.05 0.95 1.05
6 IF 300/420 0.50 2.50 0.10 0.00 0.10 0.55 0.30 1.10 1.05 0.95 1.05
7 HSLA 350/450 0.50 5.00 0.12 0.10 NA 0.55 0.30 1.50 1.05 0.95 1.05
8 HSLA 420/500 0.60 5.00 0.14 0.10 NA 0.55 0.45 1.25 1.10 0.90 1.10
9 HSLA 490/600 0.60 5.00 0.16 0.10 NA 0.55 0.45 1.65 1.10 0.90 1.10
10 HSLA 550/650 0.60 5.00 0.35 0.10 NA 0.55 0.45 1.65 1.10 0.90 1.10
11 HSLA 700/780 2.00 5.00 - - - - - - - - -
12 SF 570/640 2.90 5.00 0.35 0.10 NA NA 0.45 2.05 1.10 0.90 1.10
13 SF 600/780 2.00 5.00 0.35 0.10 NA NA 0.45 2.05 1.10 0.90 1.10
14 TRIP 350/600 0.60 4.00 0.40 0.10 NA NA 0.45 1.25 1.10 0.90 1.10
15 TRIP 400/700 0.60 4.00 0.45 0.10 NA NA 0.45 1.65 1.10 0.90 1.10
16 TRIP 450/800 0.60 2.20 0.50 0.10 NA NA 0.50 1.30 1.15 0.85 1.15
17 TRIP 600/980 0.90 2.00 0.55 0.10 NA NA 0.55 1.35 1.15 0.85 1.15
18 FB 330/450 1.60 5.00 0.20 0.10 NA 0.55 0.30 1.10 1.05 0.95 1.05
19 FB 450/600 1.40 6.00 0.25 0.10 NA 0.55 0.45 1.65 1.10 0.90 1.10
20 DP 300/500 0.50 2.50 0.20 0.10 0.10 0.55 0.45 0.85 1.10 0.90 1.10
21 DP 350/600 0.60 5.00 0.26 0.10 0.10 0.55 0.45 1.25 1.10 0.90 1.10
22 DP 500/800 0.60 4.00 0.31 0.10 NA 0.55 0.50 0.90 1.15 0.85 1.15
23 DP 700/1000 0.60 2.30 0.38 0.10 NA NA 0.55 0.95 1.15 0.85 1.15
24 DP 800/1180 1.00 2.00 - - - - - - - - -
25 DP 1150/1270 0.60 2.00 0.38 0.10 NA NA 0.55 0.95 1.15 0.85 1.15
26 CP 500/800 0.80 4.00 0.31 0.10 NA NA 0.50 1.30 1.15 0.85 1.15

The average cost over 5 years (2010-2014) per kg of 27


28
29
CP 600/900
CP 750/900
CP 800/1000
1.00
1.60
0.80
4.00
4.00
3.00
0.35
0.40
0.45
0.10
0.10
0.10
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.52
0.52
0.55
1.32
1.32
1.35
1.15
1.15
1.15
0.85
0.85
0.85
1.15
1.15
1.15

steel used in the cost model for cold rolled (CR) mild 30
31
CP 1000/1200
CP 1050/1470
0.80
1.00
2.30
2.00
0.47
0.47
0.10
0.10
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.60
0.60
1.40
1.80
1.20
1.20
0.80
0.80
1.20
1.20
32 MS 950/1200 0.50 3.20 0.47 NA NA NA 0.60 1.00 1.20 0.80 1.20

steel for the US market, published by PLATTS 33


34
MS 1150/1400
TWIP 500/980
0.50
0.80
2.00
2.00
0.48
1.20
NA
0.10
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.60
0.60
1.40
1.80
1.20
1.20
0.80
0.80
1.20
1.20
35 MS 1250/1500 0.50 2.00 0.51 0.10 NA NA 0.65 1.05 1.20 0.80 1.20

(www.platts.com). 36
37
HF 1050/1500 (22MnB5)
10Mn 980
0.60
0.60
4.50
3.00
0.75
0.65
NA
0.10
NA 0.55 0.65
0.60
1.05 1.20
1.20
0.80
0.80
1.20
1.20
38 3Mn 1500 0.60 3.00 0.53 0.10 0.60 1.20 0.80 1.20

36 #GDIS | #SteelMatters
3GAHSS Cost Estimate per kg
UTS Delta
Premium Steel Grade
MPa ($/kg)
TRIP Cost
$0.70
Delta cost TRIP 350/600 600 $ 0.40
$0.60
TRIP 400/700 700 $ 0.45
estimate for: TRIP 450/800 800 $ 0.50
$0.50
$0.40
TRIP 600/980 980 $ 0.55
$0.30
TRIP X/1200 1200 $ 0.65 400 600 800 1000 1200
10Mn - $0.65/kg
UTS Delta
Steel Grade
MPa ($/kg) Complex Phase Cost
CP 500/800 600 $ 0.31 $0.55
CP 600/900 700 $ 0.35 $0.50
CP 750/900 800 $ 0.40 $0.45
CP 800/1000 980 $ 0.45 $0.40
CP 1000/1200 1200 $ 0.47 $0.35
CP 1050/1470 1470 $ 0.47 $0.30
3Mn - $0.53/kg CP 1500 1500 $ 0.53 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400

37 #GDIS | #SteelMatters
Accomplishments
• Baseline Design: 94.6 kg. $1.26/lb
• 3GAHSS Design: 66.7 kg.
• Mass savings: 27.9 Kg. (-30%)
• Parts reduced from 46 to 28
• Cost increase $ 20.90 $0.32/lb

• Cost per Pound of Weight Saved


$0.32 / lb ($0.70 / kg)
Weight Cost per Pound of
Vehicle System System Definition (1) Reduction Weight Saved ($/lb Additional Requirements
Target (2) saved) (2)
Body-in-White, Closures, Windows,
Body Fenders, & Bumpers ≥35% ≤$3.18/lb Replacement Technology
must achieve Function and
Suspension, Steering, Wheels, & Packaging Requirements of
Chassis Underbody Structural Components ≥25% ≤$3.11/lb Technology to be Replaced
Note (2): When compared to a 2006 or Later Production Light Duty Vehicle Technologies.

38 #GDIS | #SteelMatters
Future (2025) Class Average Weights
EDAG Mass Saving Estimates

2015 Ford F-
150

Approximate Fuel
saving due to
Lightweighting
10%
39 #GDIS | #SteelMatters
Future (2025) Class Average Weights
EDAG Mass Saving Estimates

Further development and availability of 3GAHSS will provide an


excellent economic path forward for meeting these goals
2015 Ford F-
150

Approximate Fuel
saving due to
Lightweighting
10%
40 #GDIS | #SteelMatters
Thank you
The material in this presentation was possible with a lot of good feed back
from all participants

Universities / National Labs Industry Consortiums


Brown University FCA US LLC Auto/Steel Partnership
Clemson University Ford Motor Company United States Automotive Materials Partnership
Colorado School of Mines General Motors Company
Pacific Northwest National Lab ArcelorMittal
Ohio State University AK Steel Corporation
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Nucor Steel Corporation
EDAG
LSTC

41 #GDIS | #SteelMatters
Questions?
Harry Singh
Director Lightweighting
1 (248) 635-3174
harry.singh@edag-us.com

Eric McCarty
Auto/Steel Partnership
1 (248) 520 3009
emccarty@steel.org

Visit EDAG’s web site for more information:


http://www.edag.de/en/edag/stories/cocoon.html 3D Printed EDAG LIGHT COCOON
42 #GDIS | #SteelMatters