### Nic Lutsey El Monte, California May 18th 

### , 2010 

# Survey of vehicle mass - reduction technology trends and prospects

# Outline

• Introduction: CO2 

# reduction technologies • Vehicle mass -reduction technology

– Mass - reduction techniques • Background, advanced materials, components, designs



## – Potential for future designs • Prototypes, concepts 

# • Objective

– Highlight emerging mass - reduction technology trends

– Examine the technology potential for the 2025 timeframe 2

This a presentation based on the following report: Lutsey, N., 2010. Review of technical literature and trends related to automobile mass - reduction technology

. Institute of Transportation Studies, University of California, Davis, UCD - ITS - RR - 10 - 10. http://pubs.its.ucdavis.edu/publication_detail.php?id=1390CO 2 − equivalent emissions ( g / mi )      

    = CO 2 + N 2 O + CH4 − MAC allowance 

# Vehicle GHG emissions Carbon dioxide 

# (CO 2 

# )

CO 2 HFC A/C compressor Engine Transmission Nitrous Oxide Black carbon Methane



### 3* Many technologies can be combined, but percents are not strictly additive; Estimations are based on primarily on US EPA/NHTSA, 2010 ; # From US EPA, 2009 “ Trends ” report 

# GHG - Reduction Technologies

4 Area Technology or mechanism for CO 2 reduction Potential CO 2 reduction * U.S. adoption in

2008 fleet # Variable valve timing or lift 2 - 8% 53% Cylinder deactivation 3 - 6% 6% Turbocharging 2 - 5% 2% Engine Gasoline direct injection 8 - 15% 4% Compression ignition diesel 15 - 40% 0.1% Powertrain Digital valve actuation 5 - 10% 0% Homogeneous charge compress. ignition 15 - 20% 0% 6+ speed 3 - 5% 21% Transmission Continuously variable 4 - 6% 8% Dual - clutch, automated manual 4 - 8% 1% Aerodynamics 5 - 8% - Tire rolling resistance 2 - 8% - More efficient auxiliaries (steering, air conditioning) 2 - 10% - Vehicle Mass- reduction Advanced material component 5- 10% - Integrated vehicle design 10- 20% - Hybrid systems Stop- start mild hybrid 5- 10% <1%

Full hybrid electric system 20 - 50% 2% Electric - drive Plug

- in capable electric vehicles 30 - 75% 0% Fuel cell vehicles 30 - 75% 0% Critical nearer term CO 2 reduction technologies Critical medium and long- term CO 2 reduction technologies 

## • There are many promising CO 2

## - reduction technologies for vehicles • Vehicle design and electric- drive technologies could be increasingly criticalApproximately based on U.S. city and highway drive cycles ( Kromer and Heywood, 2008) ; in addition to inertial mass and rolling resistance hill - climbing is also directly linked to vehicle mass, percent vehicl e energy use and loss vary greatly according to vehicle technology and drive cycle. 

# Background: Mass and CO 2 

# emissions

5 

# • Vehicle mass is fundamental part of vehicle CO 2 

# emissions

– Efficiency is the ability of a powertrain to convert energy into vehicle propulsion

– The ultimate vehicle “ road load ” is tied directly to the vehicle mass

– Reduction in mass ‡ reduction in required energy ‡ reduction in CO 2 

### emissions 

# CO 2Sources: Casadei and Broda, 2008; Bandivadekar et al, 2008; FKA, 2007; Pagerit , et al, 2006. Effects differ by drive cycle (greater effect in city/urban, lesser effe ct in highway conditions) 

# Background: Mass and CO 2 

# emissions

6 

# • Mass has a large effect on vehicle CO 2 

# emissions

– With vehicle mass- reduction technology, CO 2 

### emissions are decreased due to reduced vehicle road loads (i.e., inertial acceleration, rolling resistance, grade)

– For constant performance, 20% mass - reduction ‡ ~12 - 16% CO 2 

### /mi decreaseAmong the distinguishing underlying factors on relative vehicle weight are the use of advanced materials (e.g., high

-strength steels, aluminum) and mass - optimized designs 

# Use of Mass - Reduction Technology

7 

## • Today ’ s vehicles use different amounts of mass - reduction technology

– For a given size and functionality, some models are heavy (by over 40%)

– Models with more mass -reduction technology can by 20 - 25% lighter (for a given size)

– Some automakers use far more mass - reduction technology across all their models

# Mass - Reduction: Automaker Plans

• Major efforts to reduce vehicle mass are underway

8 Company Quote, statement, or commitment Ford • From 2011 to 2020: “ Full implementation of known technology ... weight reduction of 250 -750 lbs ”

• “ The use of advanced materials such as magnesium, aluminum and ultra high -strength boron steel offers automakers structural strength at a reduced weight to help improve fuel economy and meet safety and durability requirements Toyota • 10 -30% weight reduction for small to mid -size vehicles Volkswagen • “ Automotive light weight solutions are necessary more than ever to reduce CO2 emissions ”

• “ Multi- Material Concepts promise cost effective light weight solutions ” GM • “ We ... are likely to use more lightweight materials in the future ”

• “ One trend is clear - vehicles will consist of a more balanced use of many materials in the future, incorporating more lightweight materials such as nanocomposites and aluminum and magnesium. ” Mazda • Reduce each model by 220 lb by 2015 ; another 220 lb by 2020 Nissan • Average 15% weight reduction by 2015

• “ We are ... expanding the use of aluminum and other lightweight materials , and reducing vehicle weight by rationalizing vehicle body structure BMW • “ Lightweight construction is a core aspect for sustainable mobility improving both fuel consumption

and CO2 emissions ” Renault • “ To meet commitments on CO2 emission levels, it is important that we stabilize vehicle weight as

from now, and then start bringing it down . ”Stahl, A., 2010. “ 2011 Porsche Cayenne breaks cover in Germany. ” http://www.insideline.com/porsche/cayenne/2011/2011 - porsche - cayenne -breaks - cover - ingermany.html. January 8. Accessed April 7. 

# Use of Mass - Reduction Technology

9 

# • One example: the 2011 Porsche Cayenne

– The model year 2011 offers a 10% weight reduction from mass- reduction technology

– 550- lb reduction (with 154 lb of added amenities) ‡ 396 lb net reduction

– And actually slightly larger size than 2010; also Porsche’ s first hybrid offering 

### Aluminum hood
Aluminum chassis components New door production process 

### Aluminum doors High - strength steel throughout body Aluminum tailgate High - strength steel chassis components Aluminum fenders Lighter all - wheel - drive system design Source:

# Vehicle Mass and Body Mass

10 

# • The vehicle body or “ body- in -white”

– Core structure and frame of the vehicle; roughly one- quarter of vehicle mass

– Fundamental to the core structure and integrity of the vehicle

– Often the critical part of the vehicle that is designed in mass- reduction concepts System Major components in system Body-in- white Passenger compartment frame, cross and side beams, roof

structure, front - end structure, underbody floor structure, panels 

### Powertrain Engine, transmission, exhaust system, fuel tank 

### Chassis Chassis, suspension, tires, wheels, steering, brakes 

### Interior Seats, instrument panel, insulation, trim, airbags 

### Closures Front and rear doors, hood, lift gate 

### Miscellaneous Electrical, lighting, thermal, windows, glazing

# Vehicle Body Mass Reduction

11 

## • Major reductions from production vehicles, prototypes, design concepts

– Many designs with 20%, 30%, 40%+ reduction of vehicle body mass

# Vehicle Mass Reduction: Strategies

12



### – Steel - intensive design

– 15 - 40% reduction

– Many OEMs, ThyssenKrupp, Porsche, Auto/Steel, EDAG, Ford, Lotus, VW



### – Aluminum - intensive design

– 30 - 45% reduction

– Audi, GM, Honda, Jaguar, Ford



### – Multi- material design

– 30 - 50% reduction

– VW/Superlight car, Lotus, DCX



### – Carbon - intensive design

– 40 - 60% reduction

– Dodge, RMI 

# • Major reductions from different approaches

# Vehicle Mass Reduction: Materials

13



### – From 1995 to 2007

– Magnesium: +100%

– Aluminum: +22%

– Plastics/composites: +25%

– High -strength steels: +45%



### – Lotus baseline to Low Development

– Magnesium: 3x

– High -strength steels: 1.6x



### – Lotus baseline to High Development

– Magnesium: 26x

– Aluminum: 2x

– Plastics/composites: +20% 

# • Material composition : a continuation of past trends

# Overall Vehicle Mass Reduction

14

– Lotus (2010) designs use some similar techniques, materials of t he PNGV (~2000) models

– Both show range of approaches with 20 -33%+ vehicle mass reduction

– But now many new low- cost techniques are proven in existing vehicles 

# • Materials and designs can offer promising vehicle mass reduction

Lotus, 2010. An Assessment of Mass Reduction Opportunities for a 2017 - 2020 Model Year Vehicle Program. March. Schexnaydor et al, 2001. Environmental Evaluation of New Generat ion Vehicles and Vehicle Components. Sources : Partnership for a New Generation Vehicles (PNGV) program Lotus Engineering (2010) mass - reduction study

# Mass - Reduction: Costs

• Some of the mass - reduction projects also estimate costs

15 Automaker Findings related to vehicle costs of mass - reduction technology Ford F150 “ IMPACT ” • 19% mass reduction at zero net cost • 25% mass reduction at $500 increase in variable vehicle cost ThyssenKrupp “ New Steel Body ” • 24% body mass reduction at 2% manufacturing cost increase IBIS aluminum • 40%+ body mass reduction for $500 -600 cost increase (aluminum body) • 17% vehicle mass reduction for $100 -200 vehicle cost increase Volkswagen - led “ Super Light Car ” • 22% body mass reduction “ multi- material, economic ” at <5 € /kg • 39% body mass reduction “ multi- material, advanced ” at <10 € /kg Lotus “ Low Development” • 20% vehicle mass decrease causes 2% decrease in cost (~$300/vehicle) Lotus “ High Development” • 33% vehicle mass decrease causes 3% increase in cost (~$500/vehicle) 

### – Near- term incremental approaches - up to 20% - have minimal costs

– More advanced technologies (~30% mass reduction) could have more substantial vehicle manufacturing cost increases.

# Mass - Reduction: Upstream CO 2

• Some materials have larger upstream energy and CO 2 

## impacts

16 

### – The vast majority of vehicle ’ s CO 2 

### emissions are due their use of energy during driving

– But manufacturing , end - of- life stages differ by material

– And more efficient vehicles put increased proportion of energy/CO2 

### impacts upstream



### – Materials, like aluminum and magnesium, are used on many mass - reduction designs and warrant further consideration of upstream impacts
WorldAutoSteel, 2007. http://www.worldautosteel.org/Environment/ Life - Cycle - Assessment/Automotive - Material.aspx Source:

# Mass - Reduction: Safety

• Issues of safety is commonly raised with mass - reduction

17 – From U.S. EPA and NHTSA: “ ... the likely deleterious safety effects of the MYs 2012 -2016 standards may be much lower than originally estimated. They may be close to zero, or possibly beneficial if mass reduction is carefully undertaken in the future ”



### – No known impacts from mass -reduced components (aluminum engine, carbon fiber roof, aluminum doors)

– Many of the above projects found no compromises .
– The recent studies (Lotus, Super Light Car, Future Steel Vehicle) continue to investigate structure, crashworthiness

– Many Five-

Star safety rated vehicles are no heavier for a given size than others

– Half of them have lower mass than industry average U.S. EPA and NHTSA. Final rule for MY2012 - 2016 CO2 and fuel economy standards. NHTSA 5 - star safety ratings (frontal, side driver, side rear), model yea r 2008 (www.safercar.gov) Sources :

# Conclusions

18



## – Mass - reduction technology is a core efficiency technology

– It has been, is being, and will continue to be deployed by autom akers


## – There is a variety of known approaches for mass - reduction

– High -strength steel, aluminum, multi - material designs will all be prominent

– Many off-the -shelf options for use of advanced materials, components

– Deploying best - in - class options for components throughout the vehicle

– Up to 20% mass reduction, minimal costs, near - term ~2015 availability



### – Many emerging concepts are available

– New manufacturing techniques, greater use of advanced designs

– Up to ~30- 35% mass reduction, additional costs, mid - term ~2020 availability


## – Areas for further study

– Full manufacturer costs, crashworthiness, upstream CO 2 

### impacts, manufacturing phase - in, inclusion with electric -drive technologies.

# Vehicle Mass Reduction: Conclusions

19



### – Lutsey, N., 2010. Review of technical literature and trends related to automobile mass -reduction technology . Institute of Transportation Studies, University of California, Davis. UCD- ITS- RR - 10 - 10. http://pubs.its.ucdavis.edu/publication_detail.php?id =1390 

# • Acknowledgement

– Study done under contract for California Air Resources Board 

# • See publication for documentation

# Mass - Reduction Technology (and what it is not )

20 

# • Vehicle mass -reduction technology is not “ downsizing ” + Mass-reduction technology : the redesign of vehicle models with advanced materials and designs for reduced mass (without compromise in vehicle space, utility) 

### – Downsizing: referred to generally as a shifts in the fleet toward smaller vehicles

# Hybrid Technology: GHG Reduction

• Hybrid vehicle models commercialized in U.S.

– Span vehicles: compacts, sedans, crossovers, large SUVs, pickups

– Average 33% CO2



### /mi reduction , 50% mpg increase vs. similar non - hybrids

– Hybrids also put an upward pressures on vehicle mass (~9%)

21