Loading ...Supplier involvement in the automaking process will foster a steady inflow of low cost, high quality parts. Automakers are using supplier input to improve and quicken materials development and to utilize suppliers’ technical resources. Materials that are expected to be affected by this relationship are high-performance steels, plastics, and aluminum.
Motor vehicle design teams chant the mantra “lighter, stiffer, recyclable, more durable” as they work with suppliers to develop the automotive materials of tomorrow. A lot of the automotive-materials work being done today sounds very futuristic, but it’s not just concept work that’s underway. In fact, most automotive supply teams already have such high-tech materials programs in process for 1998 and 1999 models.
Key to the success of such high-tech materials programs is early supplier involvement. Materials purchasing professionals constantly push for early and total supplier involvement in development projects to both speed materials development and to fully tap the extensive technical resources of materials suppliers. The challenge for suppliers is formidable: Develop new materials with advanced, “contradictory” performance specifications, at reasonable cost.
“Because we select suppliers earlier in the design phase than ever before, we now encourage all potential suppliers to make us aware of their products,” says Ronald Schuster, director of worldwide steel purchasing for General Motors Corp. “For suppliers, the benefit of working with advance vehicle design and purchasing teams is an opportunity to get business. The benefit for automakers is guaranteed future supply of higher-quality and lower-cost parts.”
Schuster of GM points out that early involvement by suppliers is important for automotive materials procurement specialists “to make sure that we know all the new products, technologies, and processes while the vehicle is being designed.” He says it is at this stage that suppliers can help remove cost from the system. “That’s where we can get the biggest bang for our buck.”
“On the commercial side, we are always looking for cost-reduction or cost-avoidance performance from suppliers,” says Mark Casey, purchasing manager for metallics at Ford Motor Co. “So, the continuous-improvement teams of design and materials engineers, buyers, and materials suppliers at the automotive-stamping plants and automotive-parts plants are working to eliminate inventories, reduce delivery leadtimes, and cut processing costs.” Many times these discussions have led to supply negotiations to test alternative or next-generation materials.
David O. Styka, senior corporate buyer of raw materials at Navistar International Transportation Corp., notes that raw material strategic-supplier relationships now include quality, competitive cost, supplier technology, cost take-out opportunities, just-in-time delivery, and technical support to manufacturing and engineering.
Better materials
Motor vehicles are made from a wide variety of materials: steel, iron, aluminum, plastics, glass, copper, powder metals, lead, zinc, magnesium, nickel, platinum, palladium, fabrics, and leather. According to various industry studies, the way these materials are being sourced today is not the way they will be in the future.
Market researchers tend to cluster steel, aluminum, magnesium, plastics, powder metals, and ceramics as “advanced automotive materials,” because these are (or may be) key production materials and because all of them are progressing in quality-improvement, weight-reduction, recycling-enhancement, and cost-reduction efforts. “The main competitive issue for suppliers of these materials will be their ability to meet the automakers’ demands on such issues as price, weight, recycling, quietness, and safety,” suggests automotive analyst Inge Matthey at the Frost & Sullivan market research organization.
In fact, automotive design and purchasing groups are looking for dramatic changes in supply from the top three tiers of suppliers, says Frost & Sullivan automotive analyst Joerg Dittmer. He explains that manufacturing engineers are investigating new technologies to improve materials preparation, intermediate processing and final assembly, and to reduce total costs. So, Dittmer continues, “materials engineers and buyers are investigating how to get suppliers more involved in materials selection, tooling, and assembly.”
Thus, the roles of the top three tiers will change dramatically, says a recent study by the A.T. Kearney & Co. consulting firm in conjunction with the University of Michigan’s Transportation Research Institute (UMTRI). The study forecasts that in less than a decade, tier-one suppliers will be systems integrators–engineering and providing modules or systems of parts and components to assemblers. The second tier will consist of direct suppliers–providing materials, parts, and components directly to assemblers, bypassing the tier-one firms. Tier-three suppliers will be indirect suppliers of parts to the tier-ones and twos.
“This redistribution of responsibilities will occur as the automakers shift materials and design engineering responsibilities to the tier-ones, who, in turn, will give tier-twos and threes much greater duties in design and development,” says David Cole, head of the Office for the Study of Automotive Transportation at UMTRI.
“We’re pretty excited about the way we already are working together internally and with our materials suppliers on next-generation vehicles,” says Casey of Ford. “We’ve got people from the various metals and plastics companies sitting side-by-side with our design and manufacturing engineers and purchasing personnel so they can help us optimize the efficiency, weight, and performance of the vehicles of the future.”
Casey adds that “the materials that walk off with the prize of expanded supply are going to be those whose suppliers will provide us with production and component materials that are best for the ultimate customer.” The reasoning is simple: “We are looking to source the materials of the future that will provide the automotive buyer with a better product, whether it’s a steel, aluminum, or plastic vehicle.” And, he adds, it doesn’t matter if the material comes from the producing mill, processing or distribution center, tier-one parts supplier, or tier-two or tier-three components provider.
Mitch Marecki, senior purchasing agent for raw materials at Chrysler Corp., points out that production-materials suppliers definitely have embraced early-supplier involvement efforts. “They’re all very aggressive, whether we’re talking about aluminum suppliers, steel suppliers, magnesium suppliers, or plastics and composites suppliers.” He says that “materials suppliers, as a group, have really got their thinking caps on, and they are aggressively working with engineers and buyers to present new ideas to enhance and expand the supply of their product in the future.”
Ford already is using programs called “material-utilization seminars,” where design and manufacturing engineers come up with ideas, bounce them off the commercial people for marketability, and bounce them off the purchasing people for availability. At this point, the suppliers and potential suppliers are involved to determine what it will take to make these materials available and economical. “It’s a combination of fresh ideas, and the people who make the materials are deeply involved right from the early discussion phases,” explains Casey. And it’s not happening just at Ford.
In fact, all of the automakers are involved in early-supplier programs that involve materials, either through the Auto/Steel Partnership, the new Auto/Aluminum Partnership, the Michigan Materials and Processing Institute’s polymer composites program, the Partnership for the New Generation of Vehicles (PNGV) program, or numerous other industry and academia-sponsored research efforts.
It’s estimated that as much as 70% of the total cost of an automotive material is driven by design. So, only 30% of potential cost savings can be achieved after all the parts and manufacturing equipment have been designed. According to Peter Beardmore, director of Ford’s Chemical and Physical Sciences Laboratory in Dear born, Mich., the “real challenge for alternate materials is affordability.” The Big Three automakers already are building concept cars to test various future powertrain, driveline, and materials concepts, and these test cars are loaded with substitute materials. “The key question isn’t whether these materials will be available,” says Beardmore, “but whether they’ll be affordable in 2004 and beyond.”
Buyer-supplier discussions on future materials also now include recycling, a factor that’s gained importance in recent years. Vehicles are regularly being designed with recycled materials. “Due to stricter government laws and growing consumer concerns, auto manufacturers are still searching for more recyclable materials,” says analyst Dittiner at Frost & Sullivan.
“To be easy to recycle, these materials must be relatively free of adhesives, coatings and paints, easy to disassemble for sorting, recyclable into other components, and recyclable many times,” Dittmer adds. Aluminum and steel are among the most recyclable materials because they can be recycled repeatedly without losing their properties.
Short-term benefits abound
Many of the new parts going into 1998 and 1999 motor vehicles have come about because of buyer-supplier discussions about improving existing materials or providing new materials for 2003 and 2004 models.
New generations of high-strength, high-performance steels are becoming more important in vehicle frames, while two-sided galvanized sheet is used for more of the body, new vibration-damping metal-plastic-metal sandwich composites are growing in use, and stainless steel exhaust systems now are in many new cars.
Despite all the research and development in alternative materials, steel remains the “material of choice” for the automakers. The industry still ships in excess of 18 million tons/year of iron and steel for motor vehicle parts and components.
“The steel industry is being driven to `lightweight’ the metal by competing materials,” acknowledges Pete Peterson, director of automotive marketing for U.S. Steel. He adds, however, that “while reducing weight of future cars is an important issue, so are cost, quality, safety, recyclability, and manufacturability. It’s the entire package of needs that iron and steel–materials familiar to automotive engineers and buyers–continue to address.”
According to purchasing exec, Casey, at Ford, “important recent trends relating to ferrous materials have been the improvement in product quality and service on the part of steel suppliers, particularly in the introduction of more flexible chemistries, flatter sheet, better coatings, effective just-in-time delivery systems, and reduced total costs.”
Looking ahead, early this year steelmakers will exhibit the first body-in-white under the global Ulsab (ultra light steel auto body) program. Ed Opbroek, program director for Ulsab, points out that through the combination of the design and application of high-strength steels and the latest state-of-the-art processes, “we’re getting a significant weight reduction and a cost savings at the same time. Also, we’re working to meet advanced safety criteria, more-stringent crash tests, and ultrahigh-performance for torsional and bending stiffness.”
Plastics are gaining
Polymers also are part of the advanced materials of the future, and about 3 billion lb/year already are used today. Plastics and composites have become increasingly popular materials; they comprise about 9% of a typical sedan’s body weight. There is widespread use in fenders, doors, and body panels of GM’s Saturn, the hood of the Taurus SHO, and the bed liner of the Ranger pickup truck. Late in 1999, Saturn will bring out an all new car that’s bigger than any of its existing models; it will feature a plastic-intensive body. And Chevrolet’s early-supplier-involvement program resulted in Ashland Chemical’s Specialty Polymers and Adhesives Division supplying both sheet molding compound (SMC) for the body panel material and the necessary adhesives for the new Corvette C5.
However, these large-volume uses are the exception rather than the rule. Plastics and composites still take only 250 lb of a typical 2,900-lb sedan. Suppliers have had more luck in replacing metals in parts such as leaf springs, fuel systems, engine components, and interior parts, according to materials-application research done by Adam C. Powell, a doctoral candidate at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He contends the replacements usually are centered around weight savings and fuel economy, although corrosion resistance is of importance in fuel systems and exterior panels, and design flexibility is the key to use in leaf springs.
Plastics indeed have drawbacks in that inexpensive plastics are considerably weaker than traditional materials, Powell says, and composites that are stronger are much more expensive. In addition, the mechanical properties of some plastics and composites make them difficult to use on existing tooling and assembly equipment. Slower-than-normal parts-molding rates associated with plastics pose a “big manufacturing challenge,” according to Bearmore of Ford.
However, Dave Hearn, manager of sales and technical services at Ashland Chemical’s polymers unit, says that “there are never-ending programs within the plastics industry to upgrade production materials, and there is the flexibility to design polymers for specific applications that will become more economical to produce once consumption levels are determined by the automakers.”
Sheet molding compound (SMC) plastics are a good example. Ashland now supplies Paccar with seven different sheet molded plastics for the truckmaker’s new composite-intensive truck cab. In fact, industry estimates suggest that 2.2 million lb of new SMC body panel and under-hood applications are being introduced in 1998 models. Dow Chemical is supplying an ABS resin for the molded consoles in the latest Ford Expedition and Lincoln Navigator models. DuPont has a PET (polyethylene terephthalate) grade used in the fenders of Chrysler LH vehicles and a glass-reinforced nylon 6,6 used to make air intake manifold valve covers for the Nissan Sentra. Atop that, Montell North America is providing a specially blended polypropylene for the bumper fascia on the 1998 Ford Windstar minivan.
Further ahead, GE Plastics is working on more advanced door module concepts with the automotive supply teams and some tier-one suppliers for motor vehicles to be built after 2000. John Madej, industry manager for inner door systems at GE Plastics, says the objective is to develop a completely modularized plastic door. The company also is working with the automakers to find tier-one suppliers willing to develop integrated air and fuel handling systems made from engineering resins. Robert Nelson, industry manager for instrument panels, says Project 2000 discussions involve the integration of such plastic parts as fuel rails, throttle bodies, air flow meters, air cleaners, connectors, and sensors with the air manifold.
Also note that plastics producers are working with Chrysler design and materials engineers on the CCV, the Concept Composite Vehicle. GE Plastics and others are providing the PET thermoplastics for the body panels, which are being bonded with adhesives from Eastman Chemical.
Then come the light metals
Aluminum suppliers continue to push for uses beyond wheels. Alcoa’s Automotive Structures International Div. worked with GM to provide reinforced floor panel extrusions for the EV1 electric vehicle, which is being covered with sheet stock from Alcan Aluminum. Several finns have provided die-cast aluminum alloys to replace cast iron and steel parts in engine blocks, undercarriage crossmembers, suspension system control arms, steering knuckles, and brake components.
Still, although more than 5 billion lb/year of aluminum are used in transportation, automotive uses lag behind aviation, aerospace, truck, trailer, and other segments of the transportation industry. The aluminum industry has been slow in developing an Auto/Aluminum Partnership to lobby for more se in exterior-exposed panels. Marketing efforts have been part-by-part on a supplier-by-supplier basis, unlike the steel industry’s “early supplier consortium” efforts.
Materials scientists and metallurgists at GM, Ford, and Chrysler say they would like to use more stamped aluminum sheet for exteriors. But as John Stiles, executive director for worldwide metallic purchasing at GM, puts it: “If the aluminum-sheet producers really want to be competitive with steel sheet, they will have to find ways to reduce their prices, and to reduce them substantially.” Automotive industry decision-makers remain unconvinced that the general buying public will pay more for cars and trucks with hoods, trunks, and body panels made from this lightweight material. Note that the transplants use less sheet aluminum in their vehicles on average than any of the Big Three.
Dr. Murray of the PNGV program notes that automotive grades of flat-rolled aluminum currently are priced four to five times higher than steel on a per-pound basis. “We may be charged $1.50 to $1.60 a pound for the aluminum we’re thinking about using, whereas the steel for the same application costs only 34 to 36 cents a pound,” Murray says. “We might be willing to continue paying the penalty to get the weight-reduction, corrosion-resistance and other advantages from using aluminum in specific parts such as a hood or deck lid on a car, but not for high-volume broad-scale applications of the kind traditionally served by steel.”
None of the transplant automakers surveyed plan to put aluminum hoods or deck lids on any of their vehicles in the foreseeable future. However, the Big Three will use aluminum sheet in some relatively high-priced 1999 models. Ford’s new Lincoln LS6 and LS8 sedans will have aluminum fenders, deck lids, and hoods. GM’s redesigned six-passenger Buick LeSabre and Pontiac Bonneville models–along with the new Oldsmobile Anthem–are expected to have aluminum hoods. And, the new Chrysler LHS cars are scheduled to use aluminum hoods.
While aluminum has sputtered somewhat, the slack in light metals has been picked up by magnesium, particularly in engine components, steering-column supports, and seat components where stiffness is important. This is because magnesium alloys are extremely light and very stiff. Most new automotive applications for magnesium have been as replacements for steel, iron, aluminum, and even some plastics. Now, Ford and General Motors materials-sourcing teams report they are working with die-castings suppliers to investigate the use of magnesium-based components for powertrains.
Right now, all transmission cases used in Ford’s cars, sports utility vehicles, vans, and pickup trucks are aluminum. Ford design and purchasing teams are looking at transmission extensions and clutch housings, engine oil pans, and other powertrain components as possible applications for magnesium casting alloys. High-volume production applications involving any of these powertrain components is unlikely for several years.
Meanwhile, GM is interested in using magnesium for more transmission and engine components. The largest automaker has done a substantial amount of research, development, and testing on such components in recent years to see how they perform under the higher temperatures and stresses associated with modem powertrains. GM also would like independent die casters to develop capabilities for making magnesium powertrain parts other than the usual valve covers, accessory mounting brackets, and oil filter adapters.
After months of discussions with key materials suppliers, General Motors has decided to apply “global enterprise pricing” to the iron, steel, aluminum, die-cast aluminum alloy, and powder metal components it buys. Curtis Harrison, purchasing director for GM’s Powertrain Group in Pontiac, Mich., says the global pricing policy could have a significant filter-down effect onto tier-two and tier-three suppliers as well. That’s because GM-Powertrain annually uses at least one million tons of iron parts; 180,000 tons of components forged and/or machined from steel; around 900 million lb of cast aluminum parts; and more than 130 million lb of powder metal compactions and forgings.
Under GM’s global enterprise pricing process, manufacturers of components used in the automaker’s engines, transmissions, and related subassemblies are asked to charge the same for parts made for GM’s use in one part of the world as they do in another. “No matter where the parts go, they should carry the same price,” Harrison says.
Interaction with tier-one suppliers during the policy’s development has been critical, he says, because the locations, metal volume needs, and delivery requirements of tier-one manufacturers play an important role in determining their metal suppliers. Also, when manufacturers find it difficult to make a profit on parts they sell to GM in certain regions of the world, they are likely to put pressure on their material suppliers to reduce prices.
Motor vehicle design teams chant the mantra “lighter, stiffer, recyclable, more durable” as they work with suppliers to develop the automotive materials of tomorrow. A lot of the automotive-materials work being done today sounds very futuristic, but it’s not just concept work that’s underway. In fact, most automotive supply teams already have such high-tech materials programs in process for 1998 and 1999 models.
Key to the success of such high-tech materials programs is early supplier involvement. Materials purchasing professionals constantly push for early and total supplier involvement in development projects to both speed materials development and to fully tap the extensive technical resources of materials suppliers. The challenge for suppliers is formidable: Develop new materials with advanced, “contradictory” performance specifications, at reasonable cost.
“Because we select suppliers earlier in the design phase than ever before, we now encourage all potential suppliers to make us aware of their products,” says Ronald Schuster, director of worldwide steel purchasing for General Motors Corp. “For suppliers, the benefit of working with advance vehicle design and purchasing teams is an opportunity to get business. The benefit for automakers is guaranteed future supply of higher-quality and lower-cost parts.”
Schuster of GM points out that early involvement by suppliers is important for automotive materials procurement specialists “to make sure that we know all the new products, technologies, and processes while the vehicle is being designed.” He says it is at this stage that suppliers can help remove cost from the system. “That’s where we can get the biggest bang for our buck.”
“On the commercial side, we are always looking for cost-reduction or cost-avoidance performance from suppliers,” says Mark Casey, purchasing manager for metallics at Ford Motor Co. “So, the continuous-improvement teams of design and materials engineers, buyers, and materials suppliers at the automotive-stamping plants and automotive-parts plants are working to eliminate inventories, reduce delivery leadtimes, and cut processing costs.” Many times these discussions have led to supply negotiations to test alternative or next-generation materials.
David O. Styka, senior corporate buyer of raw materials at Navistar International Transportation Corp., notes that raw material strategic-supplier relationships now include quality, competitive cost, supplier technology, cost take-out opportunities, just-in-time delivery, and technical support to manufacturing and engineering.
Better materials
Motor vehicles are made from a wide variety of materials: steel, iron, aluminum, plastics, glass, copper, powder metals, lead, zinc, magnesium, nickel, platinum, palladium, fabrics, and leather. According to various industry studies, the way these materials are being sourced today is not the way they will be in the future.
Market researchers tend to cluster steel, aluminum, magnesium, plastics, powder metals, and ceramics as “advanced automotive materials,” because these are (or may be) key production materials and because all of them are progressing in quality-improvement, weight-reduction, recycling-enhancement, and cost-reduction efforts. “The main competitive issue for suppliers of these materials will be their ability to meet the automakers’ demands on such issues as price, weight, recycling, quietness, and safety,” suggests automotive analyst Inge Matthey at the Frost & Sullivan market research organization.
In fact, automotive design and purchasing groups are looking for dramatic changes in supply from the top three tiers of suppliers, says Frost & Sullivan automotive analyst Joerg Dittmer. He explains that manufacturing engineers are investigating new technologies to improve materials preparation, intermediate processing and final assembly, and to reduce total costs. So, Dittmer continues, “materials engineers and buyers are investigating how to get suppliers more involved in materials selection, tooling, and assembly.”
Thus, the roles of the top three tiers will change dramatically, says a recent study by the A.T. Kearney & Co. consulting firm in conjunction with the University of Michigan’s Transportation Research Institute (UMTRI). The study forecasts that in less than a decade, tier-one suppliers will be systems integrators–engineering and providing modules or systems of parts and components to assemblers. The second tier will consist of direct suppliers–providing materials, parts, and components directly to assemblers, bypassing the tier-one firms. Tier-three suppliers will be indirect suppliers of parts to the tier-ones and twos.
“This redistribution of responsibilities will occur as the automakers shift materials and design engineering responsibilities to the tier-ones, who, in turn, will give tier-twos and threes much greater duties in design and development,” says David Cole, head of the Office for the Study of Automotive Transportation at UMTRI.
“We’re pretty excited about the way we already are working together internally and with our materials suppliers on next-generation vehicles,” says Casey of Ford. “We’ve got people from the various metals and plastics companies sitting side-by-side with our design and manufacturing engineers and purchasing personnel so they can help us optimize the efficiency, weight, and performance of the vehicles of the future.”
Casey adds that “the materials that walk off with the prize of expanded supply are going to be those whose suppliers will provide us with production and component materials that are best for the ultimate customer.” The reasoning is simple: “We are looking to source the materials of the future that will provide the automotive buyer with a better product, whether it’s a steel, aluminum, or plastic vehicle.” And, he adds, it doesn’t matter if the material comes from the producing mill, processing or distribution center, tier-one parts supplier, or tier-two or tier-three components provider.
Mitch Marecki, senior purchasing agent for raw materials at Chrysler Corp., points out that production-materials suppliers definitely have embraced early-supplier involvement efforts. “They’re all very aggressive, whether we’re talking about aluminum suppliers, steel suppliers, magnesium suppliers, or plastics and composites suppliers.” He says that “materials suppliers, as a group, have really got their thinking caps on, and they are aggressively working with engineers and buyers to present new ideas to enhance and expand the supply of their product in the future.”
Ford already is using programs called “material-utilization seminars,” where design and manufacturing engineers come up with ideas, bounce them off the commercial people for marketability, and bounce them off the purchasing people for availability. At this point, the suppliers and potential suppliers are involved to determine what it will take to make these materials available and economical. “It’s a combination of fresh ideas, and the people who make the materials are deeply involved right from the early discussion phases,” explains Casey. And it’s not happening just at Ford.
In fact, all of the automakers are involved in early-supplier programs that involve materials, either through the Auto/Steel Partnership, the new Auto/Aluminum Partnership, the Michigan Materials and Processing Institute’s polymer composites program, the Partnership for the New Generation of Vehicles (PNGV) program, or numerous other industry and academia-sponsored research efforts.
It’s estimated that as much as 70% of the total cost of an automotive material is driven by design. So, only 30% of potential cost savings can be achieved after all the parts and manufacturing equipment have been designed. According to Peter Beardmore, director of Ford’s Chemical and Physical Sciences Laboratory in Dear born, Mich., the “real challenge for alternate materials is affordability.” The Big Three automakers already are building concept cars to test various future powertrain, driveline, and materials concepts, and these test cars are loaded with substitute materials. “The key question isn’t whether these materials will be available,” says Beardmore, “but whether they’ll be affordable in 2004 and beyond.”
Buyer-supplier discussions on future materials also now include recycling, a factor that’s gained importance in recent years. Vehicles are regularly being designed with recycled materials. “Due to stricter government laws and growing consumer concerns, auto manufacturers are still searching for more recyclable materials,” says analyst Dittiner at Frost & Sullivan.
“To be easy to recycle, these materials must be relatively free of adhesives, coatings and paints, easy to disassemble for sorting, recyclable into other components, and recyclable many times,” Dittmer adds. Aluminum and steel are among the most recyclable materials because they can be recycled repeatedly without losing their properties.
Short-term benefits abound
Many of the new parts going into 1998 and 1999 motor vehicles have come about because of buyer-supplier discussions about improving existing materials or providing new materials for 2003 and 2004 models.
New generations of high-strength, high-performance steels are becoming more important in vehicle frames, while two-sided galvanized sheet is used for more of the body, new vibration-damping metal-plastic-metal sandwich composites are growing in use, and stainless steel exhaust systems now are in many new cars.
Despite all the research and development in alternative materials, steel remains the “material of choice” for the automakers. The industry still ships in excess of 18 million tons/year of iron and steel for motor vehicle parts and components.
“The steel industry is being driven to `lightweight’ the metal by competing materials,” acknowledges Pete Peterson, director of automotive marketing for U.S. Steel. He adds, however, that “while reducing weight of future cars is an important issue, so are cost, quality, safety, recyclability, and manufacturability. It’s the entire package of needs that iron and steel–materials familiar to automotive engineers and buyers–continue to address.”
According to purchasing exec, Casey, at Ford, “important recent trends relating to ferrous materials have been the improvement in product quality and service on the part of steel suppliers, particularly in the introduction of more flexible chemistries, flatter sheet, better coatings, effective just-in-time delivery systems, and reduced total costs.”
Looking ahead, early this year steelmakers will exhibit the first body-in-white under the global Ulsab (ultra light steel auto body) program. Ed Opbroek, program director for Ulsab, points out that through the combination of the design and application of high-strength steels and the latest state-of-the-art processes, “we’re getting a significant weight reduction and a cost savings at the same time. Also, we’re working to meet advanced safety criteria, more-stringent crash tests, and ultrahigh-performance for torsional and bending stiffness.”
Plastics are gaining
Polymers also are part of the advanced materials of the future, and about 3 billion lb/year already are used today. Plastics and composites have become increasingly popular materials; they comprise about 9% of a typical sedan’s body weight. There is widespread use in fenders, doors, and body panels of GM’s Saturn, the hood of the Taurus SHO, and the bed liner of the Ranger pickup truck. Late in 1999, Saturn will bring out an all new car that’s bigger than any of its existing models; it will feature a plastic-intensive body. And Chevrolet’s early-supplier-involvement program resulted in Ashland Chemical’s Specialty Polymers and Adhesives Division supplying both sheet molding compound (SMC) for the body panel material and the necessary adhesives for the new Corvette C5.
However, these large-volume uses are the exception rather than the rule. Plastics and composites still take only 250 lb of a typical 2,900-lb sedan. Suppliers have had more luck in replacing metals in parts such as leaf springs, fuel systems, engine components, and interior parts, according to materials-application research done by Adam C. Powell, a doctoral candidate at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He contends the replacements usually are centered around weight savings and fuel economy, although corrosion resistance is of importance in fuel systems and exterior panels, and design flexibility is the key to use in leaf springs.
Plastics indeed have drawbacks in that inexpensive plastics are considerably weaker than traditional materials, Powell says, and composites that are stronger are much more expensive. In addition, the mechanical properties of some plastics and composites make them difficult to use on existing tooling and assembly equipment. Slower-than-normal parts-molding rates associated with plastics pose a “big manufacturing challenge,” according to Bearmore of Ford.
However, Dave Hearn, manager of sales and technical services at Ashland Chemical’s polymers unit, says that “there are never-ending programs within the plastics industry to upgrade production materials, and there is the flexibility to design polymers for specific applications that will become more economical to produce once consumption levels are determined by the automakers.”
Sheet molding compound (SMC) plastics are a good example. Ashland now supplies Paccar with seven different sheet molded plastics for the truckmaker’s new composite-intensive truck cab. In fact, industry estimates suggest that 2.2 million lb of new SMC body panel and under-hood applications are being introduced in 1998 models. Dow Chemical is supplying an ABS resin for the molded consoles in the latest Ford Expedition and Lincoln Navigator models. DuPont has a PET (polyethylene terephthalate) grade used in the fenders of Chrysler LH vehicles and a glass-reinforced nylon 6,6 used to make air intake manifold valve covers for the Nissan Sentra. Atop that, Montell North America is providing a specially blended polypropylene for the bumper fascia on the 1998 Ford Windstar minivan.
Further ahead, GE Plastics is working on more advanced door module concepts with the automotive supply teams and some tier-one suppliers for motor vehicles to be built after 2000. John Madej, industry manager for inner door systems at GE Plastics, says the objective is to develop a completely modularized plastic door. The company also is working with the automakers to find tier-one suppliers willing to develop integrated air and fuel handling systems made from engineering resins. Robert Nelson, industry manager for instrument panels, says Project 2000 discussions involve the integration of such plastic parts as fuel rails, throttle bodies, air flow meters, air cleaners, connectors, and sensors with the air manifold.
Also note that plastics producers are working with Chrysler design and materials engineers on the CCV, the Concept Composite Vehicle. GE Plastics and others are providing the PET thermoplastics for the body panels, which are being bonded with adhesives from Eastman Chemical.
Then come the light metals
Aluminum suppliers continue to push for uses beyond wheels. Alcoa’s Automotive Structures International Div. worked with GM to provide reinforced floor panel extrusions for the EV1 electric vehicle, which is being covered with sheet stock from Alcan Aluminum. Several finns have provided die-cast aluminum alloys to replace cast iron and steel parts in engine blocks, undercarriage crossmembers, suspension system control arms, steering knuckles, and brake components.
Still, although more than 5 billion lb/year of aluminum are used in transportation, automotive uses lag behind aviation, aerospace, truck, trailer, and other segments of the transportation industry. The aluminum industry has been slow in developing an Auto/Aluminum Partnership to lobby for more se in exterior-exposed panels. Marketing efforts have been part-by-part on a supplier-by-supplier basis, unlike the steel industry’s “early supplier consortium” efforts.
Materials scientists and metallurgists at GM, Ford, and Chrysler say they would like to use more stamped aluminum sheet for exteriors. But as John Stiles, executive director for worldwide metallic purchasing at GM, puts it: “If the aluminum-sheet producers really want to be competitive with steel sheet, they will have to find ways to reduce their prices, and to reduce them substantially.” Automotive industry decision-makers remain unconvinced that the general buying public will pay more for cars and trucks with hoods, trunks, and body panels made from this lightweight material. Note that the transplants use less sheet aluminum in their vehicles on average than any of the Big Three.
Dr. Murray of the PNGV program notes that automotive grades of flat-rolled aluminum currently are priced four to five times higher than steel on a per-pound basis. “We may be charged $1.50 to $1.60 a pound for the aluminum we’re thinking about using, whereas the steel for the same application costs only 34 to 36 cents a pound,” Murray says. “We might be willing to continue paying the penalty to get the weight-reduction, corrosion-resistance and other advantages from using aluminum in specific parts such as a hood or deck lid on a car, but not for high-volume broad-scale applications of the kind traditionally served by steel.”
None of the transplant automakers surveyed plan to put aluminum hoods or deck lids on any of their vehicles in the foreseeable future. However, the Big Three will use aluminum sheet in some relatively high-priced 1999 models. Ford’s new Lincoln LS6 and LS8 sedans will have aluminum fenders, deck lids, and hoods. GM’s redesigned six-passenger Buick LeSabre and Pontiac Bonneville models–along with the new Oldsmobile Anthem – are expected to have aluminum hoods. And, the new Chrysler LHS cars are scheduled to use aluminum hoods.
While aluminum has sputtered somewhat, the slack in light metals has been picked up by magnesium, particularly in engine components, steering-column supports, and seat components where stiffness is important. This is because magnesium alloys are extremely light and very stiff. Most new automotive applications for magnesium have been as replacements for steel, iron, aluminum, and even some plastics. Now, Ford and General Motors materials-sourcing teams report they are working with die-castings suppliers to investigate the use of magnesium-based components for powertrains.
Right now, all transmission cases used in Ford’s cars, sports utility vehicles, vans, and pickup trucks are aluminum. Ford design and purchasing teams are looking at transmission extensions and clutch housings, engine oil pans, and other powertrain components as possible applications for magnesium casting alloys. High-volume production applications involving any of these powertrain components is unlikely for several years.
Meanwhile, GM is interested in using magnesium for more transmission and engine components. The largest automaker has done a substantial amount of research, development, and testing on such components in recent years to see how they perform under the higher temperatures and stresses associated with modem powertrains. GM also would like independent die casters to develop capabilities for making magnesium powertrain parts other than the usual valve covers, accessory mounting brackets, and oil filter adapters.