NVKP16 (NCEP16) NATIONAL COMPETITIVENESS AND EXCELLENCE PROGAMME

Transcription

1 NVKP16 (NCEP16) NATIONAL COMPETITIVENESS AND EXCELLENCE PROGAMME

2 Automotive composites overview Main benefits of composite in automotive: - Weight reduction - CO 2 emission reduction - Excellent corrosion resistance - Class A surface - High strength-to weight ration, etc. - 1 kg car weight g/km CO Average CO 2 emission per km of all cars sold per years in EU Penalties for excess CO 2 emission: Current fleet average, EU 2017) 0 Potential penalties, per car in fleet EU penalties for excess CO 2 emission: : 5 - for the 1 st g/km of exceedance 15 - for the 2 nd g/km 25 - for the 3 rd g/km 95 - for each subsequent g/km from the 1 st g/km of exceedance Target 2020 Potential target /car /car Source: McKinsey & Company, Lightweight, heavy impact. How carbon fiber and other lightweight materials will develop across industries and specially in automotive, 2010.

3 Weight Saving Effect for Different Areas Space Civil Aviation Automotive -1 kg weight kg weight kg weight 3-20

4 Natural Fiber Carbon Fiber Glass Fiber Recycling Prospects of Various Composites EU End-of-life vehicle (ELV) regulation: % ELV reuse/recovery % ELV reuse/recovery 85% ELV reuse/recycled Thermosets Thermoplastics Recycled GF is more expensive than virgin GF Recycled CF is potentially cheaper than virgin CF NF is carbonneutral & fully recyclable Future prospects of recycling Weak-medium Medium Medium-strong Strong Resin is not recyclable Resin is recyclable & reusable Source: JEC: Strategic Study. Composites penetration growth in Automotive: towards mass production trends and forecasts

5 Fast composite technologies overview Part complexity High LP-RTM Low Pressure Resin Transfer Molding HP-RTM High Pressure RTM T-RTM Thermoplastic RTM R-RIM Reinforced Reaction Injection Molding RIM PU Reaction Injection Molding Polyurethane SMC Sheet Molding Compound LFI Long Fiber Injection LFI SMC Vacuum infusion Small series units/year LP-RTM HP-RTM R-RIM Wetcompression molding T-RTM RIM PU Reinforced thermoforming Low Slow Non-structural parts Non-recyclable Medium series units/year Semi-structural/structural parts Non-recyclable Mass production units/year Fast Semi-structural/structural parts Recyclable Production time

6 Thermoset composites

7 Polyurethane Resin Injection Molding 1 min Advantages: Low-cost tooling for large parts Short cycle time Two side control surfaces Disadvantages: Secondary structures Requires long postprocessing Non-recyclable RIM units

8 Reinforced Reaction Injection Molding (R-RIM) 5 min Advantages: Dimensional stability and inherent stiffness even at high temperatures Excellent impact strength Higher design freedom of components Good paintability, even at temperatures up to 180 C, inline painting is possible Low mold investment The use of recycled carbon fibers and hollow glass microspheres enable weight savings of up to 30% Core Features Jaguar F-Type bumper Fendt tractor mudguard

9 Carbon Fiber Sheet Molding Compound (CF SMC) 2. Hot pressing 3. Demolding 5 min Advantages: Short cycle time Complex shape Higher structural efficiency (vs. GF SMC) 1. SMC cutting & stack preparation Disadvantages: Low mechanical properties (vs. long fiber composites) Non-recyclable Toyota Prius PHV hatch door frame,

10 Materials & Equipment for SMC SMC-sheets production Price for Glass Fiber SMC: 5-10 /kg

11 Low-Pressure & High Pressure Resin Transfer Molding (LP-RTM & HP-RTM) LP-RTM 5-10 bar 30 min HP-RTM bar 3 min Advantages: For structural components Shorter cycle time & higher geometry complexity (vs. vacuum infusion) Premium quality sport carbon-fiber appearance LP-RTM Truck hood, LP-RTM HP-RTM Roof (visible carbon), KraussMaffei Disadvantages: Non-recyclable

12 Wet-Compression Molding Advantages: Simple mold technology Lower cost of the mold (vs. HP-RTM, T-RTM) Short cycle time 1. Fabric stack preparation Disadvantages: Simple shapes Non-recyclable 2. Resin application 3 min 4. Demolding 3. Wetted stack in mold Mold closed and vacuum applied 4. Curing in press BMW i8 upper floor panel (Krauss Maffei), 2016 Source: Huntsman Advanced Materials

13 Long Fiber Injection Molding (LFI) 15 min Advantages: First-class surfaces through simple combinations of methods (painting directly in the mold, thermoforming film, PVC film) High component stability at simultaneously low component weight by using high fiber volumes, fillers or paper honeycomb Variable fiber lengths mm and fiber volumes up to 50% Significant weight saving compared to SMC High degree of automation with short cycle times Roof element for a Fendt tractor

14 Thermoplastic composites

15 Reinforced thermoforming p = 5 bar T = C <1 min Advantages: Very fast cycle time Recyclable Weldable Combinable with injection molding Recyclable High impact resistance (if to compare with thermosets) Material low cost Low OPEX Door module carrier with integrated organo sheet Thermoplastic Composite Car Suspension Arm

16 Reinforced thermoforming equipment + injection molding

17 State of the art in TPC technologies Hyundai Pultruded Composite Beam (Curved Reactive Thermoplastic Pultrusion by CQFD 2015) Roading Roadster R1 roof frame (Thermoplastic RTM by Krauss Maffei 2015) PSA Peugeot Citroen door side impact beam (Tepex by DuPont 2013)

18 Thermoplastic Resin Transfer Molding (T-RTM) 4. Demolding Thermoplastic Roof Frame for Roding Roadster R1 1. Stack preparation 2 min 2. Preforming 3. Polymerization Advantages: Very fast cycle time For structural parts Weldable High impact resistance of products (if to compare with thermosets) Combinable with injection molding Recyclable Material low cost Low OPEX Disadvantages: High CAPEX Source: KraussMaffei Composite Solutions. RTM Market and Technologies

19 NVKP_ Production of Polymer Composite Components with a Short Cylce Time Automated Manufacturing Technology mainly for Automotive Applications especially with respect to the Comlexity of the Composite Products as well as for the Recyclability Research and Developement Consortium Project Main Targets Project datas Target market: Automotive; Duration: 3 years; Place: Hungary, Budapest; T-RTM process development less than 180 sec cycle; Building of a production line with Industry 4.0 features; Fully homogeneous recyclable product; Creation of a show-room in Budapest; Automated production of complex, continues fiber reinforced composite, based on T-RTM technology Total cycle time less than 180 sec. Application of automated textile cutting and binder application Application of back injection with short fiber reinforced PA6 Integrated industry 4.0 working cell Implementation of metallic inserts in the composite Implementation of injection molded ribs Application of PA6 based foam cores for structural sandwich construction Implementation of IMC technology to achieve near class A surface Development of advanced FEM tool to calculate and design the mechanical performance of the complex composite structure Development of faster initiator and activator systems;

20 Main topics / objectives / enablers of subprojects Material science research Goal: make poliamide in-situ with bulk polymerisation caprolactam polymerisation Find the optimum portion of initiator and activator substances for the chainreaction polymerisation of caprolactam Define optimum polimerysation environment parameters (temperature, humidity etc.) to maximise molecular weight and minimise polymerisation time TARGET: 2 mins Lab. tests Demonstrator part Manufacturing technology subproject Develop and design an automated T-RTM based production line for complex products System design work in collaboration with Krauss-Maffei Process optimisation Including conveyor, manipulators, robotic arms, pre-heating, stack manipulating, preform press, grippers, pneumatic systems TARGET: continuous production with 2 mins cycle time - Material mechanical testing - FEM based method development FEA subproject Establish validated methods to reliably predict for any critical feature of a composite product with any stackup sequence and reinforcement structure the followings: Deformation, strength, failure characteristics Draping, warpage Fatigue behaviour Structural behaviour (stiffness and strength) of joints (adhesive, rivet etc.) Effect of manufacturing defects on structural characteristics

21 Automated composite process line T-RTM production cell Digital 3-axis cutting machine Determination of technological steps

22 FEM subproject Time plan Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Testing strategy: evaluation of mechanical characteristics (stiffness and strength of composite monolith plates) Testing strategy: evaluation of mechanical characteristics of sandwich structures Testing strategy: stiffness and strength evaluation of diff. joint types (adhesive single/double lap etc., rivet etc.) Testing methodology: fatigue of monolith plates and Sandwich structures FEM simulation techniques: composite monolith structures FEM simulation techniques: joints + automated component Partitioning method FEM simulation techniques: sandwich panels, metallic Inserts and fasteners FEM methods to predict fatigue behaviour of monolith and Sandwich structures Consideration of the effect of manufacturing defects on the Mechanical properties of composites in the design phase Dez. Jan.Febr.MärzApr. Mai Juni Juli Aug.Sept.Okt.Nov.Dez. Jan.Febr.MärzApr. Mai Juni Juli Aug.Sept.Okt.Nov.Dez. Jan.Febr.MärzApr. Mai Juni Juli Aug.Sept.Okt.Nov.Dez. Jan.Febr.MärzApr. Today End of project

23 FEM subproject, phase 1 Mechanical testing of monolith plates Goals: Define mechanical tests design to puspose to provide all inputs (loads, deformations) to infer the anisotropic stiffness data (E 11, E 22, n 12, G 12 etc.) and strength parameters for the composite in question Design a generic test matrix that can be used in the future to characterise any composite materials Stich with standards (e.g. ISO 527, ISO 14125, ISO 178, ISO 14129, ASTM D5766, ASTM D5379 etc.) When standards do not fit, specify a unique testing method

24 FEM subproject, phase 1 Evaluation of composite stiffness parameters CLT Inverse solution Stackup Specific Deformation (SSD) matrix Importance of the CLT -1 concept: Ply specific stiffness constant probability distributions derived from mechanical tests done on 0/90 stackup using CLT -1 (red) vs. results from simple UD tests (blue) CLT -1

25 FEM subproject, phase 1 Testing strategy of sandwich panels Interaction of inidividual failure modes Typical non-homogenous core sandwich panel: Face plate Core (grooved, perforated or flexi cut) General buckling vs. Shear crimping How relevant is the face sheet peel? Face sheet stiffness params measured Core stiffness from supplier? Effect of resin filled cuts? Deformation modelling in FE environment Test plan Face plate Composite vehicle sandwich structure Cuts filled with resin F

26 FEM subproject, phase 2 Cost and weight-efficient partitioning of composite structures Design variables Initial geometry main directions Weight calc. Cost calc. C = A c A p Draping simulation γ(x,y) + Objective function Mech. simulation partitioning -> adh. bends joint mech. props. update elem. prop. in bands Optimization Objective: - Life-cycle cost - Direct operating cost DOC = C + p W Mårtensson P., Zenkert D., Åkermo M.: Cost and weight efficient partitioning of composite automotive structures. Polymer Composites, 38, (2017) Static load cases, modal analysis Evaluation of results + new cycles with the part. components C: manufacturing cost W: structural weight p: weight penalty factor [ /kg]

27 FEM subproject, phase 3 Effect of manufacturing defects on structural characteristics Identify relevant defects Characterise defects - Mechanical model - Back up / fit based on test result [1] [2] [3] Generate FE material datacard (representing the desired probability level) Read the defect map onto the part to design using the corresponding data card, analyse [4] [5] Make decisions (scrap part, inspection limits etc.) [6]

28 List of references [1] Carbon Fibre Tea Tray, Talk Composites Forum, [Online]. Available: [2] M. LeGault, Carbon fiber auto body panels: Class A paint?, 10 January [Online]. Available: [3] S. S. Rani F.Elhajjar, Compression testing of continuous fiber reinforced polymer composites with out-of-plane fiber waviness and circular notches, Polymer Testing, [4] E. M. Z. A. J. V. H. Zrida, Master curve approach to axial stiffness calculation for non-crimp fabric biaxial composites with out-of-plane waviness, Composites: Part B, pp , [5] J. W. A. N. W. G. X. L. Y. W. Jun Zhu, A multi-parameter model for stiffness prediction of composite laminates with out-of-plane ply waviness, Composite structures, pp , [6] Lukaszewicz, Dirk*; Ionescu, Viorel-Constantin; Becherer, David, AUTOMOTIVE COMPOSITE DESIGN PROCESS, Conference Paper

29 Questions?