Lightweight Crankshafts

7/28/2019 Lightweight Crankshafts

1/9

400 Commonwealth Drive, Warrendale, PA 15096-0001 U.S.A. Tel: (724) 776-4841 Fax: (724) 776-5760 Web: www.sae.or

SAE TECHNICAL

PAPER SERIES 2006-01-0016

Lightweight Crankshafts

Alan P. Druschitz, David C. Fitzgerald and Inge HoegfeldtINTERMET Corporation

Reprinted From: New SI Engine and Component Design 2006(SP-2004)

2006 SAE World CongressDetroit, Michigan

April 3-6, 2006

THIS DOCUMENT IS PROTECTED BY U.S. AND INTERNATIONAL COPYRIGHT

It may not be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, distributed or transmitted, in whole or in part, i n any form or by any means.

Downloaded from SAE International by Volkswagen AG, Thursday, May 24, 2012 09:32:19 AM


2/9

The Engineering Meetings Board has approved this paper for publication. It has successfully completed

SAE's peer review process under the supervision of the session organizer. This process requires a

minimum of three (3) reviews by industry experts.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or

transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise,

without the prior written permission of SAE.

For permission and licensing requests contact:

SAE Permissions

400 Commonwealth Drive

Warrendale, PA 15096-0001-USA

Email: [email protected]

Tel: 724-772-4028Fax: 724-776-3036

For multiple print copies contact:

SAE Customer Service

Tel: 877-606-7323 (inside USA and Canada)

Tel: 724-776-4970 (outside USA)

Fax: 724-776-0790

Email: [email protected]

ISSN 0148-7191

Copyright 2006 SAE International

Positions and opinions advanced in this paper are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of SAE.

The author is solely responsible for the content of the paper. A process is available by which discussions

will be printed with the paper if it is published in SAE Transactions.

Persons wishing to submit papers to be considered for presentation or publication by SAE should send the

manuscript or a 300 word abstract to Secretary, Engineering Meetings Board, SAE.

Printed in USA





3/9

2006-01-0016

Lightweight Crankshafts

INTERMET Corporation

Copyright 2006 SAE International

ABSTRACT

The automotive industry continues to look foropportunities to reduce weight and cost whilesimultaneously increasing performance and durability.Since the introduction of aluminum cylinder blocks andheads, very few innovations have been made in

powertrain design and materials. Cast crankshafts havethe potential to produce significant weight savings (3-18kg) with little or no cost penalty. With the advent of new,high strength, cast ductile iron materials, such asMADI

TM(machinable austempered ductile iron), which

has the highly desirable combination of good strength,good toughness, good machinability and low cost,lightweight crankshafts are posed to become a highvolume production reality. An extreme demonstration ofa lightweight crankshaft is the current use of a castMADI crankshaft in the 1100 HP Darrell Cox sub-compact drag race car. This paper provides examplesof lightweight crankshaft designs and a comparison of

machinability, fatigue performance and vehicleperformance of regular cast ductile iron, regular castaustempered ductile iron, cast MADI and forged steel.

BACKGROUND

The automotive industry continues to look foropportunities to reduce weight and cost whilesimultaneously increasing performance and durability.

After the introduction of aluminum cylinder blocks andheads, very few innovations have been made inpowertrain materials. Some notable exceptions are

titanium connecting rods, intake valves and pushrods inthe Z06 Corvette and compacted graphite iron bedplatesin the DaimlerChrysler 4.7 liter engine [1].

The crankshaft is a relatively heavy component (15-45kg) and has received little light-weighting attention.Due to the difference in material density alone, a castductile iron crankshaft would weigh ~10% less than aforged steel crankshaft of identical design. Further,castings can be produced with weight reducing featuresthat would require the machining of forged products,such as hollow pins and mains and hollowed-out

counterweights. The use of forged steel crankshaftsresults in not only higher weight, but it also results inhigher total component cost due to higher materialproduction and machining costs. However, the recentrend in automotive crankshaft design has been toreplace cast ductile iron with heavier forged steel. Oftenthe decision to switch is based on an anticipated NVH

benefit due, presumably, to the higher elastic modulus osteel. The other reason often cited is the need for highestrength. However, a number of cast ductile irons havestrength equal to or better than many forged steelstypically used for automotive crankshafts.

In the early 1990s, Sumitomo Metal Industries presenteddata comparing the NVH performance of forged steecrankshafts to cast ductile iron crankshafts [2]. In theirstudy, a forged steel crankshaft produced, at best, 2-3dB less noise at a distance of one meter from the rightside of the cylinder block. No mention of torsionavibration dampers was made in their study.

In 1999, a study was published that concluded that aconventional, cast ductile iron crankshaft with a suitablydesigned damper was optimal for cost, weight and NVH[3]. This study used a production, Ford, Duratec, 2.5liter, V-6 engine, which had an aluminum cylinder blockand forged steel crankshaft. Ricardo, Inc. measured andreverse engineered the production crank and thendeveloped two new crankshaft designs; a direct copy ofthe production, forged steel design and a fourcounterweight, hollow pin, lightweight design. IntermetCorp. designers took the preliminary crankshaft designsand produced final casting designs. Intermet designers

also demonstrated potential reductions in machining bydeveloping the lightweight version as a cheekless andtopless design. The Intermet Research Foundrydeveloped the material specification and producedprototype castings. Kellogg Crankshaft Companymachined the crankshafts and Hegenscheidt-MFDperformed fillet rolling as would be used in productionRicardo, Inc. performed NVH testing on the productionengine and predicted the performance of the cast ductileiron crankshaft designs with and without dampers. UsingRicardos predictions, dampers were developed bySimpson Industries, Inc. (now a part of Metaldyne). The

Alan P. Druschitz, David C. Fitzgerald and Inge Hoegfeldt





4/9

program was brought to a conclusion when Ricardo, Inc.performed NVH testing on the engine after being rebuiltwith the new cast ductile iron crankshaft-dampercombinations. This NVH testing revealed the soundpressure levels were as good or better than theproduction forged steel crankshaft-damper combinationat less than 4500 rpm and that bedplate and enginemount accelerations were the same or lower than theproduction forged steel crankshaft-damper combinationthroughout the rpm range tested.

Recently, a new high strength and easy to machine castductile iron, MADI, was developed to match the strengthof forged steel [4,5,6]. This paper contains static anddynamic property data, component performance andmachinability data and preliminary vehicle test data forcrankshafts produced from this new material andcompares this data to crankshafts produced from regularcast ductile iron, regular cast austempered ductile ironand forged steel. Lightweight crankshaft designconcepts are also present.

PROCEDURES

LIGHTWEIGHT CRANKSHAFT DESIGN

Lightweight crankshaft designs were developed andshown to have the potential to provide 10-50% reductionin weight (2-20 kg).

MATERIAL EVALUATION

Various OEM cast and forged crankshafts werepurchased, sectioned and the hardness and tensileproperties determined. A variety of crankshafts (for 1.8liter to 5.7 liter engines) were produced in MADI at the

Intermet Archer Creek Foundry for internal evaluationand evaluation by various North American and EuropeanOEMS. The MADI castings were produced on theproduction green sand molding line and no changeswere made to the production tooling. Internal evaluationincluded hardness, tensile properties at roomtemperature in the as-heat treated condition, after agingat elevated temperature (150

oC, 300

oF) and upon

exposure to various liquids, coefficient of thermalexpansion, machinability and in-vehicle testing. OEMevaluation included machining trials on productionmachine lines and laboratory component fatigue tests.

MACHINABILITY TESTING

Machinability testing was performed by the Machine ToolSystems Research Laboratory at the University of Illinoisat Urbana-Champaign, which has extensive machinetool and instrumentation facilities for conductingmachinability studies, and on OEM production machinelines. For the OEM production machine line trials, nochanges were made to the tooling or the equipmentspeeds and feeds.

CRANKSHAFT FATIGUE (RIG) TESTING

Hegenscheidt-MFD Corp. has estimated that fatigue lifecan easily be improved by 70-100% based uponcrankshaft undercut geometry, material and deep rollingforce but the improvement is material dependentTypically, metals with high ductility and high workhardening rate show a greater improvement in fatiguestrength after fillet rolling. To determine the influence odeep fillet rolling and to compare crankshafts producedfrom MADI to current production crankshafts, sections ocrankshafts were tested on a crankshaft magneticresonance bending fatigue test rig.

VEHICLE TESTING

MADI crankshafts are currently being evaluated on thestreet and on the race track in 450-500 HP street carsand the 1100 HP Darrell Cox sub-compact drag racecar. These crankshafts were cast at the Intermet ArcheCreek Foundry, heat treated at a high volumeproduction-intent heat treat source, fully machined onthe production line at Macimex (Mexico) with no changes

in tooling or machine tool speeds and feeds andassembled into 2.4 liter engines by Darrell Cox Racing.

RESULTS & DISCUSSION

LIGHTWEIGHT CRANKSHAFT DESIGN

Lightweight crankshaft designs have been developedmodeled and shown to have the potential to provide 10-50% reduction in weight (2-20 kg). Using a V-8crankshaft as an example, the weight savings of simpleand aggressive designs were calculated. The typicasolid design weighed 23.6 kg (52.0 lbs) and is shown in

Figure 1. First, a simple cope/drag lightweighcounterweight design was developed that produced aweight savings of 2.9 kg (6.5 lbs or 12.5%). Next, asimple cored pin and main design was developed thaproduced a weight savings of 3.1 kg (6.8 lbs or 13%)Next, an aggressive cored pin, main and counterweighdesigns was developed that produced a weight savingsof 11.8 kg (25.9 lbs or 50%). The model of the simplecope/drag is shown in Figure 2, the model of thesimple hollow main design is shown in Figure 3 and themodel of the aggressive lightweight crankshaft designshowing hollow pins, mains and counterweights isshown in Figure 4.





5/9

Figure 1. Model of a Standard, Solid, V-8 Crankshaft Design. The

weight for this V-8 crankshaft design was 23.6 kg (52.0 lbs).

Figure 2. Model of the Simple cope/drag Lightweight V-8 Crankshaft

Design. Note the lightweight counterweights. The potential weight

savings for this V-8 crankshaft design was 2.9 kg (6.5 lbs or 12.5%).

Figure 3. Model of the Simple Lightweight V-8 Crankshaft Design.

Note the hollow mains. The potential weight savings for this V-8

crankshaft design was 3.1 kg (6.8 lbs or 13%).

Figure 4. Model of the Aggressive Lightweight V-8 Crankshaft Design.

Note the hollow pins, mains and counterweights. The potential weight

savings for this V-8 crankshaft design was 11.8 kg (25.9 lbs or 50%).

The lightweight features in two of these cast crankshaftswere produced using cores. No cores are required toproduce the design shown in Figure 2. The coresrequired to produce these features are shown in Figures5 and 6.

Figure 5. Model of the Core Required for the Simple Lightweight V-8

Crankshaft Design.

Figure 6. Model of the Core Required for the Aggressive Lightweight

V-8 Crankshaft Design.





6/9

A very aggressive lightweight, cast, austempered ductileiron, V-10, crankshaft that had a weight savings of 20.5kg (45.1 lbs or 45%) showing hollow pins, mains andcounterweights is shown in Figure 7.

Figure 7. Fully Machined Casting of an Aggressive Lightweight V-10

Crankshaft Produced in Grade 1 ADI. Note the hollow pins, mains and

counterweights. The weight savings for this V-10 crankshaft was 20.5kg (45 lbs or 45%).

MATERIAL EVALUATION

The material property requirements of lightweightcrankshafts are more demanding that those for astandard crankshaft design. Therefore, higher strengthcast ductile irons were required. At first, Grade 1 ADIwas investigated, but due to the poor machinability ofGrade 1 ADI, a new machinable, austempered ductileiron (MADI) was developed. The mechanical propertiesof MADI are superior to typical crankshaft cast ductileirons (D5203, D5506, DC Hi-Hard) and comparable tomany forged steel crankshafts. A comparison of themechanical properties of MADI, regular cast ductile iron,regular austempered ductile iron and forged steelcrankshafts are shown in Table I.

Steel, ADI and MADI exhibit beneficial work hardeningthat results in an increase in yield strength when pre-strained. This is a desirable characteristic since castcrankshafts are typically fillet rolled (cold worked) toincrease fatigue strength. Five percent pre-strain

increased the yield strength of these materials by 50-60%. The effect pre-strain on the tensile properties ofsteel, ADI and MADI are shown in Table II.

Table I. Comparison of crankshaft mechanicaproperties.

Average (unless noted)

Crankshaft Material UTS(MPa)

YS(MPa)

Elong(%)

Hardne(BHN

DC 1.8 liter forged steel 778 462 12.4 233DC 2.4 liter for ed steel 963 648 9.5 273-2

To ota 2.2 liter for ed steel 806 508 12.9 242Toyota 2.5 liter

1forged steel 851 553 7.3 259-2

Ford 2.5 liter forged steel 776 456 10.9 248

General Motors for ed steel 850

2

580

2

248-3D5203 5.7 liter cast DI 610 402 2.7 225D5506 5.7 liter cast DI 707 407 6.8 225DC Hi-Hard

3cast DI 783 438 4.0 253

MADI 1.8 liter cast DI 796 488 12.0 249MADI 2.4 liter

4cast DI 834 506 15.3 258

MADI 4.7 liter cast DI 774 502 12.9 246MADI 5.7 liter cast DI 748 492 10.4 244

ADI 4.7 liter cast DI 1002 634 6.5 312ADI 5.7 liter cast DI 1009 644 9.9 298ADI 5.7 liter cast DI 1076 748 8.9 325

1 Titan Racing (1500 HP, drag race car) crankshaft2 minimums3 DaimlerChrysler production 2.4 liter high-hardness ductile iron

crankshaft

4 Darrell Cox Racing (1100 HP, drag race car) crankshaft

Table II. Effect of pre-strain on the tensile properties osteel, ADI and MADI.

Material Pre-Strain (%) UTS (MPa) YS (MPa) Elong (%)

steel 0 950 633 11.61 945 703 8.93 949 865 7.35 971 949 4.2

ADI 0 1032 627 8.4

1 953 760 4.8

3 1016 919 4.75 1009 1001 1.0

MADI 0 748 492 10.4

1 756 585 9.93 759 673 9.05 798 735 9.17 792 764 4.9

MADI and ADI can exhibit beneficial age hardening withlittle or no loss of ductility when exposed to powertraintemperatures for extended periods of time. For the

MADITM and ADI chemistries and heat treatment cyclesused by Intermet, an increase in yield strength of 13%and 38%, respectively, after 2000 hours of exposure a150

oC (300

oF) was noted. Beyond 2000 hours, the

improvement is negligible. This finding demonstratedthat MADI and ADI powertrain components will maintaintheir properties throughout the product life cycle. Theeffect of exposure at 150

oC (300

oF) for up to 4000 hours

is shown in Table III.





7/9

Table III. Effect of exposure to 150oC (300

oF) on the

mechanical properties of MADI and ADI.

Average

Material Exposure Time(hrs)

UTS(MPa)

YS(MPa)

Elong(%)

Hardness (BHN)

MADI 0 795 489 11.9 2491000 839 544 11.6 2572000 869 554 13.0 2763000 871 552 11.0 2794000 869 546 10.9 278

ADI 0 991 639 5.6 3141000 1075 812 6.8 3412000 1179 879 6.0 3633000 1166 887 5.0 3664000 1171 897 4.5 374

There is no published data showing a negative effect ofautomotive liquids on the mechanical properties offorged steel. However, MADI and ADI exhibited a lossof ductility in constant strain rate tensile tests whensimultaneously in contact with water and ADI exhibited aloss of ductility when in contact with virtually allautomotive liquids [7]. Currently, the mechanism for

this apparent environmental embrittlement is not knownalthough it has many features similar to liquid metalembrittlement. This environmental embrittlement hadno effect on the yield strength of either MADI or ADI.Since automotive components are not typically stressedbeyond their yield strength in service, this effect may bea non-issue. However, component fatigue tests shouldbe run in the presence of automotive liquids to clarify thisissue. The effect of exposure to liquids on themechanical properties of MADI and ADI are shown inTable IV.

Table IV. Effect of exposure to liquids on the

mechanical properties of MADI and ADI [7].

Loss of Ductility

Liquid MADI Grade 1 ADI

pure water 37% 71%3.5% salt water 32% 74%

mineral oil none 56%synthetic motor oil none 53%

gear oil none 60%power steering fluid none 53%

brake fluid 9% 47%diesel fuel none 53%

The coefficient of thermal expansion (CTE) is animportant material characteristic that needs to beaccounted for in todays high performance engines.Notable failures in race engines have occurred becausethis was not properly accounted for, e.g., titaniumconnecting rods are known to adhere to steelcrankshafts causing catastrophic failure if the bearingclearances are not adequate. This occurs because theCTE of titanium is less than the CTE of steel, therefore,the bearing clearances are reduced as the enginecomponents heat-up. For gray iron cylinder blocks, castductile iron and steel are ideal choices for crankshafts

because the CTE of gray iron, ductile iron and steel aresimilar. However, todays aluminum cylinder blockshave a much greater CTE than ductile iron or steel andtherefore a significant mis-match exists. The mis-matchis even worse for magnesium cylinder blocks. MADI and

ADI have higher CTEs than pearlitic ductile iron or steeand, therefore, are advantageous in maintaining properbearing clearances as the engine heats-up. This hasbeen previously noted in a publication describing the useof a cast austempered ductile iron crankshaft in theTuscan Speed Six sports car [8] and later in a FordMotor Company patent [9]. The coefficients of thermaexpansion for gray iron, steel, pearlitic ductile ironMADI, Grade 1 ADI, aluminum and magnesium areshown in Table V.

Table V. The coefficients of thermal expansion for grayiron, steel, regular ductile iron, MADI, Grade 1 ADIaluminum and magnesium.

Coefficient of ThermalExpansion

Material ppm/oC ppm/

oF

Ti-6Al-4V 8.8 4.9gray iron 10.1 5.6

forged steel 10.8-11.3 6.0-6.3pearlit ic ductile iron* 12.2-12.4 6.8-6.9

MADI* 14.4-15.3 8.0-8.5Grade 1 ADI* 17.3 9.6

aluminum 21.6 12.0magnesium 25.9 14.4

* determined from samples sectioned from components

MACHINABILITY TESTING

Grade 1 austempered ductile iron has desirable strengthbut poor machinability, therefore, MADI was developedas a comprise material that has the combination ogood strength and good machinability. Crankshafts (andnumerous chassis components) have been successfullymachined and assembled on OEM production machinelines set-up for regular ductile iron (ferritic and pearliticwith no changes in tooling or equipment speeds andfeeds. No material related problems have beenencountered during any of the production machine linetrials to-date. These trials were run after the MachineTool Systems Research Laboratory at the University oIllinois at Urbana-Champaign demonstrated that MADI

TM

was easier to machine (milling, drilling and turning) thanregular cast ductile iron of the same hardness [6]. Fomilling, the forces were similar for MADI, ferritic and

pearlitic ductile iron and the insert wear for MADI wasless than that for pearlitic ductile iron of the samehardness. For drilling, a central composite design oexperiments was performed and mathematical modelsdeveloped that correlated speed and feed with tooforces and surface roughness. Drill wear and producsurface roughness were similar for MADI and pearliticductile iron of the same hardness. For turning, a centracomposite design of experiments was performed andmathematical models developed that correlated speedand feed with tool forces and surface roughness. Forcesand product surface roughness were similar for MAD





8/9

and pearlitic ductile iron of the same hardness. Also forturning, the insert wear for MADI was less than that forpearlitic ductile iron of the same hardness and much lessthan that for Grade 1 ADI.

CRANKSHAFT FATIGUE (RIG) TESTING

Component (rig) fatigue testing has shown that MADI issuperior to regular cast ductile iron with and without filletrolling. The data for D5203 was from regular productionvalidation testing. Due to all of the initial MADI testsamples running-out (no failure after 10 million cycles),additional castings were produced and machined so thatfurther testing at higher loads could be run to determinethe true capability of MADI. Component (rig) fatiguedata is shown in Table VI.

Table VI. Component (rig) fatigue data for regularductile iron (production D5203) and MADI 5.7 litercrankshafts.

Cycles to Failure

Bending Moment, Condition D5203 MADI

1184 N-m, fillet rolled 1 million >10 million1184 N-m, not fillet rolled immediate 9-20,000

VEHICLE TESTING

MADI crankshafts have performed without incident in450-500 HP street cars and the 1100 HP Darrell Coxsub-compact drag race car. The street cars have beendriven daily for over six months and the drag race carraced the entire 2005 season. The drag race car runs 0-60 mph in less than three seconds and can obtainspeeds of nearly 200 mph in approximately eight

seconds on a quarter mile track. During the 2003 and2004 race season, broken crankshafts were a problem.During the 2005 race season, there were numerouscatastrophic events, such as, compressed combustionchambers, compressed piston skirts, bent piston wristpins, the torque converter cover friction welded to theflex plate and a baseplate-cylinder block separation, but,no broken crankshafts. The 1100 HP Darrell Cox sub-compact drag race car with a MADI crankshaft on thetrack in Rockingham, NC is shown in Figure 8.

Figure 8. 1100 HP Darrell Cox, Mopar, Sub-Compact Drag Race Car

with MADI Crankshaft (foreground) Driven by Mike Crawford.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

1. Lightweight crankshaft designs have beendeveloped and shown to have the potential toprovide significant reductions in weight (2-20 kg, 10-50%).

2. Significant weight savings at little or no cost penaltyare possible through the use of cast ductile ironcrankshafts.

3. Cast MADITM

crankshafts are capable of meeting theeveryday needs of 450-500 HP street cars and the

extreme demands of 1100 HP drag race cars.

4. MADITM

has mechanical properties similar to manyforged steel automotive crankshafts and thus 10%weight savings (difference in density between forgedsteel and cast ductile iron) are easily obtainable.

5. Cast, high-strength, MADITM

crankshafts have beensuccessfully machined on production machine linesset-up for regular cast ductile iron.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The Intermet Archer Creek Foundry has cast over 27metric tons (60,000 lbs) of MADI since 2002 and cast alof the MADI crankshafts described in this report. TheMachine Tool Systems Research Laboratory at theUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign performed thelaboratory machinability testing. Macimex (Mexicomachined and fully assembled the MADI crankshaftsused for vehicle testing on their production machine lineThe assistance of Darrell Cox Racing in assemblingtesting and evaluating MADI crankshafts in his streeand race cars is gratefully acknowledged.





9/9

REFERENCES

1. Warrick, et al, Development and Application ofEnhanced Compacted Graphite Iron for the Bedplateof the New Chrysler 4.7 Liter V-8 Engine, SAETechnical Paper #1999-01-0325, Society of

Automotive Engineers, Warrendale, PA (1999).

2. Comparison of Characteristics Between Forged andCast Crankshaft, presentation by Sumitomo MetalIndustries, Ltd. (1992).

3. Druschitz, et al, Influence of Crankshaft Materialand Design on the NVH Characteristics of a Modern,

Aluminum Block, V-6 Engine, SAE Technical Paper#1999-01-1225, Society of Automotive Engineers,Warrendale, PA (1999).

4. Druschitz, et al, Machinable Austempered DuctileIron, U.S. Patent Application No. 60/408,174(Provisional Application September 4, 2002),International Publication No. WO 2004/022792 A2.

5. Druschitz, et al, MADITM: Introducing A New,Machinable Austempered Ductile Iron, SAETechnical Paper #2003-01-0831, Society of


6. Druschitz, et al, Machinability of MADITM

, SAETechnical Paper #2005-01-1684, Society of


7. Druschitz, et al, Effect of Liquid Environments onthe Tensile Properties of Ductile Iron, SAETechnical Paper #2004-01-0793, Society of


8. Brandenberg, K.R., et al, An ADI CrankshaftDesigned for High Performance in TVRs TuscanSpeed Six Sports Car, SAE Paper No. 2001-01-0408, Society of Automotive Engineers, Warrendale,PA (2001).

9. Mayer, K.M., Crankshaft for an Internal CombustionEngine Disposed in A Motor Vehicle, U.S. PatentNo. 6,761,484 B2 (July 13, 2004).

CONTACT INFORMATION

Dr. Alan P. DruschitzDirector of Materials R&DINTERMET Technical Center939 Airport RoadLynchburg, VA 24502(434) 237-8749 phone(434) 237-8752 fax

[email protected]

David C. FitzgeraldDirector of Product Engineering and DesignINTERMET Technical Center939 Airport RoadLynchburg, VA 24502(434) 237-8703 phone(434) 237-8752 [email protected]

Inge HoegfeldtTechnical Director Europe

INTERMET EuropeUnterturkheimer Strasse 39-41D-66117 SaarbruckenGermany(49) (0) 681-92740-11(49) (0) [email protected]




Documents

Lightweight Crankshafts