Development of CFRTP for Mass Produced Automobile
CDW‐15, Kanazawa, JapanOctober 18‐19, 2010
Jun Takahashi, Kiyoshi Uzawa and Tsuyoshi MatsuoThe University of Tokyo, Japan
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
ElectricityCombustibleGasOilCoal
Sect
iona
l Ene
rgy
Cons
umpt
ion
of O
ECD
an
d N
on‐O
ECD
cou
ntri
es (t
oe/c
apita
)Population Total Primary Energy Supply Total Final Energy Consumption
OECD 1154 million 4.67 toe/capita 3.25 toe/capita
Non-OECD 5114 million 1.04 toe/capita 0.69 toe/capita
ConversionLoss
IndustrySector
TransportSector
OtherSectors
Non‐EnergyUse
OECD Non OECD Non OECD Non OECD Non OECD Non
Sectional Energy Consumption of OECD and Non‐OECD countries (2003)
Energy Consumption Structure of Japanese Transport Sector
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
Energ
y C
onsu
mption in
Tra
nsp
ort
ation S
ecto
r (M
toe)
Car (Private)Car (Business)BusTruckAirplaneShipRailway
CFRTPBy using sheet and tape
high cycle press moldingexpansion into non‐automotive field
Then,Lightweight ◎Cycle time ○ ← project themeCost ○ ← project themeRecycle ◎ ← project themeSafety ○ ← project theme
Concept of automobile lightening for mass production
Immediate effect for not only energy saving but also waste management lawsIt contributes cost reduction, early spread, saving rear metals of electric vehiclesIt will extend to 60% weight reduction mass produced automobile
Current ( ave.1380kg, prod.20,000/y *1)*1) 800/day = 50/hour = cycle time is
1minuteLightweight ◎Parts number ◎Cycle time ×Cost ×Recycle ×Safety ?
Concept car (weight is 1/3)integration structure by thermoset CFRP
Global energy saving ?For EV ?
Project target (weight ▲30%, prod. 20,000/y)Parts substitution by thermoplastic CFRP
Body weight can be reduced by 30% with CFRTP application
Standard vehicle
CFRTP
Body weight1380→970kg (▲30%)
Discontinuous CFRTP:Panels, ModulesContinuous CFRTP :Structures
SeatDoor Frame
FR Engine Cover
Under Cover
Radiator Core Support
Fender SupportFront Cowl
Energy AbsorptionPipe
RR luggage space
RR luggage Partition
FR Dash
Door inner& impact beam
Hood Roof◆ Conventional car and CFRTP car
Vehi
cle w
eigh
t [kg
]
1500
1000
500
0Conventional Proposed
Aluminum
Others
CFRP
30%30%reductionreduction
Steel
The light‐weight CFRTP automotive model(parts replacement case)
In above calculation, anisotropy and integrated design are not considered
Flexural stiffness Torsional stiffness Weight
Isotropic 152 210 151kg
Anisotropic 200 286 151kg
Schematic diagram of the occurrence of industrial waste
Market50 – 70 %
Raw CF100 %
Industrial waste30 – 50 %
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ waste at trimming ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
‐‐ storage loss ‐‐
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ quality assurance inspection ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ NG parts ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
Schematic diagram of the occurrence of industrial waste
Market50 – 70 %
Raw CF100 %
Industrial waste30 – 50 %
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ waste at trimming ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
‐‐ storage loss ‐‐
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ quality assurance inspection ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ NG parts ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
Plate recycle
In‐houserepair
No storage
loss
Crushed recycleto high performance secondary member
Shop repair
< Monocoque body >Better structure for lightweight
panel88%
frame12%
panel57%
frame30%
casting13%
< Frame monocoque hybrid body >Better for safety and recyclability
Automotive Materials and Structures
Automobile parts are mostly composed of plates. Flexural properties are dominant in the case of automotive materials and structures.
Energy intensity of Parts production
0 50 100 150 200 250
Repaired or Recycled CF/PP
Fresh CF/PP (Vf=20)
Fresh CF/PP (Vf=30)
Fresh CF/PP (Vf=40)
Recycled CF/EP with PP
Fresh CF/EP (Vf=40)
Fresh CF/EP (Vf=50)
Fresh CF/EP (Vf=60)
Recycled Steel
Fresh Steel
Energy intensity [MJ/kg]
assembly, molding steel or matrix resin productionCF production materials recoverly
Considering the 3√E/ρ,energy intensity are the same !
SustainableHyper
Japanese National Program to Develop CFRTP for Mass Produced Automobile
2008 – 2012fyTotal budget: 3.8 billion JPY (≒42 million US$)
1. CF/PP and CF/PA sheetssurface treated CF and modified thermoplasticscontinuous and discontinuous CF reinforced sheets
2. High cycle molding technologypress formingbladder molding
3. Jointing technology
4. Repair and recycling
Difference in adhesion between CFRTS and CFRTP
Heat Up
CFRTS: Bolted or adhesive joint ‐‐‐ weaker than base material
CFRTP: Welding joint ‐‐‐ the same or stronger than base
material
fiber tangles and fiber volume fraction becomes higher at the welded section !
Controlling toughness with fracture mechanism
The fracture mechanism of CFRTP can beductile in comparison to that of CFRTS.
CF/PP CF/EP
Buckling
Delaminating
Fiber Breaking
Compression Side
Compression Side
Difference between CFRTP and CFRTS verified by bending test results
Adviser
Development of Sustainable Hyper Composite Materials Technology (2008‐12)
Participants
Project LeaderProf. Jun TakahashiThe Univ. of Tokyo
0
100
200
300
400
500
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25
Specific bending stiffness ( )
Spec
ific
tens
ile s
tren
gth
(σf/ρ
)
CFRTS (Rapid Molding)
CFRTS (For airplanes)
Titanium
Aluminum
Magnesium
GFRP
Vf=0.5
Steel (780MPa)
Steel (440MPa)
Steel (270MPa)
Steel (1470MPa)
CFRTPVf=0.1
• TS: Thermosetting• TP: Thermoplastic• Vf: Fiber volume fraction
Specific Bending Stiffness and Tensile Strength
ρ/3 E
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6Fiber Volume Fraction
Wei
ght R
atio
of C
FRP
and
Stee
l Pan
el PPPAPCUP
Fiber Volume Fraction vs. Weight Reduction Ratio
Aluminum: 0.51
Magnesium: 0.38
Weight reduction is the same or betterInexpensiveImpregnation becomes easier
CF/EPCF/PPElastic strain range is not sufficient as a structural
member
Weight Reduction Ratio of CFRP and Steel Panel
Materials
FlexuralModulus
[GPa](E)
FlexuralStrength
[MPa](σ)
Density
[g/cc](ρ)
SpecificFlexuralStiffness(3√E/ρ)
SpecificFlexuralStrength(√σ/ρ)
Steel Panel 200 420 7.8 0.75(×1)
2.6(×1)
UD-CFRP(for Airplane) 138 1600 1.5 3.5
(×4.6)27
(×10)UD-CFRTP
(target) 115 1600 1.4 3.5(×4.6)
29(×11)
quasi-isotropicCFRP 50 700 1.5 2.5
(×3.3)18
(×6.7)quasi-isotropicCFRTP (target) 23 400 1.2 2.4
(×3.2)17
(×6.3)
Comparison of steel panel, CFRP and CFRTP
Displacement
steel panel Thermosetting CFRP○ weight is 1/3 of steel panel○ elastic strain range is 4 times
→ decrease the frequency of repair× fracture is brittle× repair and recycle is difficult
Developing CFRTP○ weight is 1/3 of steel panel○ elastic strain range is 4 times
→ decrease the frequency of repair○ fracture is ductile → safety○ repair and recycle is (maybe) easy
Displacement
E=23GPa, σ=400MPa・ 3√E/ρ is 3.2 times of steel・ √σ/ρ is 6.3 times of steel・elastic strain range is ±1.74%
steel panel
E=23GPa, σ=250MPa・ 3√E/ρ is 3.2 times of steel・ √σ/ρ is 5.0 times of steel・elastic strain range is ±1.09%
E=23GPa, σ=100MPa・ 3√E/ρ is 3.2 times of steel・ √σ/ρ is 3.2 times of steel・elastic strain range is ±0.43%
Comparison of the strength of CFRTP
If the fracture resistance is sufficient, strength of CFR(T)P isnot so severe criterion in case of automobile.
Therefore, CF produced from various precursors (not only PAN) can be used in automobiles.
Thank you for your kind attention.