premium automotive research and development programme · pdf filepremium automotive research...

Premium Automotive Research and Development Programme

ADVANCED BODY JOINING

CLOSURE REPORT

Author: Richard Hewitt Date: March 2007 Version: v 4 P.I.: Ken Young

COMMERCIAL IN CONFIDENCE

CLOSURE- ABJ vs 4 of 35

CONTENTS

1 DOCUMENT HISTORY ................................................................................ 4

2 BACKGROUND AND INTRODUCTION ......................................................... 5 2.1 BACKGROUND ....................................................................................... 5

2.2 INTRODUCTION...................................................................................... 6

2.3 ROBUST VALIDATION PROCESS................................................................... 7

TECHNICAL PROJECTS ..................................................................................... 8

2.4 LOW INVESTMENT ALTERNATIVES TO SPR FOR STRUCTURAL JOINING OF ALUMINIUM. .. 8

2.4.1 Resistance Spot Welding of Aluminium.............................................. 9

2.4.2 Friction Spot Joining of Aluminium...................................................10

2.4.3 Low Cost solution to Structural Joining of Aluminium: ........................11

2.4.4 Low Cost solution to Structural Joining of Aluminium Technical Outcomes 11

2.5 ALUMINIUM MIG/CMT WELD PROCESS CAPABILITY .........................................13

SELF PIERCE RIVETING (SPR) PROJECTS:...............................................................15

2.5.1 SPR for Steel/Aluminium Joints. ......................................................15

2.5.2 NDT Methods for SPR. ...................................................................17

2.5.3 SPR Die Failure.............................................................................18

2.6 GRANULAR HOT MELT BODY ADHESIVES AND SEALANTS. ...................................20

2.7 REPORTS ISSUE....................................................................................23

3 OUTPUTS ................................................................................................ 25 3.1 ACHIEVEMENTS AND PLANS ......................................................................25

3.2 RISK SUMMARY ....................................................................................26

3.3 OUTPUT SUMMARY.................................................................................27

3.4 PROJECTIONS ......................................................................................30

4 WIDER ROLLOUT OPPORTUNITIES ......................................................... 31 4.1 BIW TECHNOLOGY GUILD........................................................................31



4.2 NICHE VEHICLE NETWORK .......................................................................31

4.3 YELLOW GOODS, HEAVY COMMERCIAL AND LIGHT COMMERCIAL VEHICLES...............31

4.4 WHITE GOODS AND PACKAGING.................................................................31

5 APPENDIX A – SUPPLIERS INVOLVED .................................................... 32

6 APPENDIX B – THE IARC TEAM ............................................................... 35



1 Document History

Issue Owner Date Reason for Issue

A Richard Hewitt 04/10/06 First draft

B Richard Hewitt 17/01/07 Inclusion of modifications after closure review.

C Richard Hewitt 23/03/07 Document Updated to reflect Changes Requested During Steering Group Closure Review.



2 Background and Introduction

2.1 Background

The Advanced Body Joining (ABJ) project was one of 20 projects within the Premium Automotive Research & Development programme running at the International Automotive Research Centre. The ABJ project was divided into 4 main areas:

• Low Investment Alternatives to SPR for Structural Joining of Aluminium.

o Resistance Spot Welding For Aluminium o Friction Spot Joining

• Aluminium MIG/CMT Weld Process Capability.

• Self Pierce Riveting (SPR) Projects:

o SPR for Steel/Aluminium Joints. o SPR Die Failure. o NDT Methods for SPR.

• Granular Hot Melt Body Adhesives and Sealants.

A number of Body Joining technologies which are either in use or being considered for introduction were identified

Many of these technologies, whilst described as “implementation ready”, did not have a robust supply chain within the West Midlands which could guarantee reliable, consistent results.

The main thrust of the of the Advanced Body Joining program was to develop a robust knowledge base for critical, targeted joining technologies identified.

Figure 1: Flow Process.

Technology Brief

Boundary Definition

Business Benefits &

Risks

Process Stability

Process Window



2.2 Introduction

The Advanced Body Joining Project received funding approval from the PARD Steering Group in October 2003, with a subsequent revision in January 2004. This revision consolidated the work streams listed:

• NDT methods for Self Pierce Rivets • Self Pierce Rivets for Steel/Aluminium Joints • Spot Friction Welding Of Aluminium • NDT Methods for Adhesively Bonded Structures • Application of Granular Hot Melt Adhesives • Structural Joint Processes For Aluminium Body Construction • Process Capability Investigation into Aluminium MIG/CMT Welding • Self Pierce Rivet Die Failure: identify root cause and support implementation of

preventative actions.

The only work stream which did not proceed was the investigation into Non Destructive Methods for the evaluation of Adhesively Bonded Structures; this was curtailed due to an existing programme of research within Jaguar & Ford and the corresponding increase in work load required on other programmes.

The focus of the work within this programme was to ensure that production technologies to be used within the manufacture of Premium Automotive Vehicles would be introduced in a robust manner. Matching the principles required by the Product Development System (FPDS) for product development.

The basis for this robust introduction was supported by the following documents:

Technology Brief – An initial report giving the technology description, estimated potential benefits & risks and basis for further work (or not).

Boundary Definition Report – A generic application report outlining the specific capabilities of the process and its benefits and limitations.

Business Benefits & Risks Report - A generic report into the Technology and its specific benefits and limitations when applied to the specific area of application.

Process Window – Evaluation of process performance when subjected to nominal design conditions.

Process Stability - Evaluation of process capability when subjected to the typical variability expected to be subjected to in the manufacturing process.

Process Engineering Guidelines – The aim from each of the streams of work was to provide a guide to the Manufacturing Engineering Personnel on how to apply the specific technology: its applicable range of application, the limitations, current applications, potential, lessons learnt, etc. It would also be expected that any new application would be proceeded by a production line trial where the equipment would be exposed to the normal running conditions within a production facility.



2.3 Robust Validation Process

The key aim of this programme was to put in place a robust validation process as outlined by the above documents. These outlined the benefits & risks and capabilities of the process and also dependant upon the stage of development matched them against the particular product / process requirement.

A key aim is to embed this approach to robust process validation within the supply chain to ensure that ongoing process development, improvement and incorporation will continue.

This document can only provided a flavour of the work carried out to achieve the specified deliverable. For each technology information has been included to demonstrate the approach and achievements during the programme. If further information is required please review the detailed documentation listed in the ‘Reports Issued’ Section. Information can be accessed through the team based within the IARC at the University of Warwick.



Technical Projects 2.4 Low Investment Alternatives to SPR for Structural Joining of

Aluminium.

o Resistance Spot Welding For Aluminium o Friction Spot Joining

The first stage of this analysis was to review the performance of these 2 technologies against the existing structural joining process of Self Pierce Rivets.

Self Pierce Riveting (SPR)

+ Best mechanical properties + Mixed material joints - Ongoing cost of rivets - Gun flexibility Resistance Spot Welding (RSW)

+ Low cost of equipment + Gun flexibility & automation - Consistency remains to be proven - Tip maintenance needed Spot Friction Joining (SFJ)

+ Joining thin materials + Low running costs - Long process time for thick sheet - Gun flexibility Table 1: Base Comparison Between SPR, RSW & SFJ.

A Comparison of mechanical performance

• Figure 2: Typical Lap-Shear and T-Peel test results for RSW, SPR & SFJ

Lap-Shear Tensile Curves For 2+2 mm AA5754

T-Peel Test Curves For 2+2 mm AA5754

Button

Indent

Hole

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Loa

d (

kN

)

Tensile extension (mm)

RS

SFJ

SPR

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2.0

2.2

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Loa

d (

kN

)

Peel extension (mm)

RS

SFJ

SPR



2.4.1 Resistance Spot Welding of Aluminium

Main aims of the aluminium RSW research:

• To overcome the perceived problem of short electrode life and the weld quality problems associated with electrode degradation.

• Develop process window data and consistent robust techniques to enable the adoption of RSW in high volume sheet applications.

The benefit of electrode maintenance.

• The pictures show the degradation in the electrode face, weld indentation and weld button shape after 700 welds without electrode maintenance.

After 700 welds (no buffing)

Electrode Component Surface Weld Button

• Contrast this with the unchanged electrode condition and weld quality after 10,000 welds when regular electrode maintenance is employed.

After 10,000 welds (regular buffing)

Electrode Component Surface Weld Button

Robotic Tip Buffing

The initial process was proved a manual set up. This was then proved using the set up show, manipulating the gun with the robot to retain the required tip geometry.

The final solution of gyrating mechanical motion within the tip buffing unit will preserve the domed shape is preserved over many thousands of buffing operations. This orbital motion is achieved by either manipulating the robot holding the weld gun, or by using a gyrating mechanism in the buffing station.

10

Fig 3: – Robotic Tip Buffing.



2.4.2 Friction Spot Joining of Aluminium

DoE Application: • Applied to initial parameter scoping trials • Processing undertaken by AMTD • Valuable technique providing clear pictorial result and predicted maximum

values

Fig 4: Peel Strength Gradient Graph

The comparison between Friction Spot Joining, Self Pierce Rivets and Resistance Spot Welding led to the discontinuation of investigation into Friction Spot Joining at this time. As seen below the time taken to create a joint of comparable strength is too long for the envisaged production applications.

Process Comparrison 7192.0-1 to 2 2mm 6111 - 1.8mm 5754

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

Joint 5 - SFJ - 5s Joint 5 - SFJ - 4s Joint 5 - RSW Joint 5 - SPR Joint 5 - SPR - Rev

Joint

Pee

l/She

ar

Str

engt

h(N

)

0.02.04.06.08.010.012.014.016.0

She

ar E

long

atio

n

HighLowMeanHighLowMeanHighLowMean

Further process concerns: Residual sheet thickness Joints can be made with AL070 lubricant present, but process window

restricted. Multiple sheet stacks:

Three sheet stacks are not possible (restricted heat transfer into bottom sheet).

Cycle time: 1mm – 1mm alloys, Joints of maximum strength can be made in 1s, only

for specific alloy combinations. Joints in 5754 require 3s cycle times

3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 4.2 4.4 4.6 4.8 5.04.0

4.2

4.4

4.6

4.8

5.0

*

*

*

*

*

500 600 700 800900

1000

1100

1100

1200

1200

1200

1300

1300

1300

13001300

1400

1400

14001400

1500

1500

1500

1500

PEELROTATION = 2500

CLAMP

TIME_

Fig 5: FSJ / RSW /SPR Joint Strength Comparison



2.4.3 Low Cost solution to Structural Joining of Aluminium:

Resistance Spot Welding - Business Drivers: • Reduce cost of consumables – Rivets are very expensive compared to the cost

of energy for spot welding(approx 10 times more). • Reduce cost of equipment & increase flexibility

SPR guns are more expensive and need a number of them for a range of joints.

RSW will weld a wide range of material thicknesses without the need for gun changes.

• Join steel or aluminium with same equipment - An RSW gun specked for aluminium can also weld steel parts. This means that a facility that has been specified for an Aluminium sub-assembly can be re-used or can be designed to concurrently produced components from the different materials.

Fig 6: Cost Comparison between SPR / RSW & FSJ.

Graph comparing the cost differences for SPR, RSW and SFJ based on installing a line for producing 35,000 units per annum and running the line for five years.

2.4.4 Low Cost solution to Structural Joining of Aluminium Technical Outcomes

In summary the development of Resistance Spot Welding of Aluminium has been able to

demonstrate the technical capabilities of the companies within the work stream and their

ability to deliver a working system that will meet the robustness of design requirements for a

modern production facility.

The companies within the work stream have primarily been developing the equipment to

deliver this process. Jaguar and Land Rover have provided the bulk of the deliverable KPIs as

they are currently the only vehicle manufacturer involved in this development. Other parties

have provided KPIs, but at a reduced level.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

SPR RSW SFJ

$ (1

,000

,000

)

Robots Joining EquipmentElectricty Consumables



We have seen Sertec initiate the installation of a cell incorporating this technology within their

facility to produce a new sub-assembly. It is expected that the further aluminium sub-

assemblies, to meet weight and CO2 emission targets, will be required from the supply base.

Continued development and dissemination of the technical content will allow more companies

to take up the use of this process and receive the ensuing benefits as detailed above.

These benefits have provided the base from which the deliverables have been achieved.



2.5 Aluminium MIG/CMT Weld Process Capability

Cold Metal Transfer (CMT) Welding

• Developed by Fronius welding, Austria, CMT is a revolution in low thermal input welding at the same time offering high material deposition with virtually spatter free droplet transition.

• CMT offers high productivity with good gap bridging properties and the ability to weld ultra light / ultra thin material sections – 0.3mm aluminium welds being possible with backing support. Additionally, as arc length is controlled mechanically the process is insensitive to work surface conditions.

The work at Warwick developed guide lines for the application of the technology for automotive application. Critical applications is to understand the acceptable operating parameters to ensure a robust repeatable application of the process to provide a structurally stable joint.

The parameters of operation were evaluated and guide lines for operation disseminated. During this process trials were carried out on production parts resulting in successful applications at Widney and Prescott Powell. Guidelines were generated for use at Jaguar and Land Rover.

As is indicated in the visuals an extensive range of variables can be seen from only the geometric line up of parts and weld torch. The out put document had to review all expected variation and provide a baseline for future application of this technology.

Figure 1: Process Variations.

The generation of the guide required extensive trials and testing and resulted in further investigation into joints in Aluminium and hybrid joints of steel and aluminium.

Futher research work in this area has been applied for , although at this time no further funding has been received.

-ve X

+ve Z +ve X

T o rc h a n g le

Torch Angle 20°

Confirming process capability with a 0.4mm gapping and a torch angle of 20 degrees.



2.5.1 Aluminium MIG/CMT Weld Process Technical Outcomes

The application of this technology has allowed Widney to automate the manufacture of aluminium extruded window frames with an improved competitive position, this has enabled them to provide a business benefit as well as safeguarding the employees currently employed within that segment of their business.

Prescott Powell was able to utilise this process to win a contract, demonstrating the required product cost and quality.

Currently there has been no uptake of this technology within the Jaguar and Land Rover Group. The programme has proved the capability of the process to provide alternative solutions to design issues if they arrive (single sided structural joints). This process may also improve the quality of the exterior cosmetic joint indicative of Jaguar vehicles, although further work would be required to improve the component design in that area to fully realise the benefits of the process. Partner companies have expressed their interest in future development of this process, if this type of cosmetic joint in included within the design of future Jaguar and Land Rover vehicles.




-0.3-0.2-0.1

00.10.20.30.40.50.6

220 240 260 280 300 320 360

Setting Velocity (mm/min)

Hea

d he

ight

(mm

)

C2/1 C1/2 C2/2

2.6 Self Pierce Riveting (SPR) Projects:

2.6.1 SPR for Steel/Aluminium Joints.

The effect of Setting velocity on head height can be seen on this graph. It also demonstrates the effect of material stack combination to the process window for the process.

Fig 8: Process Window Example



The effect of the material hardness can be seen on the distribution below. The range of Die and Rivet combinations which will achieve a satisfactory joint is dramatically reduced when the material provided increases over the accepted hardness level.

-0.5

-0.3

-0.1

0.1

0.3

0.5

0.7

0.9

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Set-ups

Head

heig

ht m

m

(0.3

to -0

.5)

bolyer swedish

The key target for this work was to evaluate the mixed material joints currently applied on the X350, optimising the application for future models and providing guidelines for Process & Design Engineer Guidelines. The programme was extended to review the new materials proposed for future vehicles, ensuring that the higher strength combinations will achieve a robust process application.

Key Deliverables:

1. Extended process capability of various materials and combinations by identifying the effect of all relevant process variables on the application of SPR technology

2. Improved its application by understanding the mechanical behaviour including static and dynamic of riveted structures

3. Provided advice to Manufacturing process engineers and Body & Materials Engineers on robust feasibility application as well as performance consideration of the technique.

Fig 9: Demonstration of the Material Hardness Effect to the SPR Process.



2.6.2 NDT Methods for SPR.

2 Systems pursued for review:

TSonic – A single transducer utilising narrow band spectroscopy to evaluate the Self Pierce Rivet Joint.

Cambridge Ultrasonic – A single emitter with multiple receivers

Fig 10: – TSonic Transducer Fig 11: – Schematic for the Cambridge Ultrasonic Transducer

Both these systems were evaluated with positive initial early results. Following development work on the transducers both these systems exhibited the same issue; correlation between the results distribution from the NDT techniques and the failure modes exhibited by the process. The forcing of errors through parameter manipulation allowed successful results to be achieved; though the success of the method was deemed to be unacceptable when the parameters lay on the cusp between failure and acceptable joints. The spread of results for an acceptable and failed result and the separation of these distributions meant that the level of significance was not achieved to provide a confident result.

Fig 12: Sample result from TSonic Equipment.

The decision was therefore taken to discontinue expenditure upon these techniques until an improved solution became available.

-40000

-30000

-20000

-10000

0

10000

20000

-60000 -50000 -40000 -30000 -20000 -10000 0 10000

Series1 Series2



2.6.3 SPR Die Failure.

This diagram tries to show how the learning gained from the investigation into the Die Failure of Self Pierce Rivets can be embedded into the manufacturing process. The route to success within this project was reached through multiple actions, many of which contributed to the final success of the project.

Records of these actions needed to be recorded to ensure that the lessons learned could be embedded within the process maintenance and new process introduction methodologies applied.

2.6.4 Self Pierce Riveting Technical Outcomes.

The application of the new understanding of the process of riveting has allowed benefits to be realised within the Jaguar and Land Rover facilities.

o Improving the process capability of the applied process by ensuring that the capable process is employed meeting the inherent variation with the manufacturing process.

o Reducing die failure within the rivet application process.

ASSESSMENT

ProductFacilities Processes People

Vision

Business Strategy

Business Needs

Individual Individual

Individual Capability Knowledge, Skills,

Business environment Company culture Performance management

Opportunities

Competitive Advantage

Capability Change

TRAINING

TRANSFER OF LEARNING

‘Role Deliverables’

Business Unit Functionality

Overlays

Identify & Evaluate process variables & route causes of die failure.

Develop baseline preventative maintenance parameters for die materials.

Measurables.

• Die Life increase. • Reduction of failure

in service. • Rework costs.Business Units.

• Manufacturing Engineering • Maintenance • Henrob • Supplementary Suppliers.

Manufacturing Engineering. Product Design.

Training • Die Materials • Die form • Positional alignment / compliance. • Failure detection • Nose Design • Joint position close to radius or edge –

NOT ACCEPTABLE. • Surface roughness.

Methods.

Direct seminars. On line design guidelines. On line Manufacturing Engineering guidelines.

Fig 13: - Competitive Capability Model.



o Incorporating the knowledge of the hybrid joint design into new product development and reducing the number of design concessions to manufacture the vehicle as designed.

o The application and further development of this technology will allow the over all weight reduction and consequential CO2 emmision reduction for future vehicles.




2.7 Granular Hot Melt Body Adhesives and Sealants.

The application of this technology was proven early on in the projects life when over 400 roof reinforcements for the Range Rover Sport prototype vehicles had their gap fill adhesive beads applied on site at Warwick. They were then shipped to Solihull and assembled on site. The bead proved capable of both transport and also of being able to support a greater gap than the current material.

The core issue was the ability of the material to be applied through a range of specified oil thicknesses. So although the material pass the initial trials, further tests were carried out to prove that the process could meet the full range of process parameters.

100mm/s Adhesive Flow (cc/s)

2.0gm/m2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

2 3.3 4 4.4 5.1 5.3

3 3.4 4.3 5.3 4.3 7.3 9.5 7.2 7.8

4 3.8 4.6 5.4 5.9 6.6 7.4 8.3 7.5

5 4 4.8 5.6 6.5 7.2 7.8 7.3 8

6 4 4.9 6 6.8 7 7.6 8.2 8.5

7 4.2 4.9 5.7 6.5 7.3 7.6 8.1 8.2

Nozzle Stand-off (mm)

8 3.9 5.2 5.6 6.3 6.7 7.8 7.6 8.3

It was seen from the above tables that the range of nozzle stand offs and adhesive flow dramatically decrease with the greater amount of oil. A process improvement was therefore sort to overcome the application constraints. A hot air impingement system was added to the Granular Hot Melt System to improve the initial adhesion to the panel, which was successful.

Trials are now being carried out on a new production representative solution to prove this process in Warwick, prior to the technology being tried in a production line trial. The process will then be signed of for future production implementation on new models.

100mm/s Adhesive Flow (cc/s)

4.0gm/m2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

2 3.3 4 4.4 5.1 5.3

3 3.4 4.3 5.3 4.3 7.3 9.5 7.2 7.8

4 3.8 4.6 5.4 5.9 6.6 7.4 8.3 7.5

5 4 4.8 5.6 6.5 7.2 7.8 7.3 8

6 4 4.9 6 6.8 7 7.6 8.2 8.5

7 4.2 4.9 5.7 6.5 7.3 7.6 8.1 8.2

Nozzle Stand-off (mm)

8 3.9 5.2 5.6 6.3 6.7 7.8 7.6 8.3

Fig 14: - GHM Process Window Evaluation (Example).



2.7.1 Granular Hot Melt Technical Outcomes.

The main benefits of Granular Hot Melt are:

o The reduction in material applied when compared with existing pumpable products.

o The reduction in material wastage due to improved material handling within the delivery system. Indicatively current system waste around 15% of the material at barrel change whereas this process has done away with this requirement.

o The new material can replace tape applications where a high volume of space needs to be filled, previously not possible with a pumpable product. The savings available when comparing piece prices with tape products are of a higher order than those realised with the pumpable products.

o Following the application of the adhesive and before curing, the parts may be handled, assembled or stored without degradation or slump of the adhesive product. This can enable the adhesive to be applied off-site and shipped in for assembly

o Until the material enters its curing cycle it may be recycled – the applied adhesive may be stripped off and granulated using conventional polymer processing equipment. These granules can then be processed through the application system as per fresh material. This has implications for material disposal, with a much reduced volume of material being disposed of as compared to conventional pumpable products. Also during set-up phases the panels being processed can be re-used without requiring extensive cleaning regimes.




o Short Projects

In parallel with the main technical projects, several short projects were also carried out on behalf of JLR, BIW Guild and associated companies. Friction Stud Joining Process analysis for the Joining of Aluminium Studs to the Vehicle Body identified a piece of kit produced by Harms + Wende which could provide this function. Due to cost and model constraints this solution has not yet been taken any further by Jaguar or Land Rover. NDT Methods for Adhesively Bonded Structures Initial investigation was carried out into the use of NDT equipment for adhesive application. This research was terminated once a parallel investigation was discovered within Ford.



2.8 Reports Issue

Reports and journal papers have been issued on a regular basis, either in Workshop Reviews, Supplier Technical Reviews, Technical Closure Meetings or technically recognised conferences.

The reports are as follows:

Publications:

L. Han, A. Chrysanthou, J. M. O’Sullivan, "Fretting behaviour of self-piercing riveted aluminum alloy joints under different interfacial conditions", Journal of Materials & Design, 27(3), pp.200-208, (Jun 2006)

L. Han, K.W.Young and A. Chrysanthou, "Characterisation of fretting fatigue in self-piercing riveted aluminium alloy joints", Journal of Fatigue & Fracture of Engineering Materials and Structures, (May 2006) (accepted)

L. Han, K.W.Young and A. Chrysanthou, J M O'Sullivan, "The effect of pre-straining on the mechanical behaviour of self-piercing riveted aluminium alloy sheets", Journal of Materials & Design, (Nov 2005) (in press)

L. Han, K. W. Young, R. Hewitt and A. Chrysanthou, "Effect of breakthrough on the behaviour of self-piercing riveted aluminium 5754 – HSLA joints", Transactions of JSAE, 36(5), (Sep 2005)

N. Blundell, L. Han, K. W. Young and R. Hewitt, "A competitive study between self-piercing riveting and spot friction stir welding", Transactions of JSAE, 36(5), (Sep 2005)

L. Han, K. W. Young, R. Hewitt and A. Chrysanthou, J M O'Sullivan, "The effect of pre-straining on the Mechanical behaviour of self-piercing riveted aluminium alloy sheets", Journal of Advanced Materials Research, 6, pp.157-162, (May 2005)

A. Chrysanthou, E.K.Opoku and L.Han, "An investigation of the self-propagating synthesis of Ti(Si, Al)2", Journal of Materials Science, 40, pp.2579-2581, ISSN:0022-2461, (Feb 2005)

Y. K. Chen, L. Han, A. Chrysanthou, J. M. O’Sullivan, "Fretting in self-piercing riveted aluminium alloy sheets", Wear, 255, pp.1463-1470, ISSN:0043-1648, (Oct 2003)

Conference Papers:

P. Briskham, L. Han, N. Blundell, K. W. Young, R. Hewitt and D. Boomer, "Comparison of self-pierce riveting, resistance spot welding and spot friction joining for aluminium automotive sheet", SAE 2006 congress, Detroit, USA, Paper 2006 – 01- 0774, (Apr 2006)

L. Han, K.W. Young, R. Hewitt, M. R. Alkahari and A.Chrysanthou, "Effect of sheet material coatings on quality and strength of self-piercing riveted joints", SAE 2006 annual congress, Detroit , USA, Paper , 2006 – 01-0775, (Apr 2006)

N. Blundell, L. Han, K. W. Young and R. Hewitt, "The influence of Paint Bake Cycles on the Mechanical Properties of Spot Friction Joined Aluminium Alloys", SAE 2006 congress, Detroit, USA, Paper 2006 – 01 - 0967, (Apr 2006)

A. Chrysanthou, L. Han, J. Ioannou and J.M. O’ Sullivan, "Quality examination and fatigue performance of self-piercing riveted joints between aluminium 5182 and interstitial-free steel", The 3rd International Conference on Manufacturing Research ICMR2005 incorporating the 21st UK National Conference on Manufacturing Research NCMR, Cranfield University, Bedfordshire, ISBN1861941226, (Sep 2005)



L. Han, A. Chrysanthou, J. M. O'Sullivan, K. Young & R. Hewitt, "Fatigue failure modes in self-piercing riveted aluminium alloy joints", The 7th Biennial ASME Conference on Engineering System Design and Analysis - ESDA 2004, Manchester, (Jul 2004)

L. Han, Y. K. Chen, A. Chrysanthou, J. M. O’Sullivan, "The influence of paint-bake cycle on the mechanical behaviour of self-piercing riveted aluminium alloy joints", The 10th International Conference on Sheet Material, Belfast, pp.412-419, (Apr 2003)

L. Han, J. M. O’Sullivan, Y. K. Chen, A. Chrysanthou, "Failure in self-piercing riveted joints under dynamic loading", 18 National Conference on Manufacturing Research, Leeds, UK, pp.527-531, ISBN1860583784, (Sep 2002)

L. Han, Y. K. Chen, A. Chrysanthou, J. M. O’Sullivan, "Self-pierce riveting – A new way for joining structures", ASME 2002 PVP, Vancouver, Canada, 446-2, pp.123-127, (Aug 2002)

Craig Pickin, Ken Young, "Arc Brazing of Galvanised Steel Sheets using the Cold Metal Transfer (CMT) Process", Materials and Manufacturing Processes, (Apr 2006) (in submission)

Craig Pickin, Ken Young, "Welding of Aluminium Alloy using the Cold Metal Transfer (CMT) Process.", Science and Technology of Welding and Joining., (Mar 2006) (in Submission)

Craig Pickin, Ken Young,I. Tuersley, "Joining of Lightweight Sandwich Sheets to Aluminium using Self Pierce Riveting.", Materials and Design, (Jan 2006) (In submission)

Craig Pickin, "Joining Technologies for Lightweight Sandwich Sheets", IIR Conference, Dresden, Germany, (Mar 2004)

P Briskham, D Boomer, R Hewitt, "Developments towards high-volume resistance welding of aluminium automotive sheet component", LWV6, (Sep 05)

Jaguar & Land Rover Papers:

Nic Blundell Granular Hot Melt

1. Business Benefits & Risks Report 2. Technology Boundary Definition 3. Manufacturing Issues 4. DAGAS Interim Report 5. PARDP DAGAS Interim Process Window Investigation Report 6. Process Engineering Guidelines – SCA Adhesive Application Equipment. 7. Draft DAGAS Process Engineer Guidelines.

Nic Blundell Spot Friction Joining

1. Friction Stir Spot Welding Technology Boundary Definition 2. Interim Report 3. Process Window Investigation – Interim Report 4. Interim Report: Friction Spot Joining of Aluminium Alloys for Kawasaki

Robot UK and Kawasaki Heavy Industries.

Mohammed Chunggaze SPR Die Failure

1. Die Failure Learning Document

Craig Pickin 1. Process Window CMT Brazing of Galvanised Steel Sheets.

Li Han Self Pierce Riveting

1. Technology boundary definition report 2. Bus Ben Risks Rpt 3. Design of Experiments 4. Process Engineering Guideline 1: Self-Pierce Riveting of Steel ~

Aluminium Joints 5. Process Engineering Guideline 2: Self-Pierce Riveting of high strength

Aluminium Joints 6. NDT of self-pierce riveting report 7. Process Window and Stability Analysis for SPR Joints in Jaguar X351

Cantrail Assembly – 8 reports



3 Outputs

3.1 Achievements and Plans

A summary of the actual and planned deliverables for the Advanced Body Joining project is shown in Table 1. The details behind each deliverable are included in the audited Supplier Sign-Off Sheets, and within the PARD Planning Tool.

Table 1 Summary of Deliverables

Advanced Body Joining

Output Actual Plan 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Target

Business Assists 44 JLR 1 100%

Suppliers 42 1 1 Sub Total 43 1 1 Jobs Safeguarded 440 JLR 209 209 101%

Suppliers 95 138 5 126 7

Sub Total 95 347 5 335 7

Learning Opportunities 440 JLR 150 111 61 50 100% Suppliers 152 27 17 10

Sub Total 302 138 78 60

New Products & Processes

22

JLR 12 145%

Suppliers 16 4 4

Sub Total 28 4 4

Skills Achieved 22 JLR 73% Suppliers 16 Sub Total R&D Investment 4,400,000JLR 1105480 415480 270000 220000 220000 99%

Suppliers 2566362 690032 330032 120000 120000 120000

Sub Total 2566362 1795512 745,512 390000 340,000 320,000

Value Added 33,000,000JLR 895,000 9234000 495000 995000 3997000 3747000 63% Suppliers 315000 10275334 72000 1081000 1845000 4256667 3020667 Sub Total 1210000 19509334 72000 1576000 2840000 8253667 6767667 * values agreed but awaiting final signature



3.2 Risk Summary

Overall project summary.

ba js lo sa va rd ip npActual 43 278 302 16 1,210,000 2,566,362 0 28Low 0 141 26 0 10,480,000 1,795,512 0 4Medium 1 18 112 0 7,389,334 0 0 0High 0 0 0 0 1,640,000 0 0 0Total 44 437 440 16 20,719,334 4,361,874 0 32Target 44 440 440 22 33,000,000 4,400,000 50,000 24

output

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

ba js lo sa va rd ip np

output

% o

f tar

get High

MediumLowactual

In any programme of development, there is an element of risk. However, the overall estimated level of risk for the ABJ project to achieve the AWM Deliverables is Low.

It is considered to be low risk, with the following concerns:

1. Many of the deliverables are related to future model programmes. It is perceived that these programmes are now part of an ongoing robust plan by Jaguar and Land Rover.

2. Where the quantity of deliverables relates to the level of inclusion of the technology within a future model programme, a conservative prediction was assumed. The expectation therefore is to increase rather than downgrade the figures when actuals come to be recorded.



3.3 Output Summary

As a useful guide, some of the key deliverables are summarised in this Closure Report as follows:

Business Assists

Within the Advanced Materials Integration project, 43 Business Assists have been achieved and recorded, with 1 further company to be recorded. The level of risk is therefore low for the final signature.

Jobs Safeguarded

The total identified figure is for 442 Jobs Safeguarded arising from JLR and the supply chain companies. These are due mainly to the application of the joining technologies within Jaguar and Land Rover and the application of the CMT process within Widney.

The level of risk associated with these deliverables is considered low. Within Jaguar & Land Rover the deliverables will be signed of next year and are associated primarily with the development of the new vehicles rather than their production effect. The jobs safeguarded within Widney will be signed off next year.

Learning Opportunities

There are 302 Learning Opportunities achieved to date within JLR and the supply chain, and these were spread across the project portfolio; with specific attention to Open Days and organised training.

The remaining plan for an additional 138 Learning Opportunities is split into 2 areas: 28 are considered low risk as all the partners have committed to these, and the post programme supplier liaison processes are being established; 100 are to be gained out of the IMDS module which is being created for ‘Aluminium Body Joining’. The IMDS learning opportunities are considered medium risk as they rely upon JLR and partners to fund the IMDS courses. An order is being raised by Jaguar and Land Rover for the first course of 15 people with a further 3 to run this year.

Within the programmes the driver was to record as many Learning Opportunities prior to the end of the programme, to this end 69% of the target has already been achieved with the ground laid for the achievement of the remaining Learning Opportunities in the period up to and including 2010. Reviewing the introduction of these technologies the current deliverables have been achieved by concentrating on the installation and engineering teams. There will therefore be an opportunity to gain further learning opportunities at the time of implementation by recording the learning required and achieved by the production teams who actually utilise this technology.



New Products and Processes

Several examples of New Products and Processes have been shown in this report.

The figures of 28 new products and processes have been signed off with a further 4 identified considered to be low risk, due to the partner commitments and post programme liaison processes.

R&D Investment

R&D investment of £2,566,362 already signed off is mainly due to agreed future Research Programmes already agreed or started subsequent to activities stimulated by PARD and jointly supported by Warwick and our Partners.

The planned R&D investment is mainly due to commitment by Jaguar & Land Rover and Suppliers to continue research into the joining processes within this programme.

The associated risk of achievement of these deliverables is also considered to be low, as work is now concentrated on those processes considered most appropriate for application.

Value Added

The total Value Added figure of £20.7 million (over 5 years) is based on incremental new business especially aluminium and cost efficiencies due to the application of the improved joining processes.

Where the level of take up has been discussed, the values presented have erred on the side of caution. The value is therefore expected to meet or exceed the prediction when the actuals are progressively collected, the risk is therefore considered to be low.

As raised within the closure meeting the ability to achieve further value add past the end of the 2010 recording period is high, as the technology will then be embedded within the existing vehicle programmes. Within this programme we have had to prove that the technology is:

o Capable to work at the design nominal

o Capable to work and provide robust performance when subjected to normal process variation

o The process then has to be proved within an existing production environment to prove its production readiness.

o The new process than has to be programmed into the next suitable vehicle for application.



This sequence of events had led to a longer than expected implementation time resulting in a lower than expected delivery of Value Added.

As discussed above the predicted values above have been conservative and efforts are being made to increase those values where appropriate when the time for sign off occurs.



3.4 Projections

Although the identified risks are low, particular attention should continue to be focused on:

1. Continued bidding for new contracts, many of which will have a high proportion of AHSS and aluminium. Use the knowledge from IARC in company presentations and portfolios.

2. Embed and spread the knowledge wider within each company, rather than keeping it with key individuals.

3. Keeping up to date with developments, especially by European competitors. The Euro Car Body Conference, organised by Automotive Circle is an excellent way of keeping abreast of trends in BIW material and technologies, and should continue to be attended by the team members.

4. Follow on work has been funded on:

a. Resistance Spot Welding

b. Self Pierce Riveting

c. Granular Hot Melt

A watching brief will be kept on the future vehicle process requirements and technological advances, to ensure that future research can be planned with team members when the need arises.

5. Work should continue on the processes identified to optimise the applications; ensuring that our partners can continue to provide technical excellence at a competitive rate.

6. PARDP Extension Funding – A submission has been made to extend the existing PARDP project work to enable further exploitation and dissemination of project outcomes and to enable completion of technology transfer work in the following areas:

o Hybrid SPR Joints – Aluminium to High Strength Steels

o Spot Welding of Aluminium

o Application of Granular Hot Melt Adhesive

Team supported by this funding does have knowledge of the other topics investigated in the initial funding, so further dissemination could occur on the streams which have currently ceased. Although the specialist knowledge no longer resides within the programme.



4 Wider Rollout Opportunities

There are at least 4 identified areas where there could be scope for wider rollout opportunities:

4.1 BIW Technology Guild

The cluster group known as the BIW Technology Guild includes the following companies: Stadco, CovPress, Sertec, Premier Sheet Metal and Whiston Industries. This has been a valuable pre-competitive discussion forum for future for technical development. The dissemination of information through this group should continue with possibilities to widen its membership to other local suppliers or to their common supplier Jaguar & Land Rover.

4.2 Niche Vehicle Network

A presentation was made to the Niche Vehicle Network comprises over 20 companies including Caterham, Connaught, GTM, Marcos, Morgan, Noble, Virago and Zolfe. Again, there are likely to be synergies in terms the joining of lightweight materials for body structures and closure assemblies.

4.3 Yellow Goods, Heavy Commercial and Light Commercial Vehicles

The yellow goods, heavy commercial and light commercial vehicle industries include companies such as Alvis, Caterpillar, Dennis Eagle, JCB and LTI Carbodies. These companies could potentially benefit from the increased knowledge in joining of advanced materials, and this is particularly likely to be with cold-rolled and hot-rolled sheet at thicker gauges.

4.4 White Goods and Packaging

Manufacturers of white goods (including photocopier and cooker manufacturers) tend to use simpler folded sheet and smaller brackets, but there may be opportunities for more adventurous designs based on some of the techniques discussed.



5 Appendix A – Suppliers Involved

The following table contains a list of principal suppliers involved in the Advanced Body Joining Project.

Company Contact Job Role Contact Details Status

Resistance Spot Welding of aluminium

JLR Mike Shergold

Manager, Advanced Joining Technology

01926 643311

[email protected]

Active

Rexroth, Bosch Group

Andrew Davies

Branch Manager, Handling and Car Body

01285 863 006

[email protected]

Active

Alcan Alan Carr Development Team Leader

01295 452 886

[email protected]

Active

AMDP Michael Foucault

Export Manager

+33 1 30 09 25 27

[email protected]

Active

Innoval Doug Boomer

Technology Specialist

01295 702 804

[email protected]

Active

ARO Welding Systems

Clare Pickin

Managing Director

024 762 14324

[email protected]

Active

Self Pierce Rivets

Jaguar Joe McNamara

Principle Engineer

024 762 05064

[email protected]

Active

Henrob Roger Doo Engineering Director

01244 837 220

[email protected]

Active

Cambridge Ultrasonics

David Andrews

Director 01954 231 494

[email protected]

Active

Comau Martin Kinsella

Mechanical Engineering Manager

01582 817 668

[email protected]

Active

TSonic Tadeusz Stepinski

President +46 18 471 1076

[email protected]

Active



Granular Hot Melt

DOW Philippe Belot

Global Product Marketing Manager

+41 55 416 85 74

[email protected]

Active

ABB Nigel Platt Sales Manager

01908 350 334

[email protected]

Active

Bead Tech Gordon Brady

Technical Director

07929 167 451

[email protected]

Active

SCA Schuker

Neil Chilvers

General Manager

01280 84 00 10

[email protected]

Active

Nothelfer UK Ltd

Steve Ainsworth

Project Manager

024 7651 6896

[email protected]

Active

FeRe Heinz Kurosch

Managing Director

+49 21 73 40 99 80

[email protected]

Active

Ernst Armin Ernst

+49 72 63 91 99 0

[email protected]

Active

Cold Metal Transfer

Fronius Otto Schuster

International Sales Manager

+43 7242 241 379

[email protected]

Active

TPS Fronius

Tom Palmer

CEO 01563 529435

[email protected]

Active

Widney Kevin Parker

Production Services Engineer

0121 327 5500

[email protected]

Active

Friction Spot Joining

Kawasaki Robotics UK Ltd

Jim Carr Sales & Applications Engineering

01925 713 000

[email protected]

Active

Ford RAE Tsung-Yu Pan

Senior Technical

+1 313 322 6845 Active



Specialist [email protected]

Oak Ridge National Laboratory

Michael L. Santella

Development Staff

+1 865 574 4805

[email protected]

Active

Kawasaki Heavy Industries

Hirofumi Tanaka

Senior Manager

+81 78 921 1894

[email protected]

Active



6 Appendix B – The IARC Team

International Automotive Research Centre

SPR & RSW Li Han Project Engineer

024 765 75385

[email protected]

Active

FSJ & GHM Nic Blundell

Project Engineer

024 765 75383

[email protected]

Active

RSW Paul Briskham

AJRC, Coventry

024 7688 8764

p.briskham@coventry

Active

CMT /MIG Craig Pickin

Research Associate

024 765 74602

[email protected]

Active

Principle Investigator

Ken Young

IMRC Director

024 765 22764

[email protected]

Active

premium automotive research and development programme · pdf filepremium automotive research...

Documents