w w w . a u t o s t e e l . o r g

Recapturing Aluminum Closures with Optimized Steel Solutions

J.P. McGuireUnited States Steel Corporation

w w w . a u t o s t e e l . o r g

Imagine the Possibilities

$250,000,000/yr.$250,000,000/yr.

w w w . a u t o s t e e l . o r g

Imagine the Possibilities

17,200 Loaded Sedans17,200 Loaded Sedans

w w w . a u t o s t e e l . o r g

Private Islands in Private Islands in ParadiseParadise

$250,000,000/yr.$250,000,000/yr.

w w w . a u t o s t e e l . o r g

Imagine the Possibilities

$250,000,000/yr.$250,000,000/yr.1 year1 year--long long private golf private golf lesson with lesson with

Tiger WoodsTiger Woods

w w w . a u t o s t e e l . o r g

Gross Yearly Sales of Aluminum Sheet to Domestic Gross Yearly Sales of Aluminum Sheet to Domestic OEMS for Closures: Hoods, OEMS for Closures: Hoods, DecklidsDecklids, , LiftgatesLiftgates, ,

Fenders Fenders (approx. 2003, per Detroit News, American Metal Market)(approx. 2003, per Detroit News, American Metal Market)

= = $600,000,000$600,000,000

Minimum Yearly Savings by Minimum Yearly Savings by Moving to Optimized Steel Moving to Optimized Steel

Designs = Designs = $250,000,000$250,000,000

Imagine the Possibilities

w w w . a u t o s t e e l . o r g

Cost/Weight Balance

Aluminum has a Substantial Cost Disadvantage

Unoptimized Steel Designs have a

Significant Weight Disadvantage

AA

LLUU

MM

IINN

UUMM

BIG Steel

w w w . a u t o s t e e l . o r g

Seal Stiffness & Impact Dominated

Sheet Doors

Hybrid Doors

Aluminum Weight Reduction (%) Compared to Steel

Cos

t per

lb. t

o Im

plem

ent A

lum

inum

$1.0/lb.

$1.5/lb.

$2.0/lb.

40 50 5545

Strength Dominated (minimum gauge)

Fenders

Stiffness DominatedHoods

Deck Lids

Tailgates

The Overall Picture

Wheels

Oil-Can & Stiffness Dominated

Liftgates

Sliding doors

35

From Domestic OEMs Business Case Assessments 3 to 10

Years Ago

Engine Blocks

w w w . a u t o s t e e l . o r g

The 8 Step Process

Benchmark Aluminum Application

1

CAE Structural (section refinement) &

Manufacturing Validation (forming)

Reevaluate Business Case/CAFE

Assessment of potential Optimized Steel Replacement?

Concept development & CAE Structural

Optimization Studies of potential new Steel Design

options

Select Optimal Materials using new

steel technologies and best manufacturing

options

YES

YES

YES

2 3

4

5YES

Prototype Build with

OEM

Prototype Validation

(dent, durability)

Launch Assistance

YES

YES

67

8YES

w w w . a u t o s t e e l . o r g

Application DescriptionNumber of Parts in

AssemblyCost Savings per

OEM (Per/Yr.)Tons/yr. of Steel

Business Aquired

1 Sedan Decklid Assembly 6 $2,648,000 4374

2 Sedan Fender Assembly 8 (4 parts RH & LH) $1,748,000 2700

3Sedan Fender Assembly

8 (4 parts RH & LH) $1,154,000 2200

4 Cross Over Liftgate 9 $16,500,000 11500

5 SUV Fenders 8 (4 parts RH & LH) $15,840,000 11100

6 Cross Over Hood 6 $2.866,000 4855

7 Large SUV Liftgate Assembly

9 $24,500,000 18549

8 Small Car Hood Assembly 5 $2,740,000 3874

9 Minivan Liftgate 9 $16,500,000 14400

TOTALS 68 Parts Converted $81,630,000.00 73552

North American OEM

North American OEM

North American OEM

North American OEM

North American OEM

North American OEM

North American OEM

North American OEM

North American OEM

Recent Successes – Aluminum to Steel

w w w . a u t o s t e e l . o r g

Benchmarking – U. S. Steel & IISI FKA Studies

Vehicle Inner Panel Outer Panel Hinge Rnf Latch Rnf Other RnfGrade Gage (mm) Grade Gage (mm) Grade Gage (mm) Grade Gage (mm) Grade Gage (mm)

OEM1Full Size SUV 6111 AL 0.9 min 6111 AL 0.9 min NA NA 6111 AL 1.8 min 6111 AL 0.9 minFull Size Pick-up 6111 AL 0.9 min 6111 AL 0.9 min 6111 AL 2.0 min 6111 AL 1.5 min 6111 AL 0.9 minMid Size SUV 6111 AL 0.9 min 6111 AL 0.9 min 6111 AL 2.6 min 6111 AL 1.8 min 6111 AL 0.9 minSedan 5182 AL 0.89 min 6111 AL 0.89 min NA NA NA NA NA NASedan DDQ HDGI 0.7 min BH210 EG 0.79 min NA NA NA NA NA NASmall Pick-up DDQ HDGI 0.65 min BH210 EG 0.7 min NA NA NA NA NA NASmall SUV DDQ EG 0.6 min BH210 EG 0.7 min NA NA NA NA NA NASmall SUV 5182 AL 0.89 min 6111 AL 0.89 min NA NA NA NA NA NA

OEM2Full Size Pick-up DDQ HDGI 0.7 nom BH180 EG 0.7 nom NA NA NA NA NA NAFull Size SUV DDQ HDGI 0.7 nom BH210 EG 0.7 nom NA NA NA NA NA NAFull Size Van DDQ HDGI 0.7 nom DDQ EG 0.7 nom NA NA NA NA NA NAMid Size SUV 6111 AL 1.0 nom 6111 AL 1.0 nom 5182 AL 2.5 nom 5182 AL 2.5 nom 5182 AL 1.5 nomMid Size SUV DDQ HDGI 0.75 nom DDQ EG 0.75 nom DDQ HDGI 1.6 nom DDQ HDGI 0.75 nom NA NAMid Size SUV DDQ HDGI 0.75 nom DDQ EG 0.75 nom DDQ HDGI 1.6 nom DDQ HDGI 0.75 nom NA NASedan 6111 AL 0.8 nom 6111 AL 1.0 nom 5182 AL 2.5 nom 5182 AL 2.0 nom 5182 AL 1.6 nomSedan NA NA DDQ EG 0.7 nom NA NA NA NA NA NASedan DDQ HDGI 0.65 nom BH180 EG 0.7 nom NA NA NA NA NA NASmall Car DDQ HDGI 0.65 nom DDQ EG 0.7 nom NA NA NA NA NA NASmall Car DDQ HDGI 0.65 nom BH180 EG 0.7 nom NA NA NA NA NA NASmall Pick-up DDQ HDGI 0.6 nom BH240 EG 0.7 nom NA NA NA NA NA NASmall SUV DDQ HDGA 0.6 nom DDQ EG 0.7 nom NA NA NA NA NA NA

OEM3Full Size Van NA NA DDQ EGA 0.787 min NA NA NA NA NA NAFull Size Pick-up DDQ HDGA 0.66 min DDQ EGA 0.75 min NA NA NA NA NA NAFull Size SUV EDDQ HDGA 0.635 min DDQ EGA 0.737 min DDQ CR 1.5 min NA NA NA NAFull Size SUV DDQ HDGA 0.66 min DDQ EGA 0.787 min NA NA NA NA NA NAMid Size SUV 6022 AL 0.909 min 6022 AL 0.909 min 6022 AL 1.9 min 6022 AL 0.826 min NA NAMid Size SUV DDQ HDGA 0.737 min DDQ EGA 0.8 min NA NA NA NA NA NAMid-size SUV DDQ EG 0.711 min DDQ EG 0.762 min NA NA GR210 EG 0.61 min NA NASmall Car DDQ HDGA 0.66 min DDQ EGA 0.711 min NA NA NA NA NA NASmall Car DDQ HDGA 0.61 min DDQ EGA 0.838 min NA NA DDQ HDGA 0.61 min NA NASmall Pick-up NA NA DDQ EGA 0.745 min NA NA NA NA NA NASmall Pick-up DDQ HDGI 0.635 min DDQ EGA 0.737 min NA NA NA NA NA NASmall SUV NA NA EDDQ EGA 0.787 min NA NA NA NA NA NAVan EDDQ HDGA 0.584 min DDQ EGA 0.711 min NA NA DDQ HDGA 0.711 min NA NA

Most efficient Steel Design in Production

Most efficient Aluminum Design in Production

1). While aluminum may weigh less than steel hoods, on average aluminum hoods have poorer structural performance.

2). Current steel designs are somewhat dated designs worldwide – whereas, aluminum designs are state of the art for light weight.

3). As the hoods do not have the same size, it is important to normalize structural performance data when evaluating and comparing results.

4). A common aluminum industry rumor – that aluminum hoods are generally better for pedestrian impact – is not legitimate. Pedestrian friendly hoods can be designed with steel as well as other materials.

w w w . a u t o s t e e l . o r g

Hood Example:Saving Weight & Cost with Material

Substitution

Panel OuterPanel Outer Panel InnerPanel Inner

ReinforcementsReinforcementsCAE ValidationCAE Validation

Current Grade/Gauge =.72 mm DQSK

Proposed Grade/Gauge =.60 mm BH250 or DP500

ResultsCost Savings = 11%Weight Savings = 20%

Current Grade/Gauge =.70 mm DQSK

Proposed Grade/Gauge =.55 mm EDDQ+

ResultsCost Savings = 24.5%Weight Savings= 27.2%

F

torsional rigidity

F

bending stiffness

F1F2 F3

F4

side beam stiffnesses

Current Grade/Gauge = 1.6 mm EDQ HD (Hinge), .75 mm (Latch)

Proposed Grade/Gauge = 1.4 mm HSLA GR 350

.60 mm BH250Results

Cost Savings = up to 100%Weight Savings

= 14% & 20%

w w w . a u t o s t e e l . o r g

Optimization

United States Steel Advanced Applications Technology

Altair OPTISTRUCT

w w w . a u t o s t e e l . o r g

Hood Optimization Examples

Further Weight Savings of 1.72 lbs.

Further Weight Savings of 2.58 lbs.

Material NeededMaterial Can Potentially be Removed

w w w . a u t o s t e e l . o r g

Original…………Final Lighter Steel Design!

Hood Optimization Examples

w w w . a u t o s t e e l . o r g

Optimizing Steel Lift Gates –Aluminum Benchmark

Aluminum Baseline Aluminum Baseline SpecificationsSpecifications

Panel Outer = 1.0 mm 6XXX Al

Panel Inner = 1.2 mm 6XXX Al

Latch Reinf. = 2.5 mm 6XXX Al

Pillar Reinf. = 2.0 mm 6XXX Al

Total Part Weight = 35.64 lbs.

Total Blank Weight = 52.02 lbs.Total Cost of Aluminum Blanks for Stampings ($1.68/lb./$3360/ton)

= $87.36 for Al/assembly** All aluminum costs gathered from MIT Materials

Systems Lab Publications and data from the American Metal Market 2003-2005

w w w . a u t o s t e e l . o r g

Optimizing Conventional Steel Lift Gates

Baseline Geometry Showing Topology Optimization Input for Steel

New Design Showing Sections for Refinement

Also, making section geometries more

aggressive is possible with these new higher formable

steel grades

Typical Steel Grade/gauge

•.85 mm SAE Grade 3 (DQSK)

Potential Steel Grades/gauges

•.60 mm to .70 mm SAE Grade 4,5,6 (EDDQ+)

w w w . a u t o s t e e l . o r g

Manufacturing: Formability

.60 mm Grade 5 EDDQ+

1.0 mm 6022 Aluminum

SAE Grade 4,5,6

EDDQ++

Inner Structures

Al Alloys

6022

6111-T4

5182-O

BH210

BH280

DP500

Outer Panels

w w w . a u t o s t e e l . o r g

Optimizing Steel Lift Gates

Optimized Stamped Steel Optimized Stamped Steel SpecificationsSpecifications

Panel Outer = .60 mm DP500

Panel Inner = .65 mm EDDQ+

Latch Reinf. = 1.5 mm DQ HD

Pillar Reinf. = 1.0 mm EDDQ HD

Total Part Weight = 48.69 lbs.

Total Blank Weight = 78.11 lbs. Total Cost of Steel Blanks for

Stampings ($.344/lb./$688/ton)

= $26.87/assembly

$66.03/assembly cost savings

13 lb. Weight Penalty

$5.05/lb. $2.30/Kg. for aluminum implementation

w w w . a u t o s t e e l . o r g

Steel Lift Gate Options

Optimized Conventional

Hydroformed Structural Tube Concepts

Aluminum Baseline

LWB Structure

Weight of Metal in

Design, (%) Increase

Cost of Metal Blanks, (%) Decrease

Passed all OEM Design

Requirements?

All pass except welding

All pass

Structural = Yes

Dent/Oil Canning = Yes

Formability = Yes

Welding = Yes

35.64 lbs. 48.69 lbs. 47.53 lbs. 42.89 lbs.(0%) (27%) (25%) (17%)

$87.36 $26.87(0%) (69%) (69%) (68% to 66%)

$27.03 $27.45 to $28.85

All pass

w w w . a u t o s t e e l . o r g

Remember This Picture? How does it now Change?

Cos

t per

lb. t

o Im

plem

ent A

lum

inum

ove

r Ste

el

$1.0/lb.

$1.5/lb.

$2.0/lb.

Seal Stiffness & Impact Dominated

Sheet Doors

Hybrid Doors

Aluminum Weight Reduction (%) Compared to Steel40 50 5545

Strength Dominated (minimum gauge)

Fenders

Stiffness DominatedHoods

Deck Lids

Tailgates

Wheels

Oil-Can & Stiffness Dominated

Liftgates

Sliding doors

35

From Domestic OEMs Business Case Assessments 3 to 10

Years Ago

Engine Blocks

Compared to Optimized Steel Closure Designs

Aluminum Weight Reduction (%) Compared to Steel

Cos

t per

lb. t

o Im

plem

ent A

lum

inum

ove

r Ste

el

$1.5/lb.

$5.0/lb.

$10.0/lb.

25 453515

$7.5/lb.

$2.5/lb.Optimized

Conventional Lift Gate

Optimized Conventional Hood

LWB Optimized

Hydroformed Frame Lift Gate

55

Fenders

Conventional Steel Design in Production

w w w . a u t o s t e e l . o r g

Better Cost/Weight Balance

Optimized Steel Designs

Cost SavingsCost Savings

Optimized Steel Designs

Weight SavingsWeight Savings

LEAN STEEL

MEAN

w w w . a u t o s t e e l . o r g

Acknowledgements

United States Steel Advanced Applications Technology Team

(L to R starting from top row, Andy Thompson, Ming Shi, Mike Juddo, Alex Konieczny, Ming Chen, Goufei Chen, Brian Foulkrod,

J.P. McGuire)

Dr. Ming Shi- Manager AATMike Juddo – Director Automotive GroupDr. Guofei Chen – CAE SpecialistDr. Ming Chen – CAE SpecialistDr. Alex Konieczny – FormabilityAndy Thompson - MetallographyBrian Foulkrod – Mechanical/Metallography Testing Mike Grimmet – ToolingJody Shaw – Technical MarketingBart Depompolo – Applications Engineering

Graham SpenceEric NielsenDave SmidtDave KepenskiGail ZewiningerGary Czerniak

Rick JohnsonJoe RozenbaumStephan Zurdosky

Mike OlearyHiroaki SugiuraCarrie GordonMaurice LouDave Ruhno

Altair Altair EngineeringEngineering

Karson Karson LiesLiesMichael ArnoldMichael Arnold