Final Report Summary - 3D-LIGHTTRANS (Large scale manufacturing technology for high-performance lightweight 3D multifunctional composites)
Executive Summary:
2. Publishable summary
The goal of 3D-LightTrans project was to provide ground-breaking, highly flexible and adaptable low-cost technologies for manufacturing of 3D textile reinforced plastic composites, including innovative approaches for the individual processes and its integration in complete manufacturing chains, which enables to shift them from its current position in cost intensive, small series niche markets, to broadly extended mass product applications, not only in transportation, but also in other key sectors, like health and leisure.
The main process steps are:
1. Hybrid yarn manufacturing. Hybrid yarn, composed of reinforcement material and thermoplastic matrix, is produced using a flexible and reliable manufacturing process. The hybrid yarn can be realised with customised properties and different compositions.
2. Weaving. The hybrid yarn is woven to create multifunctional textile preforms, such as double shell or spacer fabrics, and multilayer fabrics, with fibre architecture suited to the desired deep draped form of the final part.
3. Draping and fixation. The draping of the locally pre-fixed textile into the desired final 3D-form is performed in a fully automated way (avoiding the lower efficiency and reproducibility of customary manual draping).
4. Storage and transport of fixed pre-forms. In the case of thermoforming taking place at a different places or in a later time (draping and fixation performed in an intermediate, dummy tool), the pre-forms can be safely stored and transported in its fixed final geometry at room temperature.
5. Thermoforming. The final composite part is consolidated by a fast and efficient thermoforming process. Neither infiltration nor injections of the matrix material are required, as the thermoplastic matrix is already incorporated in the yarn.
The project 3D-LightTrans succeeded to develop most of the technologies and components required for the cost efficient manufacturing of 3D textile reinforced composites, based on hybrid yarn with thermoplastic matrix. A comprehensive modelling and simulation toolbox was developed. Equipment and processes were adapted for the manufacturing of hybrid yarn, the weaving of high performance 3D-shaped and multilayer fabrics and the pre-fixation of the fabrics. Significant progress was also achieved with regard to the draping process and tools, as well as in the thermoforming process. A tailgate for Fiat 500L and a Spare Wheel Well for Bentley demonstrates the applicable results. The project work was awarded with the innovation price for reinforcement by JEC Paris 2015.
Project Context and Objectives:
The goal of 3D-LightTrans project was to provide ground-breaking, highly flexible and adaptable low-cost technologies for manufacturing of 3D textile reinforced plastic composites, including innovative approaches for the individual processes and its integration in complete manufacturing chains, which enables to shift them from its current position in cost intensive, small series niche markets, to broadly extended mass product applications, not only in transportation, but also in other key sectors, like health and leisure.
The main process steps are:
1. Hybrid yarn manufacturing. Hybrid yarn, composed of reinforcement material and thermoplastic matrix, is produced using a flexible and reliable manufacturing process. The hybrid yarn can be realised with customised properties and different compositions.
2. Weaving. The hybrid yarn is woven to create multifunctional textile preforms, such as double shell or spacer fabrics, and multilayer fabrics, with fibre architecture suited to the desired deep draped form of the final part.
3. Draping and fixation. The draping of the locally pre-fixed textile into the desired final 3D-form is performed in a fully automated way (avoiding the lower efficiency and reproducibility of customary manual draping).
4. Storage and transport of fixed pre-forms. In the case of thermoforming taking place at a different places or in a later time (draping and fixation performed in an intermediate, dummy tool), the pre-forms can be safely stored and transported in its fixed final geometry at room temperature.
5. Thermoforming. The final composite part is consolidated by a fast and efficient thermoforming process. Neither infiltration nor injections of the matrix material are required, as the thermoplastic matrix is already incorporated in the yarn.
The project 3D-LightTrans succeeded to develop most of the technologies and components required for the cost efficient manufacturing of 3D textile reinforced composites, based on hybrid yarn with thermoplastic matrix. A comprehensive modelling and simulation toolbox was developed. Equipment and processes were adapted for the manufacturing of hybrid yarn, the weaving of high performance 3D-shaped and multilayer fabrics and the pre-fixation of the fabrics. Significant progress was also achieved with regard to the draping process and tools, as well as in the thermoforming process. A tailgate for Fiat 500L and a Spare Wheel Well for Bentley demonstrates the applicable results. The project work was awarded with the innovation price for reinforcement by JEC Paris 2015.
Results
Modelling and simulation toolbox. A comprehensive simulation toolbox with four major modules has been implemented by UGent, CRF, Onera, UORL and TU-Dresden. The four modules cover the following aspects: a) meso-scale modelling of the dry fabric architecture, b) draping of the dry fabric architecture and fixation of certain areas of the dry fabric, c) thermoforming of the fabric, and d) micro-, meso- and macro-scale modelling of the final composite part. Finally, the modelling of the complete process chain is addressed by GZE using the software ARENA.
The modelling and simulation tools developed were tested through experimental data with yarns, test fabrics and thermoformed plates, with key contribution of Leitat and SVUM. The analysis performed include, among others, single fibre and yarn tensile tests and yarn friction tests; uniaxial, biaxial and shear testing of fabrics; friction, compaction, bending and forming tests on fabrics, ultrasonic inspection of the impact of moisture absorption on the thermoformed plates, impact test and micro-CT scans.
Manufacturing of hybrid yarn and 3D textiles. Hybrid yarn combines glass reinforcement with thermoplastic matrix filaments in a single yarn. Among the different available technologies commingled hybrid yarns produced by air texturing display a particularly high potential for continuous-fibre-reinforced thermoplastics, due to their great impregnation quality. In air texturing, the hybrid yarn is produced by the pneumatic opening of the filament yarn by cold or hot pressurized air, and the subsequent reallocation of the initial filaments in a special air nozzle. PD-GOschatz, TU-DresdenTUD and UGent have optimized the process to produce highest yarn quality with increased reproducibility and productivity (approx. 50 m/min) in a variety of materials (including PP and PET) with different fibre-matrix ratios.
Concerning the weaving of 3D textiles, on one hand, TU-Dresden has produced fabrics with different multilayer patterns, both with z-reinforcement (in different orientations) and without. The four electronic warp let-offs systems and 20 head frames at the new Dornier loom (modified for the 3D-LightTrans technology) make it possible to produce the Multilayer fabric based on GF/PET 840 tex (final yarn architecture) with high warp density, an optimized shedding operation and more structural variety, keeping highest fabric quality and reducing fibre damages. On the other hand, VanDeWiele has developed industrial equipment available at TU-Dresden to manufacture 3D shaped reinforcement textile pre-forms with customized multifunctional structure. In contrast to the conventional spacer fabrics (pile weaves) connected by additional pile yarns, the 3D woven spacer fabrics are constructed of woven outer layers connected by crosslink fabrics. Such structures do not only possess superior mechanical properties, but can also be produced -using VanDeWiele, equipment- in just one process step.
Manufacturing of the consolidated final composite part. The state-of-the-art technology provides neither standard tools, nor automated procedures with sufficient flexibility to perform in a satisfactory way the draping of complex geometries with thick multilayer fabrics. 3D-LightTrans approach to solve this consists in decomposing the procedure in several steps: pre-fixation, automated draping in a dummy tool, fixation, and final consolidation by thermoforming.
In order to decrease the fabric handling and draping effort, the fabric is pre-fixated, which creates a local increase of mechanical stiffness in well-defined areas previous to the draping. In a novel approach, special fibres with modified characteristics are integrated in the fabric by TU-Dresden, and subsequently processed by Coatema using alternative heating methods.
As a result of the pre-fixation, draping becomes easier, the flow of forces is better balanced and the number of wrinkles is reduced. In spite of this, the automated draping still constitutes a challenge, addressed by PROMAUT and Leitat. To handle the fabric, experimental tests have been done with suction cups and needle claws, while performed analytical studies show the influence of relevant parameters, such as the air leakage in vacuum grippers as a consequence of the fabric porosity and roughness. The implemented force control system makes path programming easier and ensures a constant draping force of the fabric against the tool. While the simulation performed by TU-Dresden provides a first estimation of the effectiveness of a given draping strategy, Robot Studio simulation allows a quick verification of the robot path reachability and draping tool placement.
One of the key advantages of the 3D-LightTrans technology is the processing to 3D fixed pre-forms, previous to the final consolidation (fixation). The pre-forms with fixed 3D geometry can be easily stored and transported without altering their geometry.
To achieve good results of the final composite part, the thermoforming process has to be adapted to the needs of the 3D-LightTrans technology. Flat multilayer textile reinforced composite plates have been consolidated by thermoforming at FMSP varying the pressure applied, time and temperature, for a number 3D-LightTrans fabrics of different characteristics. The resulting thermoformed plates have been visually inspected and analysed by CT-scans, micrographs, and measurements of thickness, impact behaviour and other mechanical properties. In parallel to the investigations on flat plates, a small complex tool is used by LKR, combining long plane areas on the bottom and side walls, with both long and tight curvature areas, to investigate the process stability to manufacture parts with close concave-convex geometry curvatures.
The 3D-LightTrans manufacturing chain. The 3D-LightTrans project integrates the novel process steps described above with a knowledge-based manufacturing approach and full automation, in order to provide a totally new concept for the design, manufacture and application of high-tech composites for low cost mass products. While the modified air-texturing machine can produce hybrid yarn with high repeatability in a variety of materials (such as glass/PET and glass PP) in different fibre/matrix ratios, the weaving equipment enables an increased flexibility in the realization of high-performance 3D fabrics. Storage and transport of the fixed pre-forms (if required) can take place without refrigeration requirements, as customary with thermoset prepegs.
The manufacturing chain is very flexible and can also be adapted to different production configurations. GZE has defined and tested a framework for the production line design, using modelling and simulation methodologies, which has been tested in a specific test case. Test, reliability and quality assurance aspects over the whole manufacturing chain are addressed by Leitat und SVUM. In order to ensure the real deployment of the 3D-LightTrans technology, in a holistic approach, relevant aspects such as an impact study (realized by Xedera), business cases (AIT), product life cycle (CRF, AIT, GZE), and scale-up for mass production are also considered.
All in all the Consortium brought together multidisciplinary research teams involving industrial stakeholders from machine tools and machine automation (P-D Glasseiden Oschatz, Michel Van de Wiele, Lindauer Dornier, Coatema) and several OEM active in the field of processing of flexible materials and composite manufacturing, including Federal Mogul Systems Protection, among others, as well as from the application sector (Centro Ricerche Fiat and Bentley), and extensive expertise from well-known research specialists in the area of materials, production research and technical textiles in particular, such as AIT Austrian Institute of Technology, TU-Dresden and University of Ghent. The modelling and simulation played an important role and achieved interesting results for science as well as for the application. These results were accomplished by University of Ghent, TU-Dresden, University of Orleans, Office National D’Etudes et de Recherches Aerospatiales (ONERA), Grado Zero Espace (in Italy). The development of the concept and model for the whole manufacturing chain Automatitzacio de Processos I Mediambient (PROMAUT, Spain) was responsible. Tests on the yarn, the woven fabrics, the thermos-pressed parts, and the tests on the final component are done by Leitat (ACONDICIONAMIENTO TARRASENSE ASSOCIACION, Terrassa Spain) and SVUM (Czech Republic). Xedera (Austria) manages the website, the exploitation and dissemination.
A short film about the project work and the main results are available under https://www.3d-lighttrans.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/3D_lightTrans_VideoFinal.MSWMM1_.wmv
For further information please see: www.3d-lighttrans.com.
Project Results:
Description of the main results
Modelling and simulation
The modelling and simulation tools developed in the 3D-LightTrans project are validated and tested through experimental data The scope of modelling and simulation was to provide advices for the design of the fibre reinforcement and the manufacturing process. Therefore, sensitivity analyses on the developed models were done. The parameters that influence the several process steps and, thus, important indications could be determined.
The 3D-LightTrans composites, as textile composites in general, have three characteristic scales:
1) Micro-scale: At the micro-scale, the constituents (fiber and matrix) are treated separately. The micro-scale representative unit cell (RUC) has to contain sufficient fibers, such as to well represent the statistics of the fiber distribution within the yarns. If only the elastic properties and the ultimate tensile strength in fiber direction are considered, a hexagonal RUC containing only one fiber is sufficient. The aim of micro-scale mechanical modeling is to compute the mechanical behavior of the consolidated yarns from the constituent behavior, taking into account the fiber volume fraction and its waviness.
2) Meso-scale: At the meso-scale, the architecture of the reinforcing fabric is represented. The consolidated yarns are modeled as a homogeneous transverse isotropic material with properties obtained from micro-scale modeling or from experiments on consolidated yarns or UD-plates. The aim of meso-scale mechanical modeling is to compute the average mechanical behavior of the consolidated composite, taking into account the fabric architecture and the yarn shapes.
3) Macro-scale: At the macro-scale, the structural aspects of the composite part are modeled. The composite material itself is modeled as a homogeneous anisotropic material with properties obtained from calculations at the lower scales or from experiments.
Modelling of impact and crash behaviour
Based on experimental results, different numerical modelling strategies are investigated in order to obtain the best correlation between numerical and experimental results under impact load by means of a sensitivity analysis of the different parameters influencing the results of the finite elements simulations at macro scale. One will use a low impact speed test-setup, experimentally and numerically, since this will represent as closest the impacts a spare wheel well for example will undergo in real circumstances. The procedure is described in details in D2.7 ”Set of guidelines for optimization of the fiber reinforcement and the manufacturing process”. The
The outcome can be summarized in:
o If one compares the experimental results and the simulated results of this sensitivity analysis, a good correlation can be found by using a combination of a correct finite element model and material model
o Choosing a correct finite element model with boundary conditions as close as possible to reality is important when modeling impact in composites with damage initiation and evolution.
o This sensitivity analysis gives a first idea of an indication of the different roles of some of the parameters.
Meso-scale modelling of the dry fabric
The goal of the dry fabric meso-scale modelling is to enable qualitative and quantitative comparison of the fabric deformability especially in biaxial extension and compaction. The procedure used for the modelling is as follows:
1. Design of a consistent and representative CAD model of the unit cell,
2. Meshing of the unit cell,
3. Finite element simulations of the deformability of the unit cell.
The input needed for the simulations are: yarn tensile behaviour, yarn compaction behaviour and yarn/yarn friction. Results of fabric testing (uniaxial, biaxial, compaction and shear) are used for the validation of the model.
To characterize the internal structure of the fabrics accurately, micro-CT scans were performed. The analyses of the Micro-CT scans have shown that the real internal structure of the fabrics is disordered due to the weaving process.
Modelling of the drapability process
Numerical simulation is an important tool for the optimization of the load-bearing behaviour of composites that are reinforced with high performance textile structures. Fabrics undergo a high degree of deformation while forming from their initial two-dimensional shape into a complex three-dimensional structure. Composites can only carry load in the fibre direction. A small difference between the load and fibre orientations decreases this capacity significantly. Because of the high deformations and the anisotropic character of most fabrics the reinforcement orientation in the formed structural part is hardly predictable. Therefore, drapability simulations, based on the finite element method (FEM), are implemented to predict the fibre orientation and the highly sheared zones and, additionally, to proof the formability of the textile structure itself. Classic composite constructions are time- and cost-intensive processes, where iterative development steps for improving the lightweight character have to be made with a high amount of engineering work. Uncertainty about the reinforcement orientation hinders an exact stress analysis. The drape simulation offers new possibilities for the designing of composites. The formability of the textile reinforcement structure to the intended three-dimensional geometry can be proofed. Furthermore, it becomes possible to predict the fibre orientation and, thus, weak spots in the component. The drape simulation is also a basis for resin injection and structure simulations.
In this section the developed model is used to define the most influencing fabric and process parameters. Therefore, representative material properties (tensile-, shear- and bending behaviour) of the 3DLT/8/VDW-NCFD-400:6-240:5/6 fabrics are varied and the influence on results of the tensile and the picture frame test are analysed. For the investigations of the drape process the tetrahedron punch test of UORL was chosen. In this test the pressure exerted by the blank holders and the friction coefficients were varied.
Modelling of the thermoforming process
A series of thermoforming simulation cases were set up on a U-section geometry, provided, in order to do a sensitivity analysis. The decision of performing a sensitivity analysis was taken, since no material data from experimental test were available, neither from the other partners, nor from ESI.
In order to perform the sensitivity analysis, some parameters change among different simulation cases.
Multi-Objective-Analysis
The Multi objective analysis developed within 3D-LightTrans promotes the integration of the various levels of computational analysis on the materials, the processes and the demonstrator’s performances in order to determine the best design and process input parameters. The objective of the work done is to obtain a set of feasible solutions placed on the Pareto optimum frontier considering the objectives (minimize cost, maximize the mechanical strength, etc.) and the bonds (maximum angle limit between warp and weft direction after draping operations, satisfactory displacements on the component, resistance to impact when hit by bodies, etc.).This set of solutions will be then the starting point for the choice of the optimum parameters for the demonstrators design and manufacturing.The optimization process consists of a set of steps organized in a linear workflow. Every step of this workflow must be automatic (no user intervention required) and in the same time robust to the possible errors coming from simulations. This process will be then looped in the optimization phase considering the results of the global DOE plan.
The optimizer adopted in the Multiobjective Analysis is a MOGA-II optimizer. MOGA-II is an improved version of MOGA (Multi-Objective Genetic Algorithm); it uses a smart multi-search elitism for robustness and directional crossover for fast convergence. Its efficiency is ruled by its operators (classical crossover, directional crossover, mutation and selection) and by the use of elitism (ref. “NBI and MOGA-II, two complementary algorithms for Multi-Objective optimizations”, 2006).
On the basis of the first optimization runs it will be evaluated the relevance of both the analysis steps and the input variables in order to exclude the less influential on the final objectives of the optimization from the list of input proposed by the involved Partners (e.g. in the step of the mechanical tests on the part geometry, if the component will always satisfy the required constraint on one of the load cases).
Modelling and simulation of the complete process chain
Manufacturing modelling and simulation is the process of creating and analysing prototypes (usually digitally realized), of real-world facilities or processes (either actual or planned), to predict their performance. The facility or process exists and operates in time, and it is referred with the generic term of system. Manufacturing simulation modelling (a general term that spans across many fields, industries, and applications), deals with the collection of methods and techniques in using computer tools (usually software), to mimic the behaviour of real-world systems, evaluating them numerically, and estimating their desired characteristics.
Our primary goal in simulation was to focus the attention on defining and understanding how the system work, or should work (this is the case in which system does not exist), task that provided a great insight view about the changes that need to be made during the development of the manufacturing activities.
The creation of simplified representations for the system under study (models), was guided by a prescribed set of goals, specific objectives of the study that should make possible (many of the processes are still going and are still under developing, especially Pre-fixation and Fixation, Draping and Thermoforming), to proceed in experimenting with the system (with the manufacturing line), through its models (when they will be fully implemented and industrially deployed).
Experimentation consists in generating system's histories and observing system's behaviour over time, as well as statistics about how it works; this particular task that is usually called Data Collection, is the principal source of information for the Verification and Validation stage of every type of simulation conducted over systems, and so partially was in this case, and will be, in a more effective way, when all the manufacturing processes will be totally developed.
Models, in manufacturing simulation studies (those presented below), are discrete (even if they are capable to incorporate some continuous variables - rates of change), dynamic (non-static), and stochastic (non-deterministic), and are henceforth called discrete-event simulation (DES) models.
Manufacturing process for 3D textile fabrics
The objective was to develop industrial models, technology and adaptation of processes for the implementation of the individual manufacturing processes, in order to enable 3D-LightTrans approach for sustainable and efficient production and manufacturing based on flexible materials, integrating hybrid yarn manufacturing and weaving processes. The research focus was on the production processes and the related manufacturing systems for the processing of such flexible materials.
Manufacturing of hybrid yarn according to process stability and demonstrator requirements
The first important step was the development of the technology to enable air mingled hybrid yarn manufacturing to meet the 3D-LightTrans requirements, which constitute the novelty in this area. This is a technology for highly flexible manufacturing of hybrid yarn incorporating alternative thermoplastic materials, with configurable material and mixture distribution, homogeneous distribution and minimum fibre damage. As a result of the technology development, hybrid yarn with glass fibre were developed and produced by PD-GOschatz with different fibre volume content and yarn count, and with the best possible mixing which still guarantees a homogeneous distribution and the shortest possible cycle time. In addition, special effort was devoted to further development of the technology in order to ensure
a) Very high reproducibility of the composition of the hybrid yarn, meeting the requirements the demonstrators of the car industry (tailgate for CR Fiat and spare wheel well for Bentley).
b) Increased productivity also with other 3D-LightTrans matrix materials (PET), additional to the conventional matrix material for hybrid yarn (PP) and to alternative reinforcement yarns.
c) Reduction of fibre damage during the air texturing process, in order to maintain in the composite the properties of the raw reinforcement fibre material as close as possible.
Final specification of the hybrid yarn: Mixture ratio of 70:30 % mass content (GF/PET) with yarn count of 840 tex.
Manufacturing of the semi-finished pre-fixed forms
After trials and tests for the selection for the multilayer fabric the following architectures was chosen. The fabric with vertical z-reinforcement displays shows better impact properties, based on the finals yarn architecture. Further characteristics of the final fabric structure are as follows:
▪ Number of warp layers: 4
▪ Number of weft layers: 5
▪ Weft and warp yarn: GF/PET 840 tex
▪ Z-yarn: GF/PET 840 tex
▪ Weft density: 240 yarns /10cm
▪ Warp density: 240 yarns /10cm
▪ Z-reinforcement density: 24 yarns /10 cm (GF/PET)
The new Lindauer Dornier loom
The new Lindauer Dornier loom compared to the standard weaving machine from Dornier is adapted and enhanced to produce the multilayer fabric based on GF/PET hybrid yarn.
The new Dornier weaving machine was installed successfully at TUD and a fabric of GF/PET 840 tex was produced with it.
Modification of the new Dornier loom
To produce the fabric at the highest quality, and to reduce the yarn damages which typically occur on multi-layered weaves, several modifications (described in the following) have been made of the new weaving machine to minimize yarn damage during weaving and to achieve maximum mechanical properties.
Novel warp beam concept, with specially designed tension bars
The new machine has a novel warp beam concept, with specially designed tension bars (Figure 8). Each beam has separate warp tension sensors (Figure 9, Figure 10).This new concept makes it possible to control the warp tension regularly and avoid yarn damage during the weaving process. Tension control is possible from the FT-panel which is totally new in comparison to the old Dornier loom.
The multilayer fabric produced on the new loom has a thickness of 5 mm (GF (55%)/PET (45%) volume content), and the composite based on the fabric has a thickness of 2.5 mm.
The 3D-shaped / spacer fabric
3D woven spacer fabrics are constructed of woven outer layers connected by crosslink fabrics. This allows thermoplastic based 3D preforms using GF/PET hybrid yarns to be manufactured in just one process step possessing good mechanical properties such as compressive, tensile, flexural strength, impact, and resistance.
Spacer / 3D-shaped fabric structure
▪ Weft and warp yarn: GF/PET 840 tex
▪ Z-yarns: GF/PET
▪ For each plate: 5 weft and 4 warp layers
▪ Density of the yarns:
• 300 weft/10cm/plate
• 120 warp/10cm/plate
• Thickness of the plate: approx. 2 mm
The new Michel Van De Wiele loom
The design of specific fabric take up motion, for taking 3D shaped fabrics had to take into account the adaptations on the base platform for allowing the assembly of lay back system with the design of the beam stand and the double drive system, the software development for actuation of the backwards motion, and developing the new configuration to control the tension of the warp beam.
Manufacturing processes of 3D-LightTrans final compound
The process required the development of the individual industrial models, technology and adaptation of processes for the implementation of final part draping and thermoforming manufacturing processes, in order to enable 3D-LightTrans approach for sustainable and efficient production and manufacturing based on flexible materials, integrating specifically draping and thermoforming of the final part. Based on the steps described above the research has focused on the production processes and the related manufacturing systems for the processing of such flexible materials.
Draping
The draping process was developed for the challenging deep drawn component of the spare wheel well. To conclude the achievement of the draping process can be summarized: The project achieved an automated, robotized solution for the complex process of draping with a mechanical, electrical, and programming demonstrator.
Prefixation
The following results have been achieved during the 3D-LightTrans project.
• Pre-fixation is possible with IR-radiation, but the operating window is small.
• Pre-fixation is as well possible with Xenon flashes, the operating window being similar small as with IR. But the effect of Xenon flashes is controllable by the colour of the fibres.
• By integrating some black PET yarns into a fabric the pre-fixation process can be restricted to well defined areas.
• The bending stiffness of such fabrics, being pre-fixated in stripes only, is significantly higher than without pre-fixation.
• Although the melting behaviour of PET is significantly different from PP, the result looks very similar to the trials with PP-fibres, so the combination Glass/PET should be fixed in the same way as Glass/PP.
• Alternatively a black PET powder could be used instead of black PET-yarns for a local pre-fixation of glass fabric. Milled PET powder with 0 – 80µ particles then should be used to achieve a homogeneous bonding. Such PET powder is commercially available.
Fixation
1. Fixation of draped fabrics using black PET powder as adhesive is possible by melting the powder with flash light irradiation. But the focus ability of the flash light to the areas of interest is difficult.
2. Alternatively the PET powder can be molten by lasers of appropriate wavelength and power. Such lasers are sufficiently small to be guided by a robot and thus will be focussed to irradiate the areas of interest only.
Proposals of technical realization
Pre-fixation: Weave black PET yarns into the fabric at the areas to be pre-fixated and melt them by flash light immediately subsequent to the weaving process. Instead of black yarns a black PET powder may be used, which is applied to the areas to be pre-fixated.
Fixation: Apply black PET powder to the areas to be fixated and melt the PET by a focussed laser.
Thermo-pressing technologies
AIT/LKR and Federal Mogul used their available thermos-compression equipment /process for the manufacturing of 3D-LightTrans textile reinforced thermoplastic composites. AIT/LKR realized extensive tests to support the experimental validation of the final production process. AIT/LKR played an important role, complementing FMSP efforts, to provide all thermoformed samples needed to evaluate and compare the resulting process performance and product properties, depending on the test geometries and characteristics of the textile preforms. A number of experiments were performed with different types of fixated test fabrics, in order to validate the procedure, establish the adequate process parameters and provide relevant feedback to the other partners. This helped to define adequate manufacturing rules for optimal results and generate guidelines on which specific combinations, among the configurable parameters and factors of yarn, weaving and fixing, lead to the best thermoforming results.
Analysis of results: Quality of plates depend on dryness of G/PET-fabrics, process duration at high temperature (>255C), handling time of pre-heated fabrics during processing, fast cooling of the final pressed sheets. Mechanical properties depend on pressure at high temperature (> 255°C) -> compaction, pressure during cooling -> keeping compaction, quick cooling -> enhanced chrystalinity -> fracture toughness, the faster the thermoforming (in special cooling under process) the better the mechanical properties.
Battery case
Per decisions during WP4 technical reviews, it was decided to try to use an existing mold to investigate feasibility of vacuum bag moulding in autoclave. Because consolidated plaques were obtained through thermo-compression at 260°C, it was also decided to try to use standard vacuum moulding equipment: Temperature above 260°C would require very specific and expensive materials. They are available at AirTech (annex). However, trials failed to achieve an acceptable consolidation of the parts. It is believed current vacuum moulding in autoclave techniques can’t provide enough heat and pressure to process a PET based hybrid fabric.
Tailgate
The tailgate multilayer demonstrators have been organized with thermo-compression techniques, based on DOE learning. The tailgate components were visually assessed not too curvy, and, to save some time, it was decided not to drape those parts. Also, to limit mould cost and because of the 12 month delay in project timing, it was decided to use wooden moulds rather than metal. Consequently, no in-mould cooling system could be included. Wooden moulds longevity is very limited but sufficient for the small amount of demonstrators required. Contact heating plates were specially designed and made to reach up to 300°C.
The consolidation of spacer fabric.
Although the spacer fabric can be woven with the appropriate shape, thermo-compression is a real technical challenge as pressure and temperature also need to be applied inside the tube to prevent the tube from collapsing.
The challenge of thermos-pressing spacer fabrics is to make sure pressure and heat are also applied inside the part. This is a challenge since high temperatures significant pressures are being used. Several solutions are known to avoid crushing spaces inside composite parts, some of those being used to consolidate thermos-set composites. They are: Plain elastomeric inserts, with/without metal foil wrapping, Inflatable elastomeric inserts / bladders, Mechanical expansion inserts, Solid (wood) mandrels, Lost foam.
Those techniques can be investigated as alternatives for space fabric based TRTC.
Module assembly technologies
Metal Parts Integration
Adhesives and sealants, rivets bolts and pin technology can be used for module assembly, specifically metal to composite joining. Various technologies have been tested and developed.
Class A Surface
Class A surface cannot be reached with the developed 3D-LightTrans technologies. Nevertheless there are several outputs and achievements in this direction: Involved parameters (Substrate quality, Paint materials, Process parameters), Testing requirement established (Important characteristics, Secondary characteristics), Processes (Formed film (GE plastic/Azdel Inc ), Paint Coating), Literature review (Amorphous substrates have higher gloss than semi crystalline matrices, Matrix-rich layer improves gloss, Adding nano-particles (e.g. CaCO3) can enhance gloss), Patent review (Resin rich surface layer (powder or film), Polished mould, Metal sheet on composite).
Manufacturing chain integration
The 3D-LightTrans project worked out a concept for the integration of the individual processes into a complete manufacturing chain, taking into account all relevant aspects of automation, quality assurance required to guarantee the shifting of the proposed manufacturing process from the lab scale to the 3D-LightTrans industrial scale production of mass products based on textile reinforced thermoplastic composites.
Automated handling devices and processes
Based on the tests of several fabric samples developed in the 3D-LightTrans project (e.g. VDW XC7 400:2/80:1 Fabric with 80 yarns/cm2, VDW NCF 400:3/140:4: Fabric with 140 yarns/cm2, VDW NCF 400:3/200:4: fabric with 200 yarns /cm2, VDW NCF 400:3/280:4; fabric within 280yarns /cm2, 3D: 3D fabric the possibilities of manipulations are studied.
Handling test on using suction cups with different vacuum systems, needles claws of different types and characteristics have been performed. A priori, it was expected that the test results for the final 3D-LightTrans fabric was much better than that obtained with the previous tests. This is due to the type of leakage that occurs in each fabric. Analyzing the air leakage of the fabrics, it can be classified mainly into two types, the leaking porosity of the fabric with air passing through the fabric and the leaking fabric roughness with air that passes between the lip of the cup and the surface.
Handling and clamping vacuum-assisted mechanical designs
Adequate tools and automated procedures for the handling transport and feeding of the pre-forms in the different forms (deep draped multilayer and 3D-shaped) and at different stages (before and after fixation resp. thermoforming) have been implemented. It was decided to develop ONE gripper for the worst case that could handle the biggest size of textile fabric.
Handling systems join robotic systems
A design for one gripper has been worked out which could handle the most difficult demonstrator. The aim of the handling systems was not only to transport the textile from one station to the other, moreover it should help the most difficult part or the process, the fixation.
This gripper works out for the for the 3 possible workstations: Textile processing, Draping, Termoforming.
The video available on https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DVSeDrS4tOk shows the process concept.
Optimized Manufacturing Procedures
PROMAUT and GZE worked out a concept for the establishment of the requirements of the full-automated process chain for manufacturing automotive parts with the best quality. The result is a document which can serve as guide to develop production lines with the 3D-LightTrans technology and ensure the best results. The document shows the 3D-LightTrans manufacturing line as a generic production line, only with demonstration purpose.
For describing the whole line they start with the yarn properties the machinery safety (concerning the EU Directives and Legislation, Conformity Assessment, EC Declaration of Conformity Procedure, Safety Strategy, and Safety Standards and Norms).
The 3D-LightTrans part manufacturing process
The manufacturing process of 3DLT fabric parts has been split in process steps. Each process step has special properties and policies to ensure the best quality and results of the final product.
Fabric production: In this process it is assumed that the fabric production is done by a third company, called “the fabric supplier“.
Fabric load: This process assumes the 3D-LightTrans fabric is supplied in reels, but 3D-LightTrans fabric can be supplied in different ways too: in rectangular or square pieces, or in defined cut shape. In these cases, the cutting and trimming process are avoided reducing the complexity of the part manufacture and the machinery necessary.
Handling: The handling of the fabric must be taken in mind in so much as the traditional automatic systems to move parts in a factory are not practicable, especially in the first processes when the fabric is still flexible. When the fabric passes by the fixation or thermoforming processes, the part becomes stiffer and less porous and can be handled by using traditional systems like suckers or grips.
Cutting and trimming: When the fabric is received in reels or in pieces, is necessary to cut the fabric to specific dimensions or figure depending on the part to be manufacture. A cutting machine is necessary and the management of the leftover fabric of the cutting process must be taken in mind.
Draping & fixation: The draping and fixation process is necessary when the manufactured part has complicated shape. This process ensures the correct execution of thermoforming process. The draping and fixation process consist in giving a shape to the fabric very close to the final shape and ensure that the fabric will fits into the thermoforming mould in the best way.
Thermoforming: This process consists in melting the fabric inside a mould giving it the final shape, and once it has cooled the 3DLT part will have the final properties.
Quality control: In the quality control station, every finished part will be verified while the parts are cooling.
Studies regarding each of these steps are accomplished and documented.
For each step in the production line, the safety requirements and risks are studied and described and the safety advices are shown.
Demonstrators
The development of a complete supply chain and material solution ends with the production of a technology demonstrator, which captures the critical performance and can be tested in an appropriate environment. The CRF and Bentley decided to test the technology on a tailgate for FIAT 500L and a spare wheel well for Bentley Mulsanne.
Demonstrator Tailgate
There are many issues to be considered when designing a part for an existing vehicle i.e. the geometrical constraints that are already fixed. In the case of tailgate demonstrator they are the outer skin and the inner frame. After that it should be consider the reinforcement parts to maintain unchanged compared to the current solution and finally the design space must be evaluated to not cause interferences with adjacent components.
A mechanical behaviour assessment helped to with the Multidisciplinary design optimization (MDO) activity, with direct application on the tailgate. After the optimization phase, it has been produced a Finite-Element-Method (FEM) model of the complete part in order to verify the optimized design of the demonstrator.
The component is composed by: external part: th. 1,9 mm; structural part: th. 1,9 mm; integrated reinforcements to structural part in pillar zone: th. 1,9 mm; 3D-shaped reinforcements: th. 2 mm (may differ); fixing elements (for 3D-shaped reinf. to structural part): by rapid prototyping.
Both the external and the structural part have been designed keeping in mind the limitation of the width (1 m) of the material produced, creating overlaps. The steel strut reinforcements have been modified as a result of the change in the thickness of the various components. The bonding between the interior and exterior has been designed. Attachment systems of the other components are to be evaluated (e.g. plate holder, motor wiper reinforcement and spoiler).
The outlook based on the experiences with developing demonstrator “tailgate” can be summarised as follows. Considering the innovative character of the material developed in the project it is expected a short turn improvement of the material after the experiences gained in the project by the full partnership. In particular the material appears to be extremely effective on weight reduction if associated, considerations and effort effectiveness, to another material on the external shell. The material should be in this case dedicated thermoplastic aesthetical material with the same matrix polymer of the structural shell to be manufactured in multi-layered fabric. Adopting the Matrix polymer on external part will also surely solve the A class quality of surface issues emerged in specimens produced in the process analysis phase of the project. In this solution the advantages would take to a higher weight reduction in the component (attended in the percentage of up to 15% on normal production component) and a better performance to be achieved by the aesthetical requirements point of view. The point of force of the multi- layered material and the 3D-shaped material, and the real range of application both in automotive field and the other interested fields, is as a structural reinforcement design material where aesthetical finishing is not required. In this field, particularly for multi-layered material, the aspects related to easy drapability of the textile and the good weight to stiffness ratio will permit a low cost composite introduction and an increased design freedom. The 3D-shaped material instead compensates the lower formability and geometrical freedom with an extremely high stiffness to weight ratio, concerning in particular the hollow structure. In fact the panel effect is enhanced at his maximum thanks to the continuity in the fibres also in the spacer profiles, taking an expected good impact resistance and a collapse resistance when subject to shear loading.
Demonstrator Spare Wheel Well
The challenges for the development of a spare wheel well out of 3D-LightTrans technology are the following:
• Geometry: The spare wheel well (SWW) consists of 2 major components, which are identified as INNER and OUTER. We know from the existing manufacturing process that the textile solutions are already close to (or at) the limit of their drape capability and the multilayer materials are less drape-able so it was necessary to separate the complex interior detail from the exterior, deep draw shape.The exterior of the OUTER is smooth as it forms part of the underfloor and diffuser. It must be stiff enough and of sufficient accuracy, to maintain aerodynamic efficiency and maintain a gap to the exhaust. The interior of the OUTER is also smooth, as it is visible to the customer and mates with the INNER in a bonded assembly. The INNER complex and supports a large number of components retained by the SWW and which will require structural metallic inserts to secure those components with mechanical fasteners.The main benefit of this approach is that we can arrive at a minimum weight solution with parasitic mass associated with a dense foam core. Multilayer fabrics were used for this application as the geometry exceeds the capability of the 3D shape textiles to form hollow cells.
• Environment: As mentioned above, the SWW passes close to the exhaust and therefore must be of sufficient thermal capability. The temperature experienced by the SWW increases significantly as the gap closes and therefore the stiffness and accuracy of the part must be maintained. The underside of the SWW is exposed to debris from the road surface and with a top speed in excess of 300km/h. The structure will experience high levels of small, high speed impacts and abrasion from dust and dirt. The whole of the outside of the OUTER is exposed to the outside elements and therefore will be exposed to high levels of moisture and/or freezing conditions for long periods of time. This is of particular concern, in combination with the impact and abrasion issues highlighted above.
• Crash: International regulations require that the battery must be retained in the SWW in the event of an 80km/h rear collision. Although there is no requirement to crash test the demonstrator within the scope of the programme, the materials will need to demonstrate equivalence to the existing solution for strength and stiffness.
The target benefits can be summarized in the following way:
• Cost: The primary driver for the adoption of the 3D-LightTrans material and manufacturing solution is reduced cost. This can be achieved if the solution replaces high performance, thermoset solutions such as RTM or Prepreg (as in the case of the SWW) which are usually associated with high material cost, high wastage and high levels of skilled labour input; or if we can exceed the performance of low cost thermoplastic solutions which are usually much more automated, employ isotropic, discontinuous reinforcing fibre and low fibre fractions. Metallic inserts are currently included in the foam core and these are drilled and threaded in a post moulding CNC operation, which can be removed as a result of the change of design to a twin-skinned solution.
• Weight Reduction: Although the material properties associated with the 3D-LightTrans product are lower than that of the incumbent thermoset materials there is a weight reduction opportunity as a result of removing the foam core, which is extremely dense due to the high injection pressures employed in the RTM cell. Further weight reduction can be established as a result of removing or reducing the size and weight of the metallic inserts necessary to accommodate the fastening systems. Much smaller and lighter “standard” fasteners can be employed across the range of load requirements with good positional accuracy determined by drilled or moulded-in holes and features.
Finally, a further weight saving of up to 3kg is possible if the thickness of the INNER is slightly increased to enhance the stiffness and the battery tray currently employed to introduce the batteries to the vehicle will become redundant. Materials and Manufacturing Processes.
This approach lends among others itself well to a press–forming process, which is the most likely route to produce highly automated, low cost composite components at volumes in excess of 3,000 p.a. in the future. To this end, Bentley is investigating this possibility for a structure on the forthcoming Continental GT product, in production from 2018 at an annual production volume expectation of 3,500. In the short-term we can evaluate this proposal on a low volume application of the same component, but (having learned from the experience on the project) we would employ a process representative of a much more volume capable solution. This component will almost certainly be composed of 2 skins bonded together and including captive nuts to accommodate the mechanical fastening to the remainder of the Body in White.
The development of a low volume manufacturing process, using the 3D-LightTrans materials, has yielded some very interesting and valuable learning, regarding what these materials are (and are not) capable of and suited to.
However we were not able to test the SWW in the representative vehicle environment, due to the still poor mechanical performance, but are able to validate many of the requirements at a material level: Mechanical performance of small specimens, Environmental resistance of matrix and reinforcement, Limitations of drape, Fibre architecture, Defect and damage mechanisms.
And assembly level: Final thickness variation due to drape mechanisms and overlaps, Geometric tolerance, spring-back, Fastener strategy and Insert selection/evaluation.
Future design of SWW components would need to take into account the material property and manufacturing limitations of the 3DLightTrans textiles. It is clear from the low-volume production method trials, that a pressed solution is essential to ensure adequate consolidation and prevent excessive oxidation. Ideally the geometry of the component should be limited to that which can be draped without the need for cuts, darts and/or overlaps, due to the low probability of successfully maintaining an accurate ply drop position during the pressing process. It is also apparent that the aesthetic of the material is not adequate to meet Bentley A-Surface requirements, so the use of these materials should be restricted to structural applications.
In summary, the use of 3D-LightTrans materials to replace high performance thermoset solutions is unlikely, as the weight penalty is not likely to be sufficiently offset by any cost saving (to be confirmed by commercial calculations). However, we could imagine the application of these technologies to replace low-cost, low-performance reinforced thermoplastics or injection moulding, where the improved performance over these materials might be sufficiently attractive and the cost differential small.
Results of tests and characterization
Demonstrator tailgate for Fiat 500 L and the glass reinforced polyester thermoformed material as developed in 3D-LightTran for the demonstrators manufacture have been extensively tested. Fiat 500 L tailgate is one of the most challenging components and demonstrators of the project. According to the product requirements defined in 3D-LightTrans and following the Fiat company production standards the tests were performed in order to verify the achievements of the targets: measurements of accuracy with optical system, surface quality analysis, bonding tests, painting tests. Moreover results were compared with those of the normal production using conventional materials – steel sheets.
The following tests were performed: Material surface quality evaluation, Full scale component tests, Material static flexural tests with E-modulus evaluation, Water penetration and sensitivity of static strength to humidity, Static tensile tests with E-modulus evaluation and fire resistance tests
To sum up: Besides the torsional and side flexion full scale tests of the 3D-LightTrans tailgate prototype, compared with identical tests performed on the conventional steel tailgate, experimental evaluation of different characteristics of the glass fibre polyester thermoformed composite materials used for the demonstrator manufacture was performed.
The most important results can be summarised as follows:
− 3D-LightTrans tailgate full scale tests, performed together and compared with conventional steel tailgate tests, confirmed the feasibility of the design and manufacture using the 3D glass reinforced polyester thermoformed fabric. Though E-modulus of steel and glass fibre polyester thermoformed composite differed more than by one order, the design and manufacture process of the composite tailgate was so well done and balanced that final deformation properties of the composite tailgate were very close and comparable to the conventional steel component. Minor differences between stiffness of 3D-LightTrans and steel tailgate at different types of loading were pointed out.
− Numerous tests of the final 3D thermoformed composite material confirmed sufficient properties, Some detailed knowledge of the material and mutual links between thermoforming quality and other properties like strength, E-modulus, surface roughness, water absorption, scatter of properties etc. was gained.
Life Cycle Analysis
In order to achieve more sustainable production and consumption patterns, 3D-LightTrans team considers the environmental implications of the whole supply-chain of the products we produce (including materials and processes), as well as their use and waste management; i.e. their entire Life Cycle from “cradle to grave”. Product Life Cycle, including maintainability, reparability and recyclability of the products, is therefore an important aspect in relation to environmental concerns, especially if our main goal is to achieve the EU objectives about sustainability.
The focus of the LCA was on FIAT tailgate.
Based on the process flow of 3D-LightTrans production, the parameters were defined, gathered and elevated.
The Life Cycle impact assessment evaluates the categories defined by the CML2001 method (April 2013) and the Primary Energy Demand from renewable and non-renewable resources impact. A list of such environmental impacts and their reliability levels, as defined by the Joint Research Centre recommendations.
For highlighting some results:
• The 3D-LightTrans tailgate is 1 kg lighter than the Normal Production (NP) solution (made of steel).
Use of the 3D-LihgtTrans tailgate: The lightweight is the main way to drop down the global warming potential (GWP) impact in use phase and so the 3D-LightTrans tailgate, reducing the component weight of around 1 kg, shows an 8% improvement than the Normal Production solution
▪ Lifetime = 200.000 km
▪ Leads to 8% improvements thanks to the light weighting
Results of the Impact Assessment analysis (LCIA)
Besides many detailed analysis results described in the document “Life Cycle Assessment” (D5.15) another aspect of the LCA along the whole life cycle, the 3D-LightTrans solution shows:
▪ Advantages in use phase thanks to the light weighting
▪ The benefits in use phase are, anyway, not enough to balance the environmental burdens in production
▪ Anyway, the commingling step, the most environmentally critical, could be further improved/optimized
▪ Use of recycled material could improve significantly the 3D-LightTrans solution (check on the quality requirements)
For the GWP, the advantages in use phase, due to the lightweight 3D-LightTrans tailgate are not enough to balance the environmental burdens in production and so the innovative solution is 26% worse than Normal Production solution. Anyway, comparing the two solutions, the main difference is due to process because the Normal Production solution is industrialized, while the 3D-LightTrans tailgate is a R&D solution and so has to be still optimized.
▪ For the GWP (Global Warming Potential), the advantages in use phase, due to the lightweight 3D-LightTrans tailgate are not enough to balance the environmental burdens in production and so the innovative solution is 26% worse than Normal Production solution. Anyway, comparing the two solutions, the main difference is due to process because the Normal Production solution is industrialized, while the 3D-LightTrans tailgate is a R&D solution and so has to be still optimized.
▪ For the PED (Primary Energy Demand from renewable & non-renewable resources), the aforementioned considerations are applicable and the 3D-LightTrans solution is 51% worse than the Normal Production solution.
▪ For the ADP elements (Abiotic Depletion) impact, the result is affected mainly by the materials of the 3D-LightTrans solution and, in particular, by the glass fibre contribution. Instead, from the comparison, the Normal Production solution is the best.
▪ For the ADP fossil (Abiotic Depletion) impact, the advantages in use phase for the lightweight 3D-LightTrans solution are not enough to balance the impact due to materials and process. The comparison shows a worsening of 30% for the innovative solution with respect to the Normal Production one.
▪ For the AP (Acidification Potential), the 3D-LightTrans solution results are affected, in production, by materials (mainly glass fibre), and by electricity (for the high compressed air consumption in the commingling step), while, in use phase, mainly by fuel consumption. The advantages in use phase are not enough to balance the environmental burden in production and so the 3D-LightTrans solution is 78% worse than the Normal Production one.
▪ For the EP (Eutrophication Potential), the aforementioned considerations are true even though the use phase contribution is slightly more important. From the comparison, the 3D-LightTrans tailgate is 60% worse than the Normal Production solution. Anyway, it is always important to underline that the 3D-LightTrans process is not yet optimized.
▪ For the ODP (Ozone Depletion Potential), the 3D-LightTrans solution improves over the Normal Production one thanks to the advantages in production. Such advantages are referred to the scrap management, which, considering the incineration scenario, leads to a credit for the ODP impact due to the destruction of chlorofluorocarbons during the incineration process. Anyway, the ODP results are very low and can be considered null for both solutions.
▪ For the POCP (Photochemical Ozone Creation Potential), the 3D-LightTrans tailgate is 29% better than the Normal Production solution thanks to the lightweight advantages in use phase and to the glass fibre credits in production (due to the nitrogen monoxide emissions in air).
Market analysis
The total global value of fibre reinforced composite products was 14.8 Billion Euro in 2011. Around 30% of this market was on thermoplastic composite products and 70% on thermoset.
Thermoplastic composite materials show a stronger growth compared to thermoset.
The general market driver for using composite materials was the need for lightweight construction, mainly in automotive and aircraft applications.
Advantages of thermoplastic over thermoset composites are: Short cycle time thermoforming, low moisture uptake, good toughness and damage resistance, room temperature storage eliminates the use of refrigeration and allows large structure fabrication, ability to re-form parts (thermoplastic resins retain their properties even after repeated heating and cooling), lower void content. alternative fabrication without using autoclaves, improved fire retardancy.
Disadvantages of thermoplastic over thermoset composites are: Higher initial raw material cost over thermosets, higher processing temperatures, unfamiliarity with today’s thermoplastic composite processing, typically higher cost tooling.
There is a trend to more continuous and longer fibres since the mechanical properties are increasing depending on fibre length. However the manufacturing processes which can be used are also depending on fibre length. Injection moulding is therefore only useable up to a fibre length per diameter of approximately 200. Above this value other consolidation processes such as thermo-pressing have to be used.
Definition of target market
Only thermoplastic composite (TPC) materials are considered in this study. The target market was chosen for the following reasons. A focus on the whole light weight and the whole structural components market appears to be too wide. Focus on thermoplastic seems to be rather narrow, but thermoplastic can substitute thermoset. Therefore it was decided to focus on thermoplastic in this study with a strong focus on the possibility to substitute components which are produced of thermoset.
Definition of thermoplastic composite in general: A composite material containing short, long, continuous nonwoven or woven fibres as reinforcement. The matrix can be any polymer. The fibre can be glass, carbon, or polymers. The processes for fabrication can be manifold.
Definition of 3D-LightTrans thermoplastic composite: A composite material containing any thermoplastic polymer as a matrix that is reinforced by a textile woven structure made out of glass fibre. The process for fabrication of such a structure is based on air mingling of polymer fibres and glass fibres, textile processing into woven preforms and final consolidation by thermos-pressing.
The global market weight and value of thermoplastic consumption amounted to 1.95 Mio tonnes with a value of 4.47 Billion Euro in 2011.
According to Lucintel a continuing moderate to strong growth is expected for TPC materials until 2017. Regarding applications strongest growth is expected in industrial applications with 8.5% by value per year until 2017. The growth for all other applications is forecast to be around 5% in value per year until 2017. Concerning the type of material the strongest growth expected for CFT with 8.6% in value and LFT with 7.9% in value per year until 2017. Regarding the regions the strongest growth in value is expected for USA with 5.5% and EU with 5% per year. The Rest of world will experience strongest growth in weight with 4.5% per year, while North America will experience 4.3% growth in weight per year and EU 4.0% until 2017.
Market trends
The general market trends for TPC are the following:
▪ Moderate continued growth in all application segments
▪ Transportation will remain the largest segment
▪ Strong growth in new industrial segments is expected, e.g. plates and tubes
▪ New applications appearing in construction (GMT materials)
▪ In other non-automotive niche segments (defence, ballistic, miscellaneous) CFT is preferred
General trends in type of materials are the following:
• More innovative fibres to be used: bio-based, increasing carbon, self-reinforcing fibres
• Nano-reinforcement
• Trend to longer fibres: LFT, CFT
• Increase in new and adapted matrix polymers
• Increased replacement of thermoset by thermoplastic materials
General trends in manufacturing are as follows:
• Reduction of hand lay-up techniques will occur
• More automation is expected but will result in higher capital costs required
• More barriers for new entrants and SME by higher capital costs
General trends in applications are as follows:
▪ More thermoplastic will be used in aerospace (e.g. PEEK matrices for demanding applications)
▪ New applications in building and construction are coming (reinforcement bars, GMT decking materials)
▪ Infrastructure applications (relining sewers, water and gas pipelines)
▪ Energy applications (blade and housing of wind turbines)
▪ Increased application in sporting goods
▪ Higher complexity in automotive parts (e.g. hybrid components)
Competitors: Cytec Industries Inc, Fiber Glass Industries, Inc, TenCat, COMFIL ApS, Bond Laminates, Fiberforge, Concordia Fibers. Information of the competitors listed here is summarized in the Market Analysis (D5.15).
Business cases
Continuous Fibre Reinforced Thermoplastics (CFTs) have a history of about 25 years and CFT differ from short fibre reinforced thermoplastics such as LFRT and GMT in terms of fibre length. CFTs include a variety of products, including unidirectional prepregs, fabric based prepregs, narrow tapes, commingled fibres in roving and fabric forms, sheets, and rods. Historically, CFTs were used in niche applications in aerospace and defence market. But in recent years, the market has strongly diversified into automotive, sporting, transportation, industrial and other applications. Demand has been driven by a variety of aerospace, automotive and truck applications. However, CFTs are even finding their way into furniture, fastener, medical, marine, and other applications adding on to increase in use of thermoplastic composites by Airbus and Boeing and other commercial aircraft manufacturers.
The Continuous Fibre Reinforced Thermoplastics (CFT) market has experienced significant growth during last 5 years and is expected to reach € 150 million in 2014 with a global annual growth rate of 8% - 12% for the next five years. The critical success factor for CFTs material producers will increasingly be not only about developing new products at low cost; in addition, Lucintel believes the most successful companies will be those that can develop application-specific, customer-focused solutions and have the ability to help their customers achieve long-term business objectives, such as increasing performance or lowering costs. (http://www.lucintel.com/marketCFT.aspx)
Growth of CFT material is driven by its superior performance compared with LFT and SFT. The cost of manufacturing of CFT material is similar albeit somewhat lower than thermoset depending on the manufacturing process
Basically there are three processes for producing CFT:
a) unidirectional tapes by pultrusion
b) wetting of fabric or unidirectional aligned fibres with low viscosity thermoplastic matrix (fully impregnated prepregs or semi-pregs = dry fabric with resin films fused on the outside).
c) using comingled fibres (this is the 3D-LightTrans process)
Several business cases for the application of 3D-LightTrans material were selected on the basis of priority ranking in the meetings of the 3D-LightTrans consortium. The business cases to be worked out in greater detail are the following:
▪ Two automotive business cases: spare wheel well and tailgate (3D-LightTrans demonstrators),
▪ Aircraft applications
▪ Two industrial business cases: storage tanks, and plate and tube stocks
▪ Energy with a focus on wind energy
▪ Consumer goods with a focus on sports and leisure
▪ Medical applications with a focus on orthopaedic devices
These cases are discussed in Market Analysis (D5.15).
Potential Impact:
Terms such as impact or effect assessment / study are very broad and subject to different interpretations. Therefore, it is worth to discuss and define its meaning and scope in this document. There are for example a number of definitions of impact. For example, impact is ‘improvements in the lives and livelihoods of beneficiaries’ (OECD/DAC, 1997). Blankberg’s definition of impact specifies further and refers to long-term and sustainable changes introduced by a given intervention in the lives of beneficiaries (Blankenberg, 1995).
In an impact study research is done on a certain topic to determine if a certain action would, or is, having some sort of an effect on its environment or other related issues. The most common type of impact study referred to may be an environmental impact study, but there are many other types of impact studies as well. Impact studies pull data from many different sources and often look at many different aspects of the issue. A similar, more specific and much more frequently used term, is “impact assessment”. Impact Assessment (IA) simply defined is the process of identifying the future consequences of a current or proposed action. The “impact” is the difference between what would happen with the action and what would happen without it. The terms “impact” and “effect” are frequently used synonymously (as in US National Environmental Policy Act Regulations 1508.8).
The oldest, most well-established aspect of IA is Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). Increasing concerns in developed economies about the impact of human activities on human health and on the biophysical environment led to the development of the concept of EIA in the 1960s, and to its adoption as a legally based decision-support instrument later in that decade to assess the environmental implications of proposed development. The European Union approved a Directive on EIA in 1985. Some EIA systems or jurisdictions constrain EIA to the analysis of impacts on the biophysical environment while others include the social and economic impacts of development proposals. Other forms of IA focus on specific type of impacts (e.g. Social IA, Health IA, Ecological or Biodiversity IA). These may be carried out independently, but also in a joint exercise with other IA. To emphasize such integration of different forms of impacts, some professionals and institutions use the expression Integrated IA. For others, the integration of the environment, social and economic dimensions of assessment justifies the adoption of a distinct term: Sustainability Assessment (IAIA, 2009)
After detailed analysis of the potential areas of relevance, we have decided to include following aspects in the 3D-LightTrans impact study
- Technological impact. Here we are considering the impact of the technologies developed in terms of enabling further development, innovation and future technological breakthroughs.
- Impact in the natural environment. This includes issues such as air and water quality, use of raw material, etc. This part of the impact study is closely related to Task 5.5- Life cycle analysis. Therefore there has been interaction with the partners involved in this, in order to optimize the use of information avoiding duplication of efforts.
- Economic impact. Material and manufacturing costs are considered here, as well as the indirect economic impact through the products. This part is closely related to the market study and business cases performed by AIT; again interaction has focus on optimal use of results avoiding overlapping.
Requirements and methodology
Basic principles of an impact assessment
Irrespective of the topic under investigation and of the chosen nomenclature, an impact study or assessment should be (IAIA & IEA, 1999):
- Purposive- the process should inform decision making and result in appropriate levels of environmental protection and community well-being.
- Rigorous - the process should apply “best practicable” science, employing methodologies and techniques appropriate to address the problems being investigated.
- Practical - the process should result in information and outputs which assist with problem solving and are acceptable to and able to be implemented by proponents.
- Relevant - the process should provide sufficient, reliable and usable information for development planning and decision making.
- Cost-effective - the process should achieve the objectives of EIA within the limits of available information, time, resources and methodology.
- Efficient - the process should impose the minimum cost burdens in terms of time and finance on proponents and participants consistent with meeting accepted requirements and objectives of EIA.
- Focused - the process should concentrate on significant environmental effects and key issues; i.e. the matters that need to be taken into account in making decisions.
- Adaptive - the process should be adjusted to the realities, issues and circumstances of the proposals under review without compromising the integrity of the process, and be iterative, incorporating lessons learned throughout the proposal's life cycle.
- Participative - the process should provide appropriate opportunities to inform and involve the interested and affected publics, and their inputs and concerns should be addressed explicitly in the documentation and decision making.
- Interdisciplinary - the process should ensure that the appropriate techniques and experts in the relevant bio-physical and socio-economic disciplines are employed, including use of traditional knowledge as relevant.
- Credible - the process should be carried out with professionalism, rigor, fairness, objectivity, impartiality and balance, and be subject to independent checks and verification.
- Integrated - the process should address the interrelationships of social, economic and biophysical aspects.
- Transparent - the process should have clear, easily understood requirements for EIA content; ensure public access to information; identify the factors that are to be taken into account in decision making; and acknowledge limitations and difficulties.
- Systematic - the process should result in full consideration of all relevant information on the affected environment, of proposed alternatives and their impacts, and of the measures necessary to monitor and investigate residual effects.
In our impact study, we have tried to follow all these principles, particularly focusing in relevant aspects, practical information and a participative process (with exchange of information with the project partners, especially in relation to market study deliverable, where this impact report is embedded in, and to the Life Cycle Analysis, reported in an additional deliverable).
Establishment of a methodology
A large number of applicable types of techniques can be used for perfoming impact analysis, depending on the method features and outputs. These include analogue (look-alike) case studies, checklists (simple, descriptive questionnaire), decision focused checklists, environmental cost-benefit analysis, expert opinion, expert systems, indices or indicators, laboratory testing and scale models, landscape evaluation, literature review, mass balance calculations, matrices, monitoring (baseline), monitoring (field studies of receptors near analogs), networks, overlay mapping via GIS, photographs/photomontage (historical and current), qualitative model (conceptual), quantitative modelling, risk assessment, scenario building, trend extrapolation
Generally speaking, multiple techniques can be useful for each impact study activity, while there is no single method which is capable of meeting all needs. Xedera has examined different alternative techniques and made a selection of the methods which maximize the usability of results for our concrete case (the 3D-LightTrans technology). The list of methods selected to be used in the 3D-LightTrans study is given below:
- Indices or indicators
- Monitoring (baseline)
- Qualitative and quantitative models
- Laboratory testing and scale models
- Scenario building
- Literature review
- Expert opinions
Performance indicators play an important role in assessing the impact of research projects. Here, it is important to distiguish between outputs, performance indicators and impacts. The service contract “IEEE Project Performance Indicators” “IEE Project Performance Indicators (EACI/IEE/2011/001), the final results of which have been delivered in December 2012, provide a set of performance indicators relevant for the IEE programme and explains the relation between inputs, activities, outputs, impacts, performance indicators and targets related to the research projects (Intelligent Energy Europe, 2013):
- Inputs are the resources required to deliver the project
- Activities are the tasks or processes undertaken. These are set out in the work packages, in the section “Work Programme”
- Outputs are the direct products and services delivered by your project. They include material deliverables (e.g. brochures, reports, CD ROM) as well as services provided (e.g. hours of training, number of people taught). However, usually they say very little about the actual effect of the action or benefits to your target group.
- Impacts are identifiable changes which demonstrate the extent to which your activities have an effect on your target group. These changes – the impacts of your projet- can take place during its lifetime (specific – or short term – impacts) or beyond its lifetime (strategic – or long term – impacts) and come under the five fields of delivery above mentioned.
- Performance indicators should be used to determine the success of your project in reaching its objectives and creating an impact. The performance Indicators should be SMART (specific, measureable, achievable, relevant and time-bound).
- The changes caused by your project include quantifiable energy-related impacts both within the duration of the project and beyond its lifetime, known as IEE Common performance indicators. These are the sustainable energy investments triggered, renewable energy production, primary energy saving, and reduction of greenhouse gas emission, demonstrating the contribution to the EU energy targets.
The general procedure is established as follows:
1. Research and performance indices or indicators are defined, computed and compared with baseline / state-of-the art data, in order to assess the degree of project progress resp. of achievement of goals. This information will be crucial to estimate the real technological impact of the results achieved. The specific data assigned to the indicators are calculated using the most appropriate method on a case-to-case base (e.g. laboratory testing of material samples, manufacturing chain simulation results on the base of a hypothetical scenario, nominal values for machine performance provided by the equipment manufacturers, etc.)
2. In parallel, additional information is collected from literature review, expert opinions, available databases, feedback from other project tasks and other sources. This provides relevant background information and additional input data for establishing comparisons with other state-of-the-art technologies and for providing a holistic view and a global perspective.
3. A comprehensive review of the available information is done to establish a comparison and give a global perspective of the 3D-LightTrans project impact in comparison to other technologies. Final conclusions are drawn and main statements on the project impact listed.
Results of the impact study
Technological impact
3D-LightTrans innovation
The following figure provides an overview of the main innovation aspects of the results achieved in the 3D-LightTrans project. It must be noted that the technological and innovation impact of the project is not only related to the complete manufacturing process, but also to the breakthroughs achieved in the individual processing steps. As a matter of fact, the technological developments achieved (e.g. in relation to the manufacturing of hybrid yarn, industrial weaving of complex geometries, novel fixation process, etc.) can lead to significant progress and exploitation opportunities also in other applications beyond the 3D-lightTrans manufacturing chain.
On the basis of the technological impact created by 3D-LightTrans, as described above, it becomes apparent that there are very good chances for the introduction of 3D-LightTrans textile reinforced composites in a large number of potential applications. The market study (work by AIT and reported in this document) elaborates on this in an exhaustive way. For the impact study, we offer a simplified overview and focus applications in the automotive sector. Here, to provide a realistic estimation of the expected impact, we must consider that 3DLightTrans will compete both with traditional and with advanced materials. The following table provides a comparative insight into representative both traditional and state-of-the-art alternative technologies:
Material / technology Brief discussion
Metal Steel is a heavy material, less abundant than glass or plastic but with good performance. Its extraction represents a large environmental burden, but it is easy to separate for recycling.
Light metals are comparatively lighter but more expensive and less easy to separate for recycling than steel.
Carbon composites Very high performance but also high price and more difficult to recycle.
Non textile reinforced plastic composites Low weight, abundant materials. Performance better than pure plastic, but lower than textile reinforced plastics. Not so easy to separate as steel, but easier to recycle than those with textile reinforcement.
Glass thermoset composites Lightweight and abundant material with medium performance. More difficult and energy consuming in their manufacturing, storage and transport of preforms requires refrigeration. Final forming process is time intensive.
New approaches for fibre / textile reinforced thermoplastic composites:
Low cost, abundant material (thermoplastic) with medium performance and easy and fast consolidation process. Suitable for different applications depending on the requirements:
Fibre Chain Automated laser assisted tape placement for unidirectional continuous fibre reinforced thermoplastic composites, especially suited to small &medium lot-sizes.
Mapicc3D The project aims to develop a technology for 3D placement of thermoplastic hybrid fibres and will be particularly suited to the manufacture of three-dimensional parts which can be composed by combining a number of structures (stiffener and panel structures) with a given standard geometrical form.
3D-LightTrans 3D-LightTrans provides a solution for low-cost manufacturing of three dimensional parts combining deep draped complex geometry and spacer structures with very high flexibility in the achievable geometries, and with enhanced performance (thanks to the textile reinforcement) in large and very large lot sizes.
In deliverable D5.14 chapter Impact study there are figures and also a table to "comparison of material technologies".
Research / performance indicators
One of the methods used to assess systematically and provide a realistic estimation of the technological impact is the use of quantitative and qualitative research/performance indicators. The baseline and indicators are based on those established in the work plan, but have been redefined and extended to provide useful data which can allow to determine in accurate and reliable terms the real progress achieved. In the table below, baseline data provide measurable means to assess the work progress, and are stated in terms of processing time, yarn displacement, etc. between two specific control points of the production chain. The baseline data are regularly recorded. Based on this, criteria and research / performance indicator provide an overview on project progress and impact at specific points of time, and are stated in terms of % reduction, degree of improvement, etc. in comparison with the initial baseline (baseline data at the beginning of the project or value known or estimated for state-of-the-art comparable processes). For the calculation of the performance indicator values, laboratory testing and scale models, as well as scenario building and simulation (for the calculation of process times, which is depending on the choice of in-tool or out-of-the-tool and use or fixation or not) have been used. The following pictures provide an insight into the progress achieved for some of the baselines in the frame of the project:
In the following, the main baselines and performance indicators are discussed in detail:
Baseline Initial / reference baseline data Current baseline data Perf. indicator value
Geometrical stability during storage and transport Unstable (no method for fixation available) Fixation process successful Achieved
Composite forming process time (2) With RTM 1 hour = 3600 s. 30+200 (+280)= 230 s. (510 s. if draping on tool) 6,3% reduction (14,1% if draping takes place on tool)
Fibre displacement (surface in-plane waviness) Estimated from visual inspection in the first samples pressed > 1 mm Estimated from visual inspection in the latest samples < 0,5 mm. Reduction in fibre displacement > 50%
Number of processing steps for production of pre-forms based on 3D-shaped fabric 3 up to 5 (weave, sew, glue...) 1 (using 3D-LightTrans adapted
weaving machine) Reduction from 3-5 to only 1
Table 8 - Selection of 3D-LightTrans baselines and performance indicators
For the project achievements in some of the manufacturing steps, it is not always possible to establish a direct quantitative performance comparison with previous results or with the state of the art by the project start. For these, a qualitative assessment of the results is discussed below:
- Hybrid yarn manufacturing: Our current base data for productivity is of 500 m/min for industrial production, as reported by our equipment manufacturer (PD-GOschatz) in the deliverable report. Here, information available from other manufacturers is insufficient to establish a comparison, as productivity data are not provided and, when available (e.g. 10-30 m/sec with TwinTex for glass/PP), no information is given on the yarn count with which this speed is achieved.
In any case, 3D-LightTrans results go, to the best of our knowledge, beyond the state of the art, in that improved performance and higher repeatability have been achieved with a variety of compositions, while the yarn is optimized to minimize the abrasion damage during multilayer and spacer fabrics weaving, and the highly homogeneous distribution of material guarantees good performance of the final 3D-LightTrans composite. For example, before the beginning of the project, no industrial manufactured hybrid yarn with PET was, to the best of our knowledge, available. However, this was indicated as unconditional requirement by our automotive end-users in order to fulfil the demonstrator requirements. Nowadays still glass/PP is the main material for the state of the art hybrid thermoplastic-glass yarn and, whereas in the meantime also Twintex seems to offer some type of glass/PET yarn, it is not clear whether the yarn properties would satisfy the demanding requirements of the 3D-LightTrans further textile processing.
- Weaving equipment performance. According to the 3D-LightTrans machine specifications and for the specific case example defined on Deliverable x2.6 a speed of 4,4 cm/min (for spacer fabric with hollows of 100mmx40 mm, 2 plates with 5 weft layers per plate, 2 walls with 3 weft layers per wall and a density of 6 wefts per cm. per plate and 5 wefts per cm per wall) to 13,5 cm/min (for multilayer fabric with 5 weft layers, 4 warp layers, 4 mm. thickness, 1 m. width and a density of 24 wefts/cm and 24 warps per cm. ) can be achieved. Again, we cannot establish comparison with other competing weaving machines in terms of speed, as this is depending on the density, complexity and thickness of the fabric, and there no industrial systems capable of manufacturing fabrics of this complexity (including spacer fabrics with woven outer layers connected by crosslink fabrics). Thus, the innovation and progress beyond the state of the art here are linked to the 3D-LightTrans capability for industrial production of more complex weave architectures and thicker fabrics with a large degree of flexibility, keeping reduced fibre damage and guaranteeing high quality using the 3D-LightTrans hybrid yarn.
Improvement of the European innovation capacity
The following picture shows the key sectors involved in increasing the European capacity index:
3D-LightTrans has addressed two specific sectors: Research and development, and human capital and training.
With regard to research and development, the improvement in the innovation capacity has covered different aspects, from modelling and simulation through the production processes down to testing and characterization. In these areas, the 3D-LightTrans partners have developed new knowledge and resources to support industries and investors interested in new potential applications and to increase their own competitiveness, in the case of industry. Another contribution to increase the innovation capacity has been done by spreading and sharing the knowledge generated within the project. This has led to 20 scientific publications in journals and conferences, several poster presentations at fairs, networking events and conferences, and invited talks at key events such as those organized by strategic European technology planning actors, such as the Textile Flagship Conference and the 10th Annual Conference of the Textile ETP.
In connection with human capital and training, the academic partners can introduce the results achieved in the teaching curriculum / skills and education training, contribute to the training of PhD and Diploma students. Dedicated lectures can be introduced in courses. The modelling and simulation modules, as well as the testing setups (especially at UGent and UOrleans), as well as the laboratory equipment modified and/or implemented in the frame of the project (especially at TU-Dresden) will be used for further research and experiments, including (where applicable) PhDs and Diploma thesis.
Economic impact
3D-LightTrans objective was to provide an alternative solution with comparatively lower costs for light-weight structural components in the automotive sector. To illustrate the expected economic impact, we will focus on the case of Bentley’s spare wheel well (3D-LightTrans demonstrator). To obtain light-weight (8-9 Kg, in contrast to the around 15 Kg. that the steel component would weight) and guarantee high performance, the SWW is currently made of glass-carbon-epoxy composite. This solution has actually quite high cost (400 € per part). In order to reduce costs, SRIM was initially considered as an alternative, with an expected cost per part of 50 €. However, this option was discarded because the complex shape was not achievable and, even if it had been attainable, it would have required an investment of several millions. The steel part would be an economic solution (might be a little bit more expensive than SRIM) but not light-weight.
The 3D-LightTrans SWW demonstrator was implemented to demonstrate the possibility of realizing this part in light weight, with a material composition (based on PET-Glass hybrid yarn) and enhanced mechanical properties (thanks to the textile reinforcement) which, even being inferior to those of the carbon composite part, still satisfy the component requirements. Here, the biggest benefit of 3D-LightTrans is that it uses a production technology with can attain the complex SWW geometry with high rate capability and reduced cost through automation. If the costs of the 3D-LightTrans SWW came down to 50 €, with an annual volume of 1000 p.a. this would lead to saving up to 350.000 € per year, and the investment would be significantly lower than needed for doing the part in SRIM.
This is only an example for one specific component with moderate annual volume. However, it illustrates the fact that, with light-weight becoming more and more important in the automotive branch, but with the need to keep guaranteeing the high performance properties of the material, manufacturers are often forced to make huge investments and/or produce in expensive processes and materials (e.g. carbon composites). In this project, we demonstrate that 3D-LightTrans offers an economic alternative able of satisfying strict requirements. If this is used for several components and car models with bigger annual volume, we can easily conclude that an economic benefit of many million Euros is realistic.
This is only a brief statement in order to illustrate the economic dimension of the project impacts. In-depth details on the economic impact can be derived from the market study and business cases, which are described in detail in the first and second part of this document. Therefore, in this section we will not go into more detail.
Environmental impact
Using known data on industry emissions by sector, we reach for car manufacturing a footprint of 720 CO2 per £1000 (around 6 tonnes for a Citroen C1, 17 tonnes for a Ford Mondeo with medium spec. or 35 tonnes for a Land Rover Discovery, top of the range). Of this amount, 33% corresponds to metal extraction (for a Ford Mondeo with medium spec., 5.61 Tonnes).
Figure 36 – CO2 manufacturing footprint in a midsize car
A first contribution of 3D-LightTrans to reduce this footprint could be expected in relation to the substitution of metal with glass and thermoplastic, reducing the footprint of metal extraction. Nevertheless, this contribution to the impact due to material extraction is generally assumed to decrease, as the new normative for the automotive sector foresees that almost all the material in a car should be recycled (therefore the metal extraction footprint would be anyway reduced to a minimum by recycling, even if metal is not substituted by composites).
A second contribution to the car manufacturing footprint is related to the gas and electricity used by the auto industry itself, including all the component manufacturers as well as the assembly plant, and it accounts for 12% (around 2 Tonnes for a Ford Mondeo with medium spec). The 3D-LightTrans Life Cycle Analysis, performed in a dedicated Task and reported separately, shows that the manufacturing footprint with our manufacturing chain is not necessarily lower, due to a large extend to the relative high footprint of air-entangled commingling. However, we can assume that the footprint could be considerably decreased by modifying or optimizing the process for hybrid yarn manufacturing.
The clearest contribution of 3D-LightTrans to decrease the environmental burden seems to be, for the time being, the abatement of CO2 emissions during car service through vehicle weight reduction. Using yearly average data for passenger vehicle (cars, minivans, pick-ups, vans and SUVs), we come to an average footprint of 0,1954 Kg CO2/Km (source www.americanforests.org). Assuming 100.000 Km/vehicle, this means 20 Tonnes CO2 per vehicle during its entire lifetime. If we substitute a tailgate made of steel with one made with 3D-LightTrans technology (as done in CRF’s project demonstrator) and if we reached, by means of design optimization, a weight reduction of around 12% of the total 19.5 Kg. component’s weight, that would mean a reduction in weight of around 2 Kg. If we take, for a first assumption, a linear relationship between CO2 exhaustion and the vehicle’s weight, this would lead to a decrease of the order of 32 Kg. CO2 per vehicle for its entire lifetime. With an expected production rate of 50.000 vehicles per annum, this makes 1.600 Tonnes less CO2 considering the entire lifetime of the cars of this model produced in only one year. Even if the assumptions made lead to some inaccuracy in the calculations, it is apparent that, if the 3D-LightTrans technology is applied for further components (e.g. other car doors) in further models, we would be speaking of an abatement of many thousands tonnes CO2.
For more details on environmental aspects of the impact, please refer to the Life Cycle Analysis (reported separately), which provides very complete information on the environmental aspects of the 3D-LightTrans technology.
List of Websites:
http://www.3d-lighttrans.com/
Project Coordinator: Marianne Hörlesberger; AIT (marianne.hoerlesberger@ait.ac.at); Exploitation & Dissemination Manager: Ana Almansa Martin, Xedera (aam@xedera.eu)
2. Publishable summary
The goal of 3D-LightTrans project was to provide ground-breaking, highly flexible and adaptable low-cost technologies for manufacturing of 3D textile reinforced plastic composites, including innovative approaches for the individual processes and its integration in complete manufacturing chains, which enables to shift them from its current position in cost intensive, small series niche markets, to broadly extended mass product applications, not only in transportation, but also in other key sectors, like health and leisure.
The main process steps are:
1. Hybrid yarn manufacturing. Hybrid yarn, composed of reinforcement material and thermoplastic matrix, is produced using a flexible and reliable manufacturing process. The hybrid yarn can be realised with customised properties and different compositions.
2. Weaving. The hybrid yarn is woven to create multifunctional textile preforms, such as double shell or spacer fabrics, and multilayer fabrics, with fibre architecture suited to the desired deep draped form of the final part.
3. Draping and fixation. The draping of the locally pre-fixed textile into the desired final 3D-form is performed in a fully automated way (avoiding the lower efficiency and reproducibility of customary manual draping).
4. Storage and transport of fixed pre-forms. In the case of thermoforming taking place at a different places or in a later time (draping and fixation performed in an intermediate, dummy tool), the pre-forms can be safely stored and transported in its fixed final geometry at room temperature.
5. Thermoforming. The final composite part is consolidated by a fast and efficient thermoforming process. Neither infiltration nor injections of the matrix material are required, as the thermoplastic matrix is already incorporated in the yarn.
The project 3D-LightTrans succeeded to develop most of the technologies and components required for the cost efficient manufacturing of 3D textile reinforced composites, based on hybrid yarn with thermoplastic matrix. A comprehensive modelling and simulation toolbox was developed. Equipment and processes were adapted for the manufacturing of hybrid yarn, the weaving of high performance 3D-shaped and multilayer fabrics and the pre-fixation of the fabrics. Significant progress was also achieved with regard to the draping process and tools, as well as in the thermoforming process. A tailgate for Fiat 500L and a Spare Wheel Well for Bentley demonstrates the applicable results. The project work was awarded with the innovation price for reinforcement by JEC Paris 2015.
Project Context and Objectives:
The goal of 3D-LightTrans project was to provide ground-breaking, highly flexible and adaptable low-cost technologies for manufacturing of 3D textile reinforced plastic composites, including innovative approaches for the individual processes and its integration in complete manufacturing chains, which enables to shift them from its current position in cost intensive, small series niche markets, to broadly extended mass product applications, not only in transportation, but also in other key sectors, like health and leisure.
The main process steps are:
1. Hybrid yarn manufacturing. Hybrid yarn, composed of reinforcement material and thermoplastic matrix, is produced using a flexible and reliable manufacturing process. The hybrid yarn can be realised with customised properties and different compositions.
2. Weaving. The hybrid yarn is woven to create multifunctional textile preforms, such as double shell or spacer fabrics, and multilayer fabrics, with fibre architecture suited to the desired deep draped form of the final part.
3. Draping and fixation. The draping of the locally pre-fixed textile into the desired final 3D-form is performed in a fully automated way (avoiding the lower efficiency and reproducibility of customary manual draping).
4. Storage and transport of fixed pre-forms. In the case of thermoforming taking place at a different places or in a later time (draping and fixation performed in an intermediate, dummy tool), the pre-forms can be safely stored and transported in its fixed final geometry at room temperature.
5. Thermoforming. The final composite part is consolidated by a fast and efficient thermoforming process. Neither infiltration nor injections of the matrix material are required, as the thermoplastic matrix is already incorporated in the yarn.
The project 3D-LightTrans succeeded to develop most of the technologies and components required for the cost efficient manufacturing of 3D textile reinforced composites, based on hybrid yarn with thermoplastic matrix. A comprehensive modelling and simulation toolbox was developed. Equipment and processes were adapted for the manufacturing of hybrid yarn, the weaving of high performance 3D-shaped and multilayer fabrics and the pre-fixation of the fabrics. Significant progress was also achieved with regard to the draping process and tools, as well as in the thermoforming process. A tailgate for Fiat 500L and a Spare Wheel Well for Bentley demonstrates the applicable results. The project work was awarded with the innovation price for reinforcement by JEC Paris 2015.
Results
Modelling and simulation toolbox. A comprehensive simulation toolbox with four major modules has been implemented by UGent, CRF, Onera, UORL and TU-Dresden. The four modules cover the following aspects: a) meso-scale modelling of the dry fabric architecture, b) draping of the dry fabric architecture and fixation of certain areas of the dry fabric, c) thermoforming of the fabric, and d) micro-, meso- and macro-scale modelling of the final composite part. Finally, the modelling of the complete process chain is addressed by GZE using the software ARENA.
The modelling and simulation tools developed were tested through experimental data with yarns, test fabrics and thermoformed plates, with key contribution of Leitat and SVUM. The analysis performed include, among others, single fibre and yarn tensile tests and yarn friction tests; uniaxial, biaxial and shear testing of fabrics; friction, compaction, bending and forming tests on fabrics, ultrasonic inspection of the impact of moisture absorption on the thermoformed plates, impact test and micro-CT scans.
Manufacturing of hybrid yarn and 3D textiles. Hybrid yarn combines glass reinforcement with thermoplastic matrix filaments in a single yarn. Among the different available technologies commingled hybrid yarns produced by air texturing display a particularly high potential for continuous-fibre-reinforced thermoplastics, due to their great impregnation quality. In air texturing, the hybrid yarn is produced by the pneumatic opening of the filament yarn by cold or hot pressurized air, and the subsequent reallocation of the initial filaments in a special air nozzle. PD-GOschatz, TU-DresdenTUD and UGent have optimized the process to produce highest yarn quality with increased reproducibility and productivity (approx. 50 m/min) in a variety of materials (including PP and PET) with different fibre-matrix ratios.
Concerning the weaving of 3D textiles, on one hand, TU-Dresden has produced fabrics with different multilayer patterns, both with z-reinforcement (in different orientations) and without. The four electronic warp let-offs systems and 20 head frames at the new Dornier loom (modified for the 3D-LightTrans technology) make it possible to produce the Multilayer fabric based on GF/PET 840 tex (final yarn architecture) with high warp density, an optimized shedding operation and more structural variety, keeping highest fabric quality and reducing fibre damages. On the other hand, VanDeWiele has developed industrial equipment available at TU-Dresden to manufacture 3D shaped reinforcement textile pre-forms with customized multifunctional structure. In contrast to the conventional spacer fabrics (pile weaves) connected by additional pile yarns, the 3D woven spacer fabrics are constructed of woven outer layers connected by crosslink fabrics. Such structures do not only possess superior mechanical properties, but can also be produced -using VanDeWiele, equipment- in just one process step.
Manufacturing of the consolidated final composite part. The state-of-the-art technology provides neither standard tools, nor automated procedures with sufficient flexibility to perform in a satisfactory way the draping of complex geometries with thick multilayer fabrics. 3D-LightTrans approach to solve this consists in decomposing the procedure in several steps: pre-fixation, automated draping in a dummy tool, fixation, and final consolidation by thermoforming.
In order to decrease the fabric handling and draping effort, the fabric is pre-fixated, which creates a local increase of mechanical stiffness in well-defined areas previous to the draping. In a novel approach, special fibres with modified characteristics are integrated in the fabric by TU-Dresden, and subsequently processed by Coatema using alternative heating methods.
As a result of the pre-fixation, draping becomes easier, the flow of forces is better balanced and the number of wrinkles is reduced. In spite of this, the automated draping still constitutes a challenge, addressed by PROMAUT and Leitat. To handle the fabric, experimental tests have been done with suction cups and needle claws, while performed analytical studies show the influence of relevant parameters, such as the air leakage in vacuum grippers as a consequence of the fabric porosity and roughness. The implemented force control system makes path programming easier and ensures a constant draping force of the fabric against the tool. While the simulation performed by TU-Dresden provides a first estimation of the effectiveness of a given draping strategy, Robot Studio simulation allows a quick verification of the robot path reachability and draping tool placement.
One of the key advantages of the 3D-LightTrans technology is the processing to 3D fixed pre-forms, previous to the final consolidation (fixation). The pre-forms with fixed 3D geometry can be easily stored and transported without altering their geometry.
To achieve good results of the final composite part, the thermoforming process has to be adapted to the needs of the 3D-LightTrans technology. Flat multilayer textile reinforced composite plates have been consolidated by thermoforming at FMSP varying the pressure applied, time and temperature, for a number 3D-LightTrans fabrics of different characteristics. The resulting thermoformed plates have been visually inspected and analysed by CT-scans, micrographs, and measurements of thickness, impact behaviour and other mechanical properties. In parallel to the investigations on flat plates, a small complex tool is used by LKR, combining long plane areas on the bottom and side walls, with both long and tight curvature areas, to investigate the process stability to manufacture parts with close concave-convex geometry curvatures.
The 3D-LightTrans manufacturing chain. The 3D-LightTrans project integrates the novel process steps described above with a knowledge-based manufacturing approach and full automation, in order to provide a totally new concept for the design, manufacture and application of high-tech composites for low cost mass products. While the modified air-texturing machine can produce hybrid yarn with high repeatability in a variety of materials (such as glass/PET and glass PP) in different fibre/matrix ratios, the weaving equipment enables an increased flexibility in the realization of high-performance 3D fabrics. Storage and transport of the fixed pre-forms (if required) can take place without refrigeration requirements, as customary with thermoset prepegs.
The manufacturing chain is very flexible and can also be adapted to different production configurations. GZE has defined and tested a framework for the production line design, using modelling and simulation methodologies, which has been tested in a specific test case. Test, reliability and quality assurance aspects over the whole manufacturing chain are addressed by Leitat und SVUM. In order to ensure the real deployment of the 3D-LightTrans technology, in a holistic approach, relevant aspects such as an impact study (realized by Xedera), business cases (AIT), product life cycle (CRF, AIT, GZE), and scale-up for mass production are also considered.
All in all the Consortium brought together multidisciplinary research teams involving industrial stakeholders from machine tools and machine automation (P-D Glasseiden Oschatz, Michel Van de Wiele, Lindauer Dornier, Coatema) and several OEM active in the field of processing of flexible materials and composite manufacturing, including Federal Mogul Systems Protection, among others, as well as from the application sector (Centro Ricerche Fiat and Bentley), and extensive expertise from well-known research specialists in the area of materials, production research and technical textiles in particular, such as AIT Austrian Institute of Technology, TU-Dresden and University of Ghent. The modelling and simulation played an important role and achieved interesting results for science as well as for the application. These results were accomplished by University of Ghent, TU-Dresden, University of Orleans, Office National D’Etudes et de Recherches Aerospatiales (ONERA), Grado Zero Espace (in Italy). The development of the concept and model for the whole manufacturing chain Automatitzacio de Processos I Mediambient (PROMAUT, Spain) was responsible. Tests on the yarn, the woven fabrics, the thermos-pressed parts, and the tests on the final component are done by Leitat (ACONDICIONAMIENTO TARRASENSE ASSOCIACION, Terrassa Spain) and SVUM (Czech Republic). Xedera (Austria) manages the website, the exploitation and dissemination.
A short film about the project work and the main results are available under https://www.3d-lighttrans.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/3D_lightTrans_VideoFinal.MSWMM1_.wmv
For further information please see: www.3d-lighttrans.com.
Project Results:
Description of the main results
Modelling and simulation
The modelling and simulation tools developed in the 3D-LightTrans project are validated and tested through experimental data The scope of modelling and simulation was to provide advices for the design of the fibre reinforcement and the manufacturing process. Therefore, sensitivity analyses on the developed models were done. The parameters that influence the several process steps and, thus, important indications could be determined.
The 3D-LightTrans composites, as textile composites in general, have three characteristic scales:
1) Micro-scale: At the micro-scale, the constituents (fiber and matrix) are treated separately. The micro-scale representative unit cell (RUC) has to contain sufficient fibers, such as to well represent the statistics of the fiber distribution within the yarns. If only the elastic properties and the ultimate tensile strength in fiber direction are considered, a hexagonal RUC containing only one fiber is sufficient. The aim of micro-scale mechanical modeling is to compute the mechanical behavior of the consolidated yarns from the constituent behavior, taking into account the fiber volume fraction and its waviness.
2) Meso-scale: At the meso-scale, the architecture of the reinforcing fabric is represented. The consolidated yarns are modeled as a homogeneous transverse isotropic material with properties obtained from micro-scale modeling or from experiments on consolidated yarns or UD-plates. The aim of meso-scale mechanical modeling is to compute the average mechanical behavior of the consolidated composite, taking into account the fabric architecture and the yarn shapes.
3) Macro-scale: At the macro-scale, the structural aspects of the composite part are modeled. The composite material itself is modeled as a homogeneous anisotropic material with properties obtained from calculations at the lower scales or from experiments.
Modelling of impact and crash behaviour
Based on experimental results, different numerical modelling strategies are investigated in order to obtain the best correlation between numerical and experimental results under impact load by means of a sensitivity analysis of the different parameters influencing the results of the finite elements simulations at macro scale. One will use a low impact speed test-setup, experimentally and numerically, since this will represent as closest the impacts a spare wheel well for example will undergo in real circumstances. The procedure is described in details in D2.7 ”Set of guidelines for optimization of the fiber reinforcement and the manufacturing process”. The
The outcome can be summarized in:
o If one compares the experimental results and the simulated results of this sensitivity analysis, a good correlation can be found by using a combination of a correct finite element model and material model
o Choosing a correct finite element model with boundary conditions as close as possible to reality is important when modeling impact in composites with damage initiation and evolution.
o This sensitivity analysis gives a first idea of an indication of the different roles of some of the parameters.
Meso-scale modelling of the dry fabric
The goal of the dry fabric meso-scale modelling is to enable qualitative and quantitative comparison of the fabric deformability especially in biaxial extension and compaction. The procedure used for the modelling is as follows:
1. Design of a consistent and representative CAD model of the unit cell,
2. Meshing of the unit cell,
3. Finite element simulations of the deformability of the unit cell.
The input needed for the simulations are: yarn tensile behaviour, yarn compaction behaviour and yarn/yarn friction. Results of fabric testing (uniaxial, biaxial, compaction and shear) are used for the validation of the model.
To characterize the internal structure of the fabrics accurately, micro-CT scans were performed. The analyses of the Micro-CT scans have shown that the real internal structure of the fabrics is disordered due to the weaving process.
Modelling of the drapability process
Numerical simulation is an important tool for the optimization of the load-bearing behaviour of composites that are reinforced with high performance textile structures. Fabrics undergo a high degree of deformation while forming from their initial two-dimensional shape into a complex three-dimensional structure. Composites can only carry load in the fibre direction. A small difference between the load and fibre orientations decreases this capacity significantly. Because of the high deformations and the anisotropic character of most fabrics the reinforcement orientation in the formed structural part is hardly predictable. Therefore, drapability simulations, based on the finite element method (FEM), are implemented to predict the fibre orientation and the highly sheared zones and, additionally, to proof the formability of the textile structure itself. Classic composite constructions are time- and cost-intensive processes, where iterative development steps for improving the lightweight character have to be made with a high amount of engineering work. Uncertainty about the reinforcement orientation hinders an exact stress analysis. The drape simulation offers new possibilities for the designing of composites. The formability of the textile reinforcement structure to the intended three-dimensional geometry can be proofed. Furthermore, it becomes possible to predict the fibre orientation and, thus, weak spots in the component. The drape simulation is also a basis for resin injection and structure simulations.
In this section the developed model is used to define the most influencing fabric and process parameters. Therefore, representative material properties (tensile-, shear- and bending behaviour) of the 3DLT/8/VDW-NCFD-400:6-240:5/6 fabrics are varied and the influence on results of the tensile and the picture frame test are analysed. For the investigations of the drape process the tetrahedron punch test of UORL was chosen. In this test the pressure exerted by the blank holders and the friction coefficients were varied.
Modelling of the thermoforming process
A series of thermoforming simulation cases were set up on a U-section geometry, provided, in order to do a sensitivity analysis. The decision of performing a sensitivity analysis was taken, since no material data from experimental test were available, neither from the other partners, nor from ESI.
In order to perform the sensitivity analysis, some parameters change among different simulation cases.
Multi-Objective-Analysis
The Multi objective analysis developed within 3D-LightTrans promotes the integration of the various levels of computational analysis on the materials, the processes and the demonstrator’s performances in order to determine the best design and process input parameters. The objective of the work done is to obtain a set of feasible solutions placed on the Pareto optimum frontier considering the objectives (minimize cost, maximize the mechanical strength, etc.) and the bonds (maximum angle limit between warp and weft direction after draping operations, satisfactory displacements on the component, resistance to impact when hit by bodies, etc.).This set of solutions will be then the starting point for the choice of the optimum parameters for the demonstrators design and manufacturing.The optimization process consists of a set of steps organized in a linear workflow. Every step of this workflow must be automatic (no user intervention required) and in the same time robust to the possible errors coming from simulations. This process will be then looped in the optimization phase considering the results of the global DOE plan.
The optimizer adopted in the Multiobjective Analysis is a MOGA-II optimizer. MOGA-II is an improved version of MOGA (Multi-Objective Genetic Algorithm); it uses a smart multi-search elitism for robustness and directional crossover for fast convergence. Its efficiency is ruled by its operators (classical crossover, directional crossover, mutation and selection) and by the use of elitism (ref. “NBI and MOGA-II, two complementary algorithms for Multi-Objective optimizations”, 2006).
On the basis of the first optimization runs it will be evaluated the relevance of both the analysis steps and the input variables in order to exclude the less influential on the final objectives of the optimization from the list of input proposed by the involved Partners (e.g. in the step of the mechanical tests on the part geometry, if the component will always satisfy the required constraint on one of the load cases).
Modelling and simulation of the complete process chain
Manufacturing modelling and simulation is the process of creating and analysing prototypes (usually digitally realized), of real-world facilities or processes (either actual or planned), to predict their performance. The facility or process exists and operates in time, and it is referred with the generic term of system. Manufacturing simulation modelling (a general term that spans across many fields, industries, and applications), deals with the collection of methods and techniques in using computer tools (usually software), to mimic the behaviour of real-world systems, evaluating them numerically, and estimating their desired characteristics.
Our primary goal in simulation was to focus the attention on defining and understanding how the system work, or should work (this is the case in which system does not exist), task that provided a great insight view about the changes that need to be made during the development of the manufacturing activities.
The creation of simplified representations for the system under study (models), was guided by a prescribed set of goals, specific objectives of the study that should make possible (many of the processes are still going and are still under developing, especially Pre-fixation and Fixation, Draping and Thermoforming), to proceed in experimenting with the system (with the manufacturing line), through its models (when they will be fully implemented and industrially deployed).
Experimentation consists in generating system's histories and observing system's behaviour over time, as well as statistics about how it works; this particular task that is usually called Data Collection, is the principal source of information for the Verification and Validation stage of every type of simulation conducted over systems, and so partially was in this case, and will be, in a more effective way, when all the manufacturing processes will be totally developed.
Models, in manufacturing simulation studies (those presented below), are discrete (even if they are capable to incorporate some continuous variables - rates of change), dynamic (non-static), and stochastic (non-deterministic), and are henceforth called discrete-event simulation (DES) models.
Manufacturing process for 3D textile fabrics
The objective was to develop industrial models, technology and adaptation of processes for the implementation of the individual manufacturing processes, in order to enable 3D-LightTrans approach for sustainable and efficient production and manufacturing based on flexible materials, integrating hybrid yarn manufacturing and weaving processes. The research focus was on the production processes and the related manufacturing systems for the processing of such flexible materials.
Manufacturing of hybrid yarn according to process stability and demonstrator requirements
The first important step was the development of the technology to enable air mingled hybrid yarn manufacturing to meet the 3D-LightTrans requirements, which constitute the novelty in this area. This is a technology for highly flexible manufacturing of hybrid yarn incorporating alternative thermoplastic materials, with configurable material and mixture distribution, homogeneous distribution and minimum fibre damage. As a result of the technology development, hybrid yarn with glass fibre were developed and produced by PD-GOschatz with different fibre volume content and yarn count, and with the best possible mixing which still guarantees a homogeneous distribution and the shortest possible cycle time. In addition, special effort was devoted to further development of the technology in order to ensure
a) Very high reproducibility of the composition of the hybrid yarn, meeting the requirements the demonstrators of the car industry (tailgate for CR Fiat and spare wheel well for Bentley).
b) Increased productivity also with other 3D-LightTrans matrix materials (PET), additional to the conventional matrix material for hybrid yarn (PP) and to alternative reinforcement yarns.
c) Reduction of fibre damage during the air texturing process, in order to maintain in the composite the properties of the raw reinforcement fibre material as close as possible.
Final specification of the hybrid yarn: Mixture ratio of 70:30 % mass content (GF/PET) with yarn count of 840 tex.
Manufacturing of the semi-finished pre-fixed forms
After trials and tests for the selection for the multilayer fabric the following architectures was chosen. The fabric with vertical z-reinforcement displays shows better impact properties, based on the finals yarn architecture. Further characteristics of the final fabric structure are as follows:
▪ Number of warp layers: 4
▪ Number of weft layers: 5
▪ Weft and warp yarn: GF/PET 840 tex
▪ Z-yarn: GF/PET 840 tex
▪ Weft density: 240 yarns /10cm
▪ Warp density: 240 yarns /10cm
▪ Z-reinforcement density: 24 yarns /10 cm (GF/PET)
The new Lindauer Dornier loom
The new Lindauer Dornier loom compared to the standard weaving machine from Dornier is adapted and enhanced to produce the multilayer fabric based on GF/PET hybrid yarn.
The new Dornier weaving machine was installed successfully at TUD and a fabric of GF/PET 840 tex was produced with it.
Modification of the new Dornier loom
To produce the fabric at the highest quality, and to reduce the yarn damages which typically occur on multi-layered weaves, several modifications (described in the following) have been made of the new weaving machine to minimize yarn damage during weaving and to achieve maximum mechanical properties.
Novel warp beam concept, with specially designed tension bars
The new machine has a novel warp beam concept, with specially designed tension bars (Figure 8). Each beam has separate warp tension sensors (Figure 9, Figure 10).This new concept makes it possible to control the warp tension regularly and avoid yarn damage during the weaving process. Tension control is possible from the FT-panel which is totally new in comparison to the old Dornier loom.
The multilayer fabric produced on the new loom has a thickness of 5 mm (GF (55%)/PET (45%) volume content), and the composite based on the fabric has a thickness of 2.5 mm.
The 3D-shaped / spacer fabric
3D woven spacer fabrics are constructed of woven outer layers connected by crosslink fabrics. This allows thermoplastic based 3D preforms using GF/PET hybrid yarns to be manufactured in just one process step possessing good mechanical properties such as compressive, tensile, flexural strength, impact, and resistance.
Spacer / 3D-shaped fabric structure
▪ Weft and warp yarn: GF/PET 840 tex
▪ Z-yarns: GF/PET
▪ For each plate: 5 weft and 4 warp layers
▪ Density of the yarns:
• 300 weft/10cm/plate
• 120 warp/10cm/plate
• Thickness of the plate: approx. 2 mm
The new Michel Van De Wiele loom
The design of specific fabric take up motion, for taking 3D shaped fabrics had to take into account the adaptations on the base platform for allowing the assembly of lay back system with the design of the beam stand and the double drive system, the software development for actuation of the backwards motion, and developing the new configuration to control the tension of the warp beam.
Manufacturing processes of 3D-LightTrans final compound
The process required the development of the individual industrial models, technology and adaptation of processes for the implementation of final part draping and thermoforming manufacturing processes, in order to enable 3D-LightTrans approach for sustainable and efficient production and manufacturing based on flexible materials, integrating specifically draping and thermoforming of the final part. Based on the steps described above the research has focused on the production processes and the related manufacturing systems for the processing of such flexible materials.
Draping
The draping process was developed for the challenging deep drawn component of the spare wheel well. To conclude the achievement of the draping process can be summarized: The project achieved an automated, robotized solution for the complex process of draping with a mechanical, electrical, and programming demonstrator.
Prefixation
The following results have been achieved during the 3D-LightTrans project.
• Pre-fixation is possible with IR-radiation, but the operating window is small.
• Pre-fixation is as well possible with Xenon flashes, the operating window being similar small as with IR. But the effect of Xenon flashes is controllable by the colour of the fibres.
• By integrating some black PET yarns into a fabric the pre-fixation process can be restricted to well defined areas.
• The bending stiffness of such fabrics, being pre-fixated in stripes only, is significantly higher than without pre-fixation.
• Although the melting behaviour of PET is significantly different from PP, the result looks very similar to the trials with PP-fibres, so the combination Glass/PET should be fixed in the same way as Glass/PP.
• Alternatively a black PET powder could be used instead of black PET-yarns for a local pre-fixation of glass fabric. Milled PET powder with 0 – 80µ particles then should be used to achieve a homogeneous bonding. Such PET powder is commercially available.
Fixation
1. Fixation of draped fabrics using black PET powder as adhesive is possible by melting the powder with flash light irradiation. But the focus ability of the flash light to the areas of interest is difficult.
2. Alternatively the PET powder can be molten by lasers of appropriate wavelength and power. Such lasers are sufficiently small to be guided by a robot and thus will be focussed to irradiate the areas of interest only.
Proposals of technical realization
Pre-fixation: Weave black PET yarns into the fabric at the areas to be pre-fixated and melt them by flash light immediately subsequent to the weaving process. Instead of black yarns a black PET powder may be used, which is applied to the areas to be pre-fixated.
Fixation: Apply black PET powder to the areas to be fixated and melt the PET by a focussed laser.
Thermo-pressing technologies
AIT/LKR and Federal Mogul used their available thermos-compression equipment /process for the manufacturing of 3D-LightTrans textile reinforced thermoplastic composites. AIT/LKR realized extensive tests to support the experimental validation of the final production process. AIT/LKR played an important role, complementing FMSP efforts, to provide all thermoformed samples needed to evaluate and compare the resulting process performance and product properties, depending on the test geometries and characteristics of the textile preforms. A number of experiments were performed with different types of fixated test fabrics, in order to validate the procedure, establish the adequate process parameters and provide relevant feedback to the other partners. This helped to define adequate manufacturing rules for optimal results and generate guidelines on which specific combinations, among the configurable parameters and factors of yarn, weaving and fixing, lead to the best thermoforming results.
Analysis of results: Quality of plates depend on dryness of G/PET-fabrics, process duration at high temperature (>255C), handling time of pre-heated fabrics during processing, fast cooling of the final pressed sheets. Mechanical properties depend on pressure at high temperature (> 255°C) -> compaction, pressure during cooling -> keeping compaction, quick cooling -> enhanced chrystalinity -> fracture toughness, the faster the thermoforming (in special cooling under process) the better the mechanical properties.
Battery case
Per decisions during WP4 technical reviews, it was decided to try to use an existing mold to investigate feasibility of vacuum bag moulding in autoclave. Because consolidated plaques were obtained through thermo-compression at 260°C, it was also decided to try to use standard vacuum moulding equipment: Temperature above 260°C would require very specific and expensive materials. They are available at AirTech (annex). However, trials failed to achieve an acceptable consolidation of the parts. It is believed current vacuum moulding in autoclave techniques can’t provide enough heat and pressure to process a PET based hybrid fabric.
Tailgate
The tailgate multilayer demonstrators have been organized with thermo-compression techniques, based on DOE learning. The tailgate components were visually assessed not too curvy, and, to save some time, it was decided not to drape those parts. Also, to limit mould cost and because of the 12 month delay in project timing, it was decided to use wooden moulds rather than metal. Consequently, no in-mould cooling system could be included. Wooden moulds longevity is very limited but sufficient for the small amount of demonstrators required. Contact heating plates were specially designed and made to reach up to 300°C.
The consolidation of spacer fabric.
Although the spacer fabric can be woven with the appropriate shape, thermo-compression is a real technical challenge as pressure and temperature also need to be applied inside the tube to prevent the tube from collapsing.
The challenge of thermos-pressing spacer fabrics is to make sure pressure and heat are also applied inside the part. This is a challenge since high temperatures significant pressures are being used. Several solutions are known to avoid crushing spaces inside composite parts, some of those being used to consolidate thermos-set composites. They are: Plain elastomeric inserts, with/without metal foil wrapping, Inflatable elastomeric inserts / bladders, Mechanical expansion inserts, Solid (wood) mandrels, Lost foam.
Those techniques can be investigated as alternatives for space fabric based TRTC.
Module assembly technologies
Metal Parts Integration
Adhesives and sealants, rivets bolts and pin technology can be used for module assembly, specifically metal to composite joining. Various technologies have been tested and developed.
Class A Surface
Class A surface cannot be reached with the developed 3D-LightTrans technologies. Nevertheless there are several outputs and achievements in this direction: Involved parameters (Substrate quality, Paint materials, Process parameters), Testing requirement established (Important characteristics, Secondary characteristics), Processes (Formed film (GE plastic/Azdel Inc ), Paint Coating), Literature review (Amorphous substrates have higher gloss than semi crystalline matrices, Matrix-rich layer improves gloss, Adding nano-particles (e.g. CaCO3) can enhance gloss), Patent review (Resin rich surface layer (powder or film), Polished mould, Metal sheet on composite).
Manufacturing chain integration
The 3D-LightTrans project worked out a concept for the integration of the individual processes into a complete manufacturing chain, taking into account all relevant aspects of automation, quality assurance required to guarantee the shifting of the proposed manufacturing process from the lab scale to the 3D-LightTrans industrial scale production of mass products based on textile reinforced thermoplastic composites.
Automated handling devices and processes
Based on the tests of several fabric samples developed in the 3D-LightTrans project (e.g. VDW XC7 400:2/80:1 Fabric with 80 yarns/cm2, VDW NCF 400:3/140:4: Fabric with 140 yarns/cm2, VDW NCF 400:3/200:4: fabric with 200 yarns /cm2, VDW NCF 400:3/280:4; fabric within 280yarns /cm2, 3D: 3D fabric the possibilities of manipulations are studied.
Handling test on using suction cups with different vacuum systems, needles claws of different types and characteristics have been performed. A priori, it was expected that the test results for the final 3D-LightTrans fabric was much better than that obtained with the previous tests. This is due to the type of leakage that occurs in each fabric. Analyzing the air leakage of the fabrics, it can be classified mainly into two types, the leaking porosity of the fabric with air passing through the fabric and the leaking fabric roughness with air that passes between the lip of the cup and the surface.
Handling and clamping vacuum-assisted mechanical designs
Adequate tools and automated procedures for the handling transport and feeding of the pre-forms in the different forms (deep draped multilayer and 3D-shaped) and at different stages (before and after fixation resp. thermoforming) have been implemented. It was decided to develop ONE gripper for the worst case that could handle the biggest size of textile fabric.
Handling systems join robotic systems
A design for one gripper has been worked out which could handle the most difficult demonstrator. The aim of the handling systems was not only to transport the textile from one station to the other, moreover it should help the most difficult part or the process, the fixation.
This gripper works out for the for the 3 possible workstations: Textile processing, Draping, Termoforming.
The video available on https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DVSeDrS4tOk shows the process concept.
Optimized Manufacturing Procedures
PROMAUT and GZE worked out a concept for the establishment of the requirements of the full-automated process chain for manufacturing automotive parts with the best quality. The result is a document which can serve as guide to develop production lines with the 3D-LightTrans technology and ensure the best results. The document shows the 3D-LightTrans manufacturing line as a generic production line, only with demonstration purpose.
For describing the whole line they start with the yarn properties the machinery safety (concerning the EU Directives and Legislation, Conformity Assessment, EC Declaration of Conformity Procedure, Safety Strategy, and Safety Standards and Norms).
The 3D-LightTrans part manufacturing process
The manufacturing process of 3DLT fabric parts has been split in process steps. Each process step has special properties and policies to ensure the best quality and results of the final product.
Fabric production: In this process it is assumed that the fabric production is done by a third company, called “the fabric supplier“.
Fabric load: This process assumes the 3D-LightTrans fabric is supplied in reels, but 3D-LightTrans fabric can be supplied in different ways too: in rectangular or square pieces, or in defined cut shape. In these cases, the cutting and trimming process are avoided reducing the complexity of the part manufacture and the machinery necessary.
Handling: The handling of the fabric must be taken in mind in so much as the traditional automatic systems to move parts in a factory are not practicable, especially in the first processes when the fabric is still flexible. When the fabric passes by the fixation or thermoforming processes, the part becomes stiffer and less porous and can be handled by using traditional systems like suckers or grips.
Cutting and trimming: When the fabric is received in reels or in pieces, is necessary to cut the fabric to specific dimensions or figure depending on the part to be manufacture. A cutting machine is necessary and the management of the leftover fabric of the cutting process must be taken in mind.
Draping & fixation: The draping and fixation process is necessary when the manufactured part has complicated shape. This process ensures the correct execution of thermoforming process. The draping and fixation process consist in giving a shape to the fabric very close to the final shape and ensure that the fabric will fits into the thermoforming mould in the best way.
Thermoforming: This process consists in melting the fabric inside a mould giving it the final shape, and once it has cooled the 3DLT part will have the final properties.
Quality control: In the quality control station, every finished part will be verified while the parts are cooling.
Studies regarding each of these steps are accomplished and documented.
For each step in the production line, the safety requirements and risks are studied and described and the safety advices are shown.
Demonstrators
The development of a complete supply chain and material solution ends with the production of a technology demonstrator, which captures the critical performance and can be tested in an appropriate environment. The CRF and Bentley decided to test the technology on a tailgate for FIAT 500L and a spare wheel well for Bentley Mulsanne.
Demonstrator Tailgate
There are many issues to be considered when designing a part for an existing vehicle i.e. the geometrical constraints that are already fixed. In the case of tailgate demonstrator they are the outer skin and the inner frame. After that it should be consider the reinforcement parts to maintain unchanged compared to the current solution and finally the design space must be evaluated to not cause interferences with adjacent components.
A mechanical behaviour assessment helped to with the Multidisciplinary design optimization (MDO) activity, with direct application on the tailgate. After the optimization phase, it has been produced a Finite-Element-Method (FEM) model of the complete part in order to verify the optimized design of the demonstrator.
The component is composed by: external part: th. 1,9 mm; structural part: th. 1,9 mm; integrated reinforcements to structural part in pillar zone: th. 1,9 mm; 3D-shaped reinforcements: th. 2 mm (may differ); fixing elements (for 3D-shaped reinf. to structural part): by rapid prototyping.
Both the external and the structural part have been designed keeping in mind the limitation of the width (1 m) of the material produced, creating overlaps. The steel strut reinforcements have been modified as a result of the change in the thickness of the various components. The bonding between the interior and exterior has been designed. Attachment systems of the other components are to be evaluated (e.g. plate holder, motor wiper reinforcement and spoiler).
The outlook based on the experiences with developing demonstrator “tailgate” can be summarised as follows. Considering the innovative character of the material developed in the project it is expected a short turn improvement of the material after the experiences gained in the project by the full partnership. In particular the material appears to be extremely effective on weight reduction if associated, considerations and effort effectiveness, to another material on the external shell. The material should be in this case dedicated thermoplastic aesthetical material with the same matrix polymer of the structural shell to be manufactured in multi-layered fabric. Adopting the Matrix polymer on external part will also surely solve the A class quality of surface issues emerged in specimens produced in the process analysis phase of the project. In this solution the advantages would take to a higher weight reduction in the component (attended in the percentage of up to 15% on normal production component) and a better performance to be achieved by the aesthetical requirements point of view. The point of force of the multi- layered material and the 3D-shaped material, and the real range of application both in automotive field and the other interested fields, is as a structural reinforcement design material where aesthetical finishing is not required. In this field, particularly for multi-layered material, the aspects related to easy drapability of the textile and the good weight to stiffness ratio will permit a low cost composite introduction and an increased design freedom. The 3D-shaped material instead compensates the lower formability and geometrical freedom with an extremely high stiffness to weight ratio, concerning in particular the hollow structure. In fact the panel effect is enhanced at his maximum thanks to the continuity in the fibres also in the spacer profiles, taking an expected good impact resistance and a collapse resistance when subject to shear loading.
Demonstrator Spare Wheel Well
The challenges for the development of a spare wheel well out of 3D-LightTrans technology are the following:
• Geometry: The spare wheel well (SWW) consists of 2 major components, which are identified as INNER and OUTER. We know from the existing manufacturing process that the textile solutions are already close to (or at) the limit of their drape capability and the multilayer materials are less drape-able so it was necessary to separate the complex interior detail from the exterior, deep draw shape.The exterior of the OUTER is smooth as it forms part of the underfloor and diffuser. It must be stiff enough and of sufficient accuracy, to maintain aerodynamic efficiency and maintain a gap to the exhaust. The interior of the OUTER is also smooth, as it is visible to the customer and mates with the INNER in a bonded assembly. The INNER complex and supports a large number of components retained by the SWW and which will require structural metallic inserts to secure those components with mechanical fasteners.The main benefit of this approach is that we can arrive at a minimum weight solution with parasitic mass associated with a dense foam core. Multilayer fabrics were used for this application as the geometry exceeds the capability of the 3D shape textiles to form hollow cells.
• Environment: As mentioned above, the SWW passes close to the exhaust and therefore must be of sufficient thermal capability. The temperature experienced by the SWW increases significantly as the gap closes and therefore the stiffness and accuracy of the part must be maintained. The underside of the SWW is exposed to debris from the road surface and with a top speed in excess of 300km/h. The structure will experience high levels of small, high speed impacts and abrasion from dust and dirt. The whole of the outside of the OUTER is exposed to the outside elements and therefore will be exposed to high levels of moisture and/or freezing conditions for long periods of time. This is of particular concern, in combination with the impact and abrasion issues highlighted above.
• Crash: International regulations require that the battery must be retained in the SWW in the event of an 80km/h rear collision. Although there is no requirement to crash test the demonstrator within the scope of the programme, the materials will need to demonstrate equivalence to the existing solution for strength and stiffness.
The target benefits can be summarized in the following way:
• Cost: The primary driver for the adoption of the 3D-LightTrans material and manufacturing solution is reduced cost. This can be achieved if the solution replaces high performance, thermoset solutions such as RTM or Prepreg (as in the case of the SWW) which are usually associated with high material cost, high wastage and high levels of skilled labour input; or if we can exceed the performance of low cost thermoplastic solutions which are usually much more automated, employ isotropic, discontinuous reinforcing fibre and low fibre fractions. Metallic inserts are currently included in the foam core and these are drilled and threaded in a post moulding CNC operation, which can be removed as a result of the change of design to a twin-skinned solution.
• Weight Reduction: Although the material properties associated with the 3D-LightTrans product are lower than that of the incumbent thermoset materials there is a weight reduction opportunity as a result of removing the foam core, which is extremely dense due to the high injection pressures employed in the RTM cell. Further weight reduction can be established as a result of removing or reducing the size and weight of the metallic inserts necessary to accommodate the fastening systems. Much smaller and lighter “standard” fasteners can be employed across the range of load requirements with good positional accuracy determined by drilled or moulded-in holes and features.
Finally, a further weight saving of up to 3kg is possible if the thickness of the INNER is slightly increased to enhance the stiffness and the battery tray currently employed to introduce the batteries to the vehicle will become redundant. Materials and Manufacturing Processes.
This approach lends among others itself well to a press–forming process, which is the most likely route to produce highly automated, low cost composite components at volumes in excess of 3,000 p.a. in the future. To this end, Bentley is investigating this possibility for a structure on the forthcoming Continental GT product, in production from 2018 at an annual production volume expectation of 3,500. In the short-term we can evaluate this proposal on a low volume application of the same component, but (having learned from the experience on the project) we would employ a process representative of a much more volume capable solution. This component will almost certainly be composed of 2 skins bonded together and including captive nuts to accommodate the mechanical fastening to the remainder of the Body in White.
The development of a low volume manufacturing process, using the 3D-LightTrans materials, has yielded some very interesting and valuable learning, regarding what these materials are (and are not) capable of and suited to.
However we were not able to test the SWW in the representative vehicle environment, due to the still poor mechanical performance, but are able to validate many of the requirements at a material level: Mechanical performance of small specimens, Environmental resistance of matrix and reinforcement, Limitations of drape, Fibre architecture, Defect and damage mechanisms.
And assembly level: Final thickness variation due to drape mechanisms and overlaps, Geometric tolerance, spring-back, Fastener strategy and Insert selection/evaluation.
Future design of SWW components would need to take into account the material property and manufacturing limitations of the 3DLightTrans textiles. It is clear from the low-volume production method trials, that a pressed solution is essential to ensure adequate consolidation and prevent excessive oxidation. Ideally the geometry of the component should be limited to that which can be draped without the need for cuts, darts and/or overlaps, due to the low probability of successfully maintaining an accurate ply drop position during the pressing process. It is also apparent that the aesthetic of the material is not adequate to meet Bentley A-Surface requirements, so the use of these materials should be restricted to structural applications.
In summary, the use of 3D-LightTrans materials to replace high performance thermoset solutions is unlikely, as the weight penalty is not likely to be sufficiently offset by any cost saving (to be confirmed by commercial calculations). However, we could imagine the application of these technologies to replace low-cost, low-performance reinforced thermoplastics or injection moulding, where the improved performance over these materials might be sufficiently attractive and the cost differential small.
Results of tests and characterization
Demonstrator tailgate for Fiat 500 L and the glass reinforced polyester thermoformed material as developed in 3D-LightTran for the demonstrators manufacture have been extensively tested. Fiat 500 L tailgate is one of the most challenging components and demonstrators of the project. According to the product requirements defined in 3D-LightTrans and following the Fiat company production standards the tests were performed in order to verify the achievements of the targets: measurements of accuracy with optical system, surface quality analysis, bonding tests, painting tests. Moreover results were compared with those of the normal production using conventional materials – steel sheets.
The following tests were performed: Material surface quality evaluation, Full scale component tests, Material static flexural tests with E-modulus evaluation, Water penetration and sensitivity of static strength to humidity, Static tensile tests with E-modulus evaluation and fire resistance tests
To sum up: Besides the torsional and side flexion full scale tests of the 3D-LightTrans tailgate prototype, compared with identical tests performed on the conventional steel tailgate, experimental evaluation of different characteristics of the glass fibre polyester thermoformed composite materials used for the demonstrator manufacture was performed.
The most important results can be summarised as follows:
− 3D-LightTrans tailgate full scale tests, performed together and compared with conventional steel tailgate tests, confirmed the feasibility of the design and manufacture using the 3D glass reinforced polyester thermoformed fabric. Though E-modulus of steel and glass fibre polyester thermoformed composite differed more than by one order, the design and manufacture process of the composite tailgate was so well done and balanced that final deformation properties of the composite tailgate were very close and comparable to the conventional steel component. Minor differences between stiffness of 3D-LightTrans and steel tailgate at different types of loading were pointed out.
− Numerous tests of the final 3D thermoformed composite material confirmed sufficient properties, Some detailed knowledge of the material and mutual links between thermoforming quality and other properties like strength, E-modulus, surface roughness, water absorption, scatter of properties etc. was gained.
Life Cycle Analysis
In order to achieve more sustainable production and consumption patterns, 3D-LightTrans team considers the environmental implications of the whole supply-chain of the products we produce (including materials and processes), as well as their use and waste management; i.e. their entire Life Cycle from “cradle to grave”. Product Life Cycle, including maintainability, reparability and recyclability of the products, is therefore an important aspect in relation to environmental concerns, especially if our main goal is to achieve the EU objectives about sustainability.
The focus of the LCA was on FIAT tailgate.
Based on the process flow of 3D-LightTrans production, the parameters were defined, gathered and elevated.
The Life Cycle impact assessment evaluates the categories defined by the CML2001 method (April 2013) and the Primary Energy Demand from renewable and non-renewable resources impact. A list of such environmental impacts and their reliability levels, as defined by the Joint Research Centre recommendations.
For highlighting some results:
• The 3D-LightTrans tailgate is 1 kg lighter than the Normal Production (NP) solution (made of steel).
Use of the 3D-LihgtTrans tailgate: The lightweight is the main way to drop down the global warming potential (GWP) impact in use phase and so the 3D-LightTrans tailgate, reducing the component weight of around 1 kg, shows an 8% improvement than the Normal Production solution
▪ Lifetime = 200.000 km
▪ Leads to 8% improvements thanks to the light weighting
Results of the Impact Assessment analysis (LCIA)
Besides many detailed analysis results described in the document “Life Cycle Assessment” (D5.15) another aspect of the LCA along the whole life cycle, the 3D-LightTrans solution shows:
▪ Advantages in use phase thanks to the light weighting
▪ The benefits in use phase are, anyway, not enough to balance the environmental burdens in production
▪ Anyway, the commingling step, the most environmentally critical, could be further improved/optimized
▪ Use of recycled material could improve significantly the 3D-LightTrans solution (check on the quality requirements)
For the GWP, the advantages in use phase, due to the lightweight 3D-LightTrans tailgate are not enough to balance the environmental burdens in production and so the innovative solution is 26% worse than Normal Production solution. Anyway, comparing the two solutions, the main difference is due to process because the Normal Production solution is industrialized, while the 3D-LightTrans tailgate is a R&D solution and so has to be still optimized.
▪ For the GWP (Global Warming Potential), the advantages in use phase, due to the lightweight 3D-LightTrans tailgate are not enough to balance the environmental burdens in production and so the innovative solution is 26% worse than Normal Production solution. Anyway, comparing the two solutions, the main difference is due to process because the Normal Production solution is industrialized, while the 3D-LightTrans tailgate is a R&D solution and so has to be still optimized.
▪ For the PED (Primary Energy Demand from renewable & non-renewable resources), the aforementioned considerations are applicable and the 3D-LightTrans solution is 51% worse than the Normal Production solution.
▪ For the ADP elements (Abiotic Depletion) impact, the result is affected mainly by the materials of the 3D-LightTrans solution and, in particular, by the glass fibre contribution. Instead, from the comparison, the Normal Production solution is the best.
▪ For the ADP fossil (Abiotic Depletion) impact, the advantages in use phase for the lightweight 3D-LightTrans solution are not enough to balance the impact due to materials and process. The comparison shows a worsening of 30% for the innovative solution with respect to the Normal Production one.
▪ For the AP (Acidification Potential), the 3D-LightTrans solution results are affected, in production, by materials (mainly glass fibre), and by electricity (for the high compressed air consumption in the commingling step), while, in use phase, mainly by fuel consumption. The advantages in use phase are not enough to balance the environmental burden in production and so the 3D-LightTrans solution is 78% worse than the Normal Production one.
▪ For the EP (Eutrophication Potential), the aforementioned considerations are true even though the use phase contribution is slightly more important. From the comparison, the 3D-LightTrans tailgate is 60% worse than the Normal Production solution. Anyway, it is always important to underline that the 3D-LightTrans process is not yet optimized.
▪ For the ODP (Ozone Depletion Potential), the 3D-LightTrans solution improves over the Normal Production one thanks to the advantages in production. Such advantages are referred to the scrap management, which, considering the incineration scenario, leads to a credit for the ODP impact due to the destruction of chlorofluorocarbons during the incineration process. Anyway, the ODP results are very low and can be considered null for both solutions.
▪ For the POCP (Photochemical Ozone Creation Potential), the 3D-LightTrans tailgate is 29% better than the Normal Production solution thanks to the lightweight advantages in use phase and to the glass fibre credits in production (due to the nitrogen monoxide emissions in air).
Market analysis
The total global value of fibre reinforced composite products was 14.8 Billion Euro in 2011. Around 30% of this market was on thermoplastic composite products and 70% on thermoset.
Thermoplastic composite materials show a stronger growth compared to thermoset.
The general market driver for using composite materials was the need for lightweight construction, mainly in automotive and aircraft applications.
Advantages of thermoplastic over thermoset composites are: Short cycle time thermoforming, low moisture uptake, good toughness and damage resistance, room temperature storage eliminates the use of refrigeration and allows large structure fabrication, ability to re-form parts (thermoplastic resins retain their properties even after repeated heating and cooling), lower void content. alternative fabrication without using autoclaves, improved fire retardancy.
Disadvantages of thermoplastic over thermoset composites are: Higher initial raw material cost over thermosets, higher processing temperatures, unfamiliarity with today’s thermoplastic composite processing, typically higher cost tooling.
There is a trend to more continuous and longer fibres since the mechanical properties are increasing depending on fibre length. However the manufacturing processes which can be used are also depending on fibre length. Injection moulding is therefore only useable up to a fibre length per diameter of approximately 200. Above this value other consolidation processes such as thermo-pressing have to be used.
Definition of target market
Only thermoplastic composite (TPC) materials are considered in this study. The target market was chosen for the following reasons. A focus on the whole light weight and the whole structural components market appears to be too wide. Focus on thermoplastic seems to be rather narrow, but thermoplastic can substitute thermoset. Therefore it was decided to focus on thermoplastic in this study with a strong focus on the possibility to substitute components which are produced of thermoset.
Definition of thermoplastic composite in general: A composite material containing short, long, continuous nonwoven or woven fibres as reinforcement. The matrix can be any polymer. The fibre can be glass, carbon, or polymers. The processes for fabrication can be manifold.
Definition of 3D-LightTrans thermoplastic composite: A composite material containing any thermoplastic polymer as a matrix that is reinforced by a textile woven structure made out of glass fibre. The process for fabrication of such a structure is based on air mingling of polymer fibres and glass fibres, textile processing into woven preforms and final consolidation by thermos-pressing.
The global market weight and value of thermoplastic consumption amounted to 1.95 Mio tonnes with a value of 4.47 Billion Euro in 2011.
According to Lucintel a continuing moderate to strong growth is expected for TPC materials until 2017. Regarding applications strongest growth is expected in industrial applications with 8.5% by value per year until 2017. The growth for all other applications is forecast to be around 5% in value per year until 2017. Concerning the type of material the strongest growth expected for CFT with 8.6% in value and LFT with 7.9% in value per year until 2017. Regarding the regions the strongest growth in value is expected for USA with 5.5% and EU with 5% per year. The Rest of world will experience strongest growth in weight with 4.5% per year, while North America will experience 4.3% growth in weight per year and EU 4.0% until 2017.
Market trends
The general market trends for TPC are the following:
▪ Moderate continued growth in all application segments
▪ Transportation will remain the largest segment
▪ Strong growth in new industrial segments is expected, e.g. plates and tubes
▪ New applications appearing in construction (GMT materials)
▪ In other non-automotive niche segments (defence, ballistic, miscellaneous) CFT is preferred
General trends in type of materials are the following:
• More innovative fibres to be used: bio-based, increasing carbon, self-reinforcing fibres
• Nano-reinforcement
• Trend to longer fibres: LFT, CFT
• Increase in new and adapted matrix polymers
• Increased replacement of thermoset by thermoplastic materials
General trends in manufacturing are as follows:
• Reduction of hand lay-up techniques will occur
• More automation is expected but will result in higher capital costs required
• More barriers for new entrants and SME by higher capital costs
General trends in applications are as follows:
▪ More thermoplastic will be used in aerospace (e.g. PEEK matrices for demanding applications)
▪ New applications in building and construction are coming (reinforcement bars, GMT decking materials)
▪ Infrastructure applications (relining sewers, water and gas pipelines)
▪ Energy applications (blade and housing of wind turbines)
▪ Increased application in sporting goods
▪ Higher complexity in automotive parts (e.g. hybrid components)
Competitors: Cytec Industries Inc, Fiber Glass Industries, Inc, TenCat, COMFIL ApS, Bond Laminates, Fiberforge, Concordia Fibers. Information of the competitors listed here is summarized in the Market Analysis (D5.15).
Business cases
Continuous Fibre Reinforced Thermoplastics (CFTs) have a history of about 25 years and CFT differ from short fibre reinforced thermoplastics such as LFRT and GMT in terms of fibre length. CFTs include a variety of products, including unidirectional prepregs, fabric based prepregs, narrow tapes, commingled fibres in roving and fabric forms, sheets, and rods. Historically, CFTs were used in niche applications in aerospace and defence market. But in recent years, the market has strongly diversified into automotive, sporting, transportation, industrial and other applications. Demand has been driven by a variety of aerospace, automotive and truck applications. However, CFTs are even finding their way into furniture, fastener, medical, marine, and other applications adding on to increase in use of thermoplastic composites by Airbus and Boeing and other commercial aircraft manufacturers.
The Continuous Fibre Reinforced Thermoplastics (CFT) market has experienced significant growth during last 5 years and is expected to reach € 150 million in 2014 with a global annual growth rate of 8% - 12% for the next five years. The critical success factor for CFTs material producers will increasingly be not only about developing new products at low cost; in addition, Lucintel believes the most successful companies will be those that can develop application-specific, customer-focused solutions and have the ability to help their customers achieve long-term business objectives, such as increasing performance or lowering costs. (http://www.lucintel.com/marketCFT.aspx)
Growth of CFT material is driven by its superior performance compared with LFT and SFT. The cost of manufacturing of CFT material is similar albeit somewhat lower than thermoset depending on the manufacturing process
Basically there are three processes for producing CFT:
a) unidirectional tapes by pultrusion
b) wetting of fabric or unidirectional aligned fibres with low viscosity thermoplastic matrix (fully impregnated prepregs or semi-pregs = dry fabric with resin films fused on the outside).
c) using comingled fibres (this is the 3D-LightTrans process)
Several business cases for the application of 3D-LightTrans material were selected on the basis of priority ranking in the meetings of the 3D-LightTrans consortium. The business cases to be worked out in greater detail are the following:
▪ Two automotive business cases: spare wheel well and tailgate (3D-LightTrans demonstrators),
▪ Aircraft applications
▪ Two industrial business cases: storage tanks, and plate and tube stocks
▪ Energy with a focus on wind energy
▪ Consumer goods with a focus on sports and leisure
▪ Medical applications with a focus on orthopaedic devices
These cases are discussed in Market Analysis (D5.15).
Potential Impact:
Terms such as impact or effect assessment / study are very broad and subject to different interpretations. Therefore, it is worth to discuss and define its meaning and scope in this document. There are for example a number of definitions of impact. For example, impact is ‘improvements in the lives and livelihoods of beneficiaries’ (OECD/DAC, 1997). Blankberg’s definition of impact specifies further and refers to long-term and sustainable changes introduced by a given intervention in the lives of beneficiaries (Blankenberg, 1995).
In an impact study research is done on a certain topic to determine if a certain action would, or is, having some sort of an effect on its environment or other related issues. The most common type of impact study referred to may be an environmental impact study, but there are many other types of impact studies as well. Impact studies pull data from many different sources and often look at many different aspects of the issue. A similar, more specific and much more frequently used term, is “impact assessment”. Impact Assessment (IA) simply defined is the process of identifying the future consequences of a current or proposed action. The “impact” is the difference between what would happen with the action and what would happen without it. The terms “impact” and “effect” are frequently used synonymously (as in US National Environmental Policy Act Regulations 1508.8).
The oldest, most well-established aspect of IA is Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). Increasing concerns in developed economies about the impact of human activities on human health and on the biophysical environment led to the development of the concept of EIA in the 1960s, and to its adoption as a legally based decision-support instrument later in that decade to assess the environmental implications of proposed development. The European Union approved a Directive on EIA in 1985. Some EIA systems or jurisdictions constrain EIA to the analysis of impacts on the biophysical environment while others include the social and economic impacts of development proposals. Other forms of IA focus on specific type of impacts (e.g. Social IA, Health IA, Ecological or Biodiversity IA). These may be carried out independently, but also in a joint exercise with other IA. To emphasize such integration of different forms of impacts, some professionals and institutions use the expression Integrated IA. For others, the integration of the environment, social and economic dimensions of assessment justifies the adoption of a distinct term: Sustainability Assessment (IAIA, 2009)
After detailed analysis of the potential areas of relevance, we have decided to include following aspects in the 3D-LightTrans impact study
- Technological impact. Here we are considering the impact of the technologies developed in terms of enabling further development, innovation and future technological breakthroughs.
- Impact in the natural environment. This includes issues such as air and water quality, use of raw material, etc. This part of the impact study is closely related to Task 5.5- Life cycle analysis. Therefore there has been interaction with the partners involved in this, in order to optimize the use of information avoiding duplication of efforts.
- Economic impact. Material and manufacturing costs are considered here, as well as the indirect economic impact through the products. This part is closely related to the market study and business cases performed by AIT; again interaction has focus on optimal use of results avoiding overlapping.
Requirements and methodology
Basic principles of an impact assessment
Irrespective of the topic under investigation and of the chosen nomenclature, an impact study or assessment should be (IAIA & IEA, 1999):
- Purposive- the process should inform decision making and result in appropriate levels of environmental protection and community well-being.
- Rigorous - the process should apply “best practicable” science, employing methodologies and techniques appropriate to address the problems being investigated.
- Practical - the process should result in information and outputs which assist with problem solving and are acceptable to and able to be implemented by proponents.
- Relevant - the process should provide sufficient, reliable and usable information for development planning and decision making.
- Cost-effective - the process should achieve the objectives of EIA within the limits of available information, time, resources and methodology.
- Efficient - the process should impose the minimum cost burdens in terms of time and finance on proponents and participants consistent with meeting accepted requirements and objectives of EIA.
- Focused - the process should concentrate on significant environmental effects and key issues; i.e. the matters that need to be taken into account in making decisions.
- Adaptive - the process should be adjusted to the realities, issues and circumstances of the proposals under review without compromising the integrity of the process, and be iterative, incorporating lessons learned throughout the proposal's life cycle.
- Participative - the process should provide appropriate opportunities to inform and involve the interested and affected publics, and their inputs and concerns should be addressed explicitly in the documentation and decision making.
- Interdisciplinary - the process should ensure that the appropriate techniques and experts in the relevant bio-physical and socio-economic disciplines are employed, including use of traditional knowledge as relevant.
- Credible - the process should be carried out with professionalism, rigor, fairness, objectivity, impartiality and balance, and be subject to independent checks and verification.
- Integrated - the process should address the interrelationships of social, economic and biophysical aspects.
- Transparent - the process should have clear, easily understood requirements for EIA content; ensure public access to information; identify the factors that are to be taken into account in decision making; and acknowledge limitations and difficulties.
- Systematic - the process should result in full consideration of all relevant information on the affected environment, of proposed alternatives and their impacts, and of the measures necessary to monitor and investigate residual effects.
In our impact study, we have tried to follow all these principles, particularly focusing in relevant aspects, practical information and a participative process (with exchange of information with the project partners, especially in relation to market study deliverable, where this impact report is embedded in, and to the Life Cycle Analysis, reported in an additional deliverable).
Establishment of a methodology
A large number of applicable types of techniques can be used for perfoming impact analysis, depending on the method features and outputs. These include analogue (look-alike) case studies, checklists (simple, descriptive questionnaire), decision focused checklists, environmental cost-benefit analysis, expert opinion, expert systems, indices or indicators, laboratory testing and scale models, landscape evaluation, literature review, mass balance calculations, matrices, monitoring (baseline), monitoring (field studies of receptors near analogs), networks, overlay mapping via GIS, photographs/photomontage (historical and current), qualitative model (conceptual), quantitative modelling, risk assessment, scenario building, trend extrapolation
Generally speaking, multiple techniques can be useful for each impact study activity, while there is no single method which is capable of meeting all needs. Xedera has examined different alternative techniques and made a selection of the methods which maximize the usability of results for our concrete case (the 3D-LightTrans technology). The list of methods selected to be used in the 3D-LightTrans study is given below:
- Indices or indicators
- Monitoring (baseline)
- Qualitative and quantitative models
- Laboratory testing and scale models
- Scenario building
- Literature review
- Expert opinions
Performance indicators play an important role in assessing the impact of research projects. Here, it is important to distiguish between outputs, performance indicators and impacts. The service contract “IEEE Project Performance Indicators” “IEE Project Performance Indicators (EACI/IEE/2011/001), the final results of which have been delivered in December 2012, provide a set of performance indicators relevant for the IEE programme and explains the relation between inputs, activities, outputs, impacts, performance indicators and targets related to the research projects (Intelligent Energy Europe, 2013):
- Inputs are the resources required to deliver the project
- Activities are the tasks or processes undertaken. These are set out in the work packages, in the section “Work Programme”
- Outputs are the direct products and services delivered by your project. They include material deliverables (e.g. brochures, reports, CD ROM) as well as services provided (e.g. hours of training, number of people taught). However, usually they say very little about the actual effect of the action or benefits to your target group.
- Impacts are identifiable changes which demonstrate the extent to which your activities have an effect on your target group. These changes – the impacts of your projet- can take place during its lifetime (specific – or short term – impacts) or beyond its lifetime (strategic – or long term – impacts) and come under the five fields of delivery above mentioned.
- Performance indicators should be used to determine the success of your project in reaching its objectives and creating an impact. The performance Indicators should be SMART (specific, measureable, achievable, relevant and time-bound).
- The changes caused by your project include quantifiable energy-related impacts both within the duration of the project and beyond its lifetime, known as IEE Common performance indicators. These are the sustainable energy investments triggered, renewable energy production, primary energy saving, and reduction of greenhouse gas emission, demonstrating the contribution to the EU energy targets.
The general procedure is established as follows:
1. Research and performance indices or indicators are defined, computed and compared with baseline / state-of-the art data, in order to assess the degree of project progress resp. of achievement of goals. This information will be crucial to estimate the real technological impact of the results achieved. The specific data assigned to the indicators are calculated using the most appropriate method on a case-to-case base (e.g. laboratory testing of material samples, manufacturing chain simulation results on the base of a hypothetical scenario, nominal values for machine performance provided by the equipment manufacturers, etc.)
2. In parallel, additional information is collected from literature review, expert opinions, available databases, feedback from other project tasks and other sources. This provides relevant background information and additional input data for establishing comparisons with other state-of-the-art technologies and for providing a holistic view and a global perspective.
3. A comprehensive review of the available information is done to establish a comparison and give a global perspective of the 3D-LightTrans project impact in comparison to other technologies. Final conclusions are drawn and main statements on the project impact listed.
Results of the impact study
Technological impact
3D-LightTrans innovation
The following figure provides an overview of the main innovation aspects of the results achieved in the 3D-LightTrans project. It must be noted that the technological and innovation impact of the project is not only related to the complete manufacturing process, but also to the breakthroughs achieved in the individual processing steps. As a matter of fact, the technological developments achieved (e.g. in relation to the manufacturing of hybrid yarn, industrial weaving of complex geometries, novel fixation process, etc.) can lead to significant progress and exploitation opportunities also in other applications beyond the 3D-lightTrans manufacturing chain.
On the basis of the technological impact created by 3D-LightTrans, as described above, it becomes apparent that there are very good chances for the introduction of 3D-LightTrans textile reinforced composites in a large number of potential applications. The market study (work by AIT and reported in this document) elaborates on this in an exhaustive way. For the impact study, we offer a simplified overview and focus applications in the automotive sector. Here, to provide a realistic estimation of the expected impact, we must consider that 3DLightTrans will compete both with traditional and with advanced materials. The following table provides a comparative insight into representative both traditional and state-of-the-art alternative technologies:
Material / technology Brief discussion
Metal Steel is a heavy material, less abundant than glass or plastic but with good performance. Its extraction represents a large environmental burden, but it is easy to separate for recycling.
Light metals are comparatively lighter but more expensive and less easy to separate for recycling than steel.
Carbon composites Very high performance but also high price and more difficult to recycle.
Non textile reinforced plastic composites Low weight, abundant materials. Performance better than pure plastic, but lower than textile reinforced plastics. Not so easy to separate as steel, but easier to recycle than those with textile reinforcement.
Glass thermoset composites Lightweight and abundant material with medium performance. More difficult and energy consuming in their manufacturing, storage and transport of preforms requires refrigeration. Final forming process is time intensive.
New approaches for fibre / textile reinforced thermoplastic composites:
Low cost, abundant material (thermoplastic) with medium performance and easy and fast consolidation process. Suitable for different applications depending on the requirements:
Fibre Chain Automated laser assisted tape placement for unidirectional continuous fibre reinforced thermoplastic composites, especially suited to small &medium lot-sizes.
Mapicc3D The project aims to develop a technology for 3D placement of thermoplastic hybrid fibres and will be particularly suited to the manufacture of three-dimensional parts which can be composed by combining a number of structures (stiffener and panel structures) with a given standard geometrical form.
3D-LightTrans 3D-LightTrans provides a solution for low-cost manufacturing of three dimensional parts combining deep draped complex geometry and spacer structures with very high flexibility in the achievable geometries, and with enhanced performance (thanks to the textile reinforcement) in large and very large lot sizes.
In deliverable D5.14 chapter Impact study there are figures and also a table to "comparison of material technologies".
Research / performance indicators
One of the methods used to assess systematically and provide a realistic estimation of the technological impact is the use of quantitative and qualitative research/performance indicators. The baseline and indicators are based on those established in the work plan, but have been redefined and extended to provide useful data which can allow to determine in accurate and reliable terms the real progress achieved. In the table below, baseline data provide measurable means to assess the work progress, and are stated in terms of processing time, yarn displacement, etc. between two specific control points of the production chain. The baseline data are regularly recorded. Based on this, criteria and research / performance indicator provide an overview on project progress and impact at specific points of time, and are stated in terms of % reduction, degree of improvement, etc. in comparison with the initial baseline (baseline data at the beginning of the project or value known or estimated for state-of-the-art comparable processes). For the calculation of the performance indicator values, laboratory testing and scale models, as well as scenario building and simulation (for the calculation of process times, which is depending on the choice of in-tool or out-of-the-tool and use or fixation or not) have been used. The following pictures provide an insight into the progress achieved for some of the baselines in the frame of the project:
In the following, the main baselines and performance indicators are discussed in detail:
Baseline Initial / reference baseline data Current baseline data Perf. indicator value
Geometrical stability during storage and transport Unstable (no method for fixation available) Fixation process successful Achieved
Composite forming process time (2) With RTM 1 hour = 3600 s. 30+200 (+280)= 230 s. (510 s. if draping on tool) 6,3% reduction (14,1% if draping takes place on tool)
Fibre displacement (surface in-plane waviness) Estimated from visual inspection in the first samples pressed > 1 mm Estimated from visual inspection in the latest samples < 0,5 mm. Reduction in fibre displacement > 50%
Number of processing steps for production of pre-forms based on 3D-shaped fabric 3 up to 5 (weave, sew, glue...) 1 (using 3D-LightTrans adapted
weaving machine) Reduction from 3-5 to only 1
Table 8 - Selection of 3D-LightTrans baselines and performance indicators
For the project achievements in some of the manufacturing steps, it is not always possible to establish a direct quantitative performance comparison with previous results or with the state of the art by the project start. For these, a qualitative assessment of the results is discussed below:
- Hybrid yarn manufacturing: Our current base data for productivity is of 500 m/min for industrial production, as reported by our equipment manufacturer (PD-GOschatz) in the deliverable report. Here, information available from other manufacturers is insufficient to establish a comparison, as productivity data are not provided and, when available (e.g. 10-30 m/sec with TwinTex for glass/PP), no information is given on the yarn count with which this speed is achieved.
In any case, 3D-LightTrans results go, to the best of our knowledge, beyond the state of the art, in that improved performance and higher repeatability have been achieved with a variety of compositions, while the yarn is optimized to minimize the abrasion damage during multilayer and spacer fabrics weaving, and the highly homogeneous distribution of material guarantees good performance of the final 3D-LightTrans composite. For example, before the beginning of the project, no industrial manufactured hybrid yarn with PET was, to the best of our knowledge, available. However, this was indicated as unconditional requirement by our automotive end-users in order to fulfil the demonstrator requirements. Nowadays still glass/PP is the main material for the state of the art hybrid thermoplastic-glass yarn and, whereas in the meantime also Twintex seems to offer some type of glass/PET yarn, it is not clear whether the yarn properties would satisfy the demanding requirements of the 3D-LightTrans further textile processing.
- Weaving equipment performance. According to the 3D-LightTrans machine specifications and for the specific case example defined on Deliverable x2.6 a speed of 4,4 cm/min (for spacer fabric with hollows of 100mmx40 mm, 2 plates with 5 weft layers per plate, 2 walls with 3 weft layers per wall and a density of 6 wefts per cm. per plate and 5 wefts per cm per wall) to 13,5 cm/min (for multilayer fabric with 5 weft layers, 4 warp layers, 4 mm. thickness, 1 m. width and a density of 24 wefts/cm and 24 warps per cm. ) can be achieved. Again, we cannot establish comparison with other competing weaving machines in terms of speed, as this is depending on the density, complexity and thickness of the fabric, and there no industrial systems capable of manufacturing fabrics of this complexity (including spacer fabrics with woven outer layers connected by crosslink fabrics). Thus, the innovation and progress beyond the state of the art here are linked to the 3D-LightTrans capability for industrial production of more complex weave architectures and thicker fabrics with a large degree of flexibility, keeping reduced fibre damage and guaranteeing high quality using the 3D-LightTrans hybrid yarn.
Improvement of the European innovation capacity
The following picture shows the key sectors involved in increasing the European capacity index:
3D-LightTrans has addressed two specific sectors: Research and development, and human capital and training.
With regard to research and development, the improvement in the innovation capacity has covered different aspects, from modelling and simulation through the production processes down to testing and characterization. In these areas, the 3D-LightTrans partners have developed new knowledge and resources to support industries and investors interested in new potential applications and to increase their own competitiveness, in the case of industry. Another contribution to increase the innovation capacity has been done by spreading and sharing the knowledge generated within the project. This has led to 20 scientific publications in journals and conferences, several poster presentations at fairs, networking events and conferences, and invited talks at key events such as those organized by strategic European technology planning actors, such as the Textile Flagship Conference and the 10th Annual Conference of the Textile ETP.
In connection with human capital and training, the academic partners can introduce the results achieved in the teaching curriculum / skills and education training, contribute to the training of PhD and Diploma students. Dedicated lectures can be introduced in courses. The modelling and simulation modules, as well as the testing setups (especially at UGent and UOrleans), as well as the laboratory equipment modified and/or implemented in the frame of the project (especially at TU-Dresden) will be used for further research and experiments, including (where applicable) PhDs and Diploma thesis.
Economic impact
3D-LightTrans objective was to provide an alternative solution with comparatively lower costs for light-weight structural components in the automotive sector. To illustrate the expected economic impact, we will focus on the case of Bentley’s spare wheel well (3D-LightTrans demonstrator). To obtain light-weight (8-9 Kg, in contrast to the around 15 Kg. that the steel component would weight) and guarantee high performance, the SWW is currently made of glass-carbon-epoxy composite. This solution has actually quite high cost (400 € per part). In order to reduce costs, SRIM was initially considered as an alternative, with an expected cost per part of 50 €. However, this option was discarded because the complex shape was not achievable and, even if it had been attainable, it would have required an investment of several millions. The steel part would be an economic solution (might be a little bit more expensive than SRIM) but not light-weight.
The 3D-LightTrans SWW demonstrator was implemented to demonstrate the possibility of realizing this part in light weight, with a material composition (based on PET-Glass hybrid yarn) and enhanced mechanical properties (thanks to the textile reinforcement) which, even being inferior to those of the carbon composite part, still satisfy the component requirements. Here, the biggest benefit of 3D-LightTrans is that it uses a production technology with can attain the complex SWW geometry with high rate capability and reduced cost through automation. If the costs of the 3D-LightTrans SWW came down to 50 €, with an annual volume of 1000 p.a. this would lead to saving up to 350.000 € per year, and the investment would be significantly lower than needed for doing the part in SRIM.
This is only an example for one specific component with moderate annual volume. However, it illustrates the fact that, with light-weight becoming more and more important in the automotive branch, but with the need to keep guaranteeing the high performance properties of the material, manufacturers are often forced to make huge investments and/or produce in expensive processes and materials (e.g. carbon composites). In this project, we demonstrate that 3D-LightTrans offers an economic alternative able of satisfying strict requirements. If this is used for several components and car models with bigger annual volume, we can easily conclude that an economic benefit of many million Euros is realistic.
This is only a brief statement in order to illustrate the economic dimension of the project impacts. In-depth details on the economic impact can be derived from the market study and business cases, which are described in detail in the first and second part of this document. Therefore, in this section we will not go into more detail.
Environmental impact
Using known data on industry emissions by sector, we reach for car manufacturing a footprint of 720 CO2 per £1000 (around 6 tonnes for a Citroen C1, 17 tonnes for a Ford Mondeo with medium spec. or 35 tonnes for a Land Rover Discovery, top of the range). Of this amount, 33% corresponds to metal extraction (for a Ford Mondeo with medium spec., 5.61 Tonnes).
Figure 36 – CO2 manufacturing footprint in a midsize car
A first contribution of 3D-LightTrans to reduce this footprint could be expected in relation to the substitution of metal with glass and thermoplastic, reducing the footprint of metal extraction. Nevertheless, this contribution to the impact due to material extraction is generally assumed to decrease, as the new normative for the automotive sector foresees that almost all the material in a car should be recycled (therefore the metal extraction footprint would be anyway reduced to a minimum by recycling, even if metal is not substituted by composites).
A second contribution to the car manufacturing footprint is related to the gas and electricity used by the auto industry itself, including all the component manufacturers as well as the assembly plant, and it accounts for 12% (around 2 Tonnes for a Ford Mondeo with medium spec). The 3D-LightTrans Life Cycle Analysis, performed in a dedicated Task and reported separately, shows that the manufacturing footprint with our manufacturing chain is not necessarily lower, due to a large extend to the relative high footprint of air-entangled commingling. However, we can assume that the footprint could be considerably decreased by modifying or optimizing the process for hybrid yarn manufacturing.
The clearest contribution of 3D-LightTrans to decrease the environmental burden seems to be, for the time being, the abatement of CO2 emissions during car service through vehicle weight reduction. Using yearly average data for passenger vehicle (cars, minivans, pick-ups, vans and SUVs), we come to an average footprint of 0,1954 Kg CO2/Km (source www.americanforests.org). Assuming 100.000 Km/vehicle, this means 20 Tonnes CO2 per vehicle during its entire lifetime. If we substitute a tailgate made of steel with one made with 3D-LightTrans technology (as done in CRF’s project demonstrator) and if we reached, by means of design optimization, a weight reduction of around 12% of the total 19.5 Kg. component’s weight, that would mean a reduction in weight of around 2 Kg. If we take, for a first assumption, a linear relationship between CO2 exhaustion and the vehicle’s weight, this would lead to a decrease of the order of 32 Kg. CO2 per vehicle for its entire lifetime. With an expected production rate of 50.000 vehicles per annum, this makes 1.600 Tonnes less CO2 considering the entire lifetime of the cars of this model produced in only one year. Even if the assumptions made lead to some inaccuracy in the calculations, it is apparent that, if the 3D-LightTrans technology is applied for further components (e.g. other car doors) in further models, we would be speaking of an abatement of many thousands tonnes CO2.
For more details on environmental aspects of the impact, please refer to the Life Cycle Analysis (reported separately), which provides very complete information on the environmental aspects of the 3D-LightTrans technology.
List of Websites:
http://www.3d-lighttrans.com/
Project Coordinator: Marianne Hörlesberger; AIT (marianne.hoerlesberger@ait.ac.at); Exploitation & Dissemination Manager: Ana Almansa Martin, Xedera (aam@xedera.eu)