Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Future of the Automobile Francis Clay McMichael Carnegie Mellon November 12, 1999.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Future of the Automobile Francis Clay McMichael Carnegie Mellon November 12, 1999."— Presentation transcript:

1 Future of the Automobile Francis Clay McMichael Carnegie Mellon November 12, 1999

2 Nov 12, 1999McMichael for Northeastern Dept of Civil Engineering 2 Industrial Ecology of Automobile Carnegie Mellon Green Design Initiative –http://www.ce.cmu.edu/GreenDesign/ –http://www.eiolca.net MIT Materials Systems Lab –msl1.mit.edu

3 Nov 12, 1999McMichael for Northeastern Dept of Civil Engineering 3 Selected regulations United States –CAFÉ regulations: fleet requirements for OEMs –California ARB: sale mandates for ULEV and ZEV –Pollution Prevention Act 1990 –NiCd Battery Recycling Act European Union –End-of-life mandatory takeback by OEM –Recycle content mandates for new vehicles

4 Nov 12, 1999McMichael for Northeastern Dept of Civil Engineering 4 Life Cycle Assessment

5 Nov 12, 1999McMichael for Northeastern Dept of Civil Engineering 5 Life cycle analysis of auto Conventional emphasis on tailpipe emissions and fuel economy LCA takes larger view - raw materials to end-of-life LCA looks for pollution prevention opportunities LCA takes inventory of material and energy use

6 Nov 12, 1999McMichael for Northeastern Dept of Civil Engineering 6 Outline Fuel economy and mass of vehicles Material substitution to reduce mass Alternative fuels and engines End of life and recycling Reducing life cycle environmental impact

7 Nov 12, 1999McMichael for Northeastern Dept of Civil Engineering 7 Questions Can alternative fuel vehicles match the performance of conventional liquid fuel vehicles? Does a life cycle assessment change our perspective on environmental impact of different vehicles? What is a zero emission vehicle?

8 Nov 12, 1999McMichael for Northeastern Dept of Civil Engineering 8 End of lifeFuel use size price safety Zip & rangeperformance Vehicle Environmental Impact

9 Nov 12, 1999McMichael for Northeastern Dept of Civil Engineering 9 Metrics to characterize the auto Performance: acceleration, top velocity and range between refueling Size: interior volume and luggage space Fuel economy and tailpipe emissions Price: first cost and lifetime ownership End-of-life: reuse, recycle, and disposal

10 Nov 12, 1999McMichael for Northeastern Dept of Civil Engineering 10 Consumer Reports 1997 CAFÉ auto 27.5 mpg = 8.6 l/100 km

11 Nov 12, 1999McMichael for Northeastern Dept of Civil Engineering 11 Power /Mass and Zip Larger cars generally have more P/M and Zip than small cars Light trucks and vans have lower P/M and Zip than cars Fuel use increases for increased P/M and Zip How much Zip is enough?

12 Nov 12, 1999McMichael for Northeastern Dept of Civil Engineering 12 Power to Mass and Zip P / M = [Vf^2 - Vi^2] / [2 * delta_t] Example: 0 to 60 mph in 10 sec –Vf = 60 mile/h = 96 km/h = 27 meter/s –Vi = zero mile/h, a standing start. –P/M = 36 watts / kg –Zip = sqrt[P/M] = 6 [W/kg]^1/2 P/M and Zip are performance metrics

13 Nov 12, 1999McMichael for Northeastern Dept of Civil Engineering 13 Consumer Reports 1997

14 Nov 12, 1999McMichael for Northeastern Dept of Civil Engineering 14 What kind of vehicles do we buy? In US, choice of many models and sizes. Presently, more interest in larger, less fuel efficient vehicles. World events [fuel prices] have affected our buying patterns.

15 Nov 12, 1999McMichael for Northeastern Dept of Civil Engineering 15

16 Nov 12, 1999McMichael for Northeastern Dept of Civil Engineering 16

17 Nov 12, 1999McMichael for Northeastern Dept of Civil Engineering 17

18 Nov 12, 1999McMichael for Northeastern Dept of Civil Engineering 18 What is weight reduction worth? Weight reduction to the consumer is mainly valued in terms of fuel savings - not worth much at todays prices. Weight reduction affects the CAFÉ penalty that an OEM pays to US government.

19 Nov 12, 1999McMichael for Northeastern Dept of Civil Engineering 19

20 Nov 12, 1999McMichael for Northeastern Dept of Civil Engineering 20

21 Nov 12, 1999McMichael for Northeastern Dept of Civil Engineering 21

22 Nov 12, 1999McMichael for Northeastern Dept of Civil Engineering 22

23 Nov 12, 1999McMichael for Northeastern Dept of Civil Engineering 23

24 Nov 12, 1999McMichael for Northeastern Dept of Civil Engineering 24 Range for a full fuel tank Fuel use is higher for larger vehicles Larger vehicles have bigger fuel tanks Range = [mile / gal] * [fuel volume in gal] Observation: small and large vehicles carry less than 4 percent of vehicle mass in fuel and a range of nearly 400 mi or 640 km. How much range is enough?

25 Nov 12, 1999McMichael for Northeastern Dept of Civil Engineering 25

26 Nov 12, 1999McMichael for Northeastern Dept of Civil Engineering 26

27 Nov 12, 1999McMichael for Northeastern Dept of Civil Engineering 27

28 Nov 12, 1999McMichael for Northeastern Dept of Civil Engineering 28 Fuel economy and vehicle mass OEMs look for design changes to reduce mass: 50 kg is a significant mass change. Typical heuristic: rule Simple model for alternative fuel vehicles –Fuel use increases directly with mass –Fuel use varies with type of engine, type of fuel, and aerodynamic form

29 Nov 12, 1999McMichael for Northeastern Dept of Civil Engineering 29

30 Nov 12, 1999McMichael for Northeastern Dept of Civil Engineering 30

31 Nov 12, 1999McMichael for Northeastern Dept of Civil Engineering 31 Design for Performance Alternative fuel vehicles will compete with conventional vehicles in range and zip P/M for a vehicle is the product of two choices –[P/M] for the engine, and [Mengine/M] E/M for vehicle depends is product of –[E/Mfuel] –[Mfuel/M] –[1 + Mtank/Mfuel]

32 Nov 12, 1999McMichael for Northeastern Dept of Civil Engineering 32 GM EV1 Indy 77 Average P/M = 80 W/kg and Average E/M = 500 Wh/kg Mfuel/M = 4% for gasoline and diesel Mtank/Mfuel is small for liquid tanks, large for pressure vessels

33 Nov 12, 1999McMichael for Northeastern Dept of Civil Engineering 33

34 Nov 12, 1999McMichael for Northeastern Dept of Civil Engineering 34 Metrics for electrical systems More non-motive power and mass changes Improved efficiency - drive by wire New materials Caution - main EOL concerns –copper : mixed, bad for ferrous recover; but high value material if separated –lead: main issue is potential for dissipative losses, regulated as toxic and hazardous

35 Nov 12, 1999McMichael for Northeastern Dept of Civil Engineering 35

36 Nov 12, 1999McMichael for Northeastern Dept of Civil Engineering 36

37 Nov 12, 1999McMichael for Northeastern Dept of Civil Engineering 37 EOL of vehicles EU mandates for recycling Dismantling and parts recovery Shredding and materials recovery EOL products –Ferrous metal –Non-ferrous metal –Non-metals called Fluff or ASR

38 Nov 12, 1999McMichael for Northeastern Dept of Civil Engineering 38 US AMP Generic Vehicle 1995 model Lumina (1510 kg), Taurus (1408 kg), and Intrepid (1459 kg) 1995 sales: 940,023 vehicles of total 7,690,223 vehicles [12%] –Taurus: 410,409 –Lumina/Monte Carlo: 361,388 –Intrepid: 168,226 20,000 parts, 9 subsystems

39 Nov 12, 1999McMichael for Northeastern Dept of Civil Engineering 39 Generic Vehicle Characteristics - US AMP study Fuel Fuel economy Engine size 0 to 60 mph time Vehicle use lifetime Passengers Doors Cargo load/volume Mass Gasoline 23 mpg [20/29] 3 liter, sec 120,000 miles 3 front / 3 rear Four 200 lbs / 17 cubic ft 3200 lb

40 Nov 12, 1999McMichael for Northeastern Dept of Civil Engineering 40 Mass fractions by Subsystem Body Powertrain Suspension Interior HVAC Electrical Fluids Total 566 kg or 37% 347 kg or 23% 291 kg or 19% 139 kg or 9% 45 kg or 3% 70 kg or 4.5% 74 kg or 5% 1532 kg or 100%

41 Nov 12, 1999McMichael for Northeastern Dept of Civil Engineering 41 Mass Fractions by Material Ferrous metals Non-ferrous metals Plastics Other materials Fluids Total 985 kg or 64% 138 kg or 9% 143 kg or 9+% 192 kg or 13% 74 kg or 5% 1532 kg or 100%

42 Nov 12, 1999McMichael for Northeastern Dept of Civil Engineering 42 Generic Vehicle - Fluids Auto transmission Engine oil SAE10w30 Ethylene glycol Glycol ether Refrigerant R134a Unleaded gasoline Water Windshield cleaner additives Total of fluids 6.7 kg or 0.44% of 1532 kg 3.5 kg or 0.23% 4.3 kg or 0.28% 1.1 kg or 0.069% 0.91 kg or 0.059% 48 kg or 3.1% 9.0 kg or 0.59% 0.48 kg or 0.031% 74 kg or 4.8%

43 Nov 12, 1999McMichael for Northeastern Dept of Civil Engineering 43 USA Metal Management

44 Nov 12, 1999McMichael for Northeastern Dept of Civil Engineering 44

45 Nov 12, 1999McMichael for Northeastern Dept of Civil Engineering 45

46 Nov 12, 1999McMichael for Northeastern Dept of Civil Engineering 46 Opportunities Mass of battery for new vehicles Lifetime of battery Composition of battery: containment, avoid dissipation losses Fuel economy Tail pipe emission reduction draws attention to other life cycle concerns


Download ppt "Future of the Automobile Francis Clay McMichael Carnegie Mellon November 12, 1999."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google