Research Needs in Predictive Research Needs in Predictive Engineering of Advanced Composite Engineering of Advanced Composite

MaterialsMaterials

Research Needs in Predictive Research Needs in Predictive Engineering of Advanced Composite Engineering of Advanced Composite

MaterialsMaterials

Joseph Carpenter (DOE), Mark Smith (PNNL), and Dave Warren (ORNL)

2

3

4

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

22

1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025

Source: Transportation Energy Data Book: Edition 22, September 2002,and EIA Annual Energy Outlook 2003, January 2003

Mill

ion

s o

f B

a rre

ls p

er

Da

y

Domestic ProductionDomestic

Production

Actual Projected

Light Trucks

Year

MarineMarine

RailOff-roadOff-road

Cars

U.S. Energy Dependence is Driven By TransportationU.S. Energy Dependence is Driven By TransportationU.S. Oil Use for Transportation

Pa

ss

en

ge

r V

eh

icle

s

• Transportation accounts for 2/3 of the 20 million barrels of oil our nation uses each day.• The U.S. imports 59% of its oil, expected to grow to 68% by 2025 under the status quo.• Nearly all of our cars and trucks currently run on either gasoline or diesel fuel.

5

64%

Saudi Arabia 26.4%Iraq 11.5%Kuwait 9.8%Iran 9.6%UAE 6.3%Russia 5.4%Venezuela 4.7%Libya 3.0%China 3.0%Mexico 2.7%Nigeria 2.4%U.S. 2.2%

U.S. 24.9%Japan 7.3%China 6.4%Germany 3.7%Russia 3.4%S. Korea 2.9%Brazil 2.9% France 2.7%India 2.7%Canada 2.6%Italy 2.5%Mexico 2.5%

Nations that HAVE oil Nations that NEED oil

Source: EIA International Petroleum Information, December 2002. Data for 2000

The Oil ImbalanceThe Oil ImbalanceThe Oil ImbalanceThe Oil Imbalance

6

Our Oil SituationOur Oil SituationOur Oil SituationOur Oil Situation

(Millions of barrels per day)

Source of Oil Gross Imports 59% Domestic 41.1%

Consumption Highway Vehicles 68%

Cost of Imports (@ $25/bbl) $105.2 Billion

1.97 (17.1%)

US Domestic 8.04

Venezuela 1.4 (12.1%)

Mexico 1.55 (13.4%)

Other OPEC0.58 (5%)

Iraq0.46 (4%)

Nigeria0.62 (5.4%)

Other Non-OPEC

3.41 (29.6%)

Saudi Arabia 1.55 (13.5%)

Canada Source: EIA Petroleum Supply Annual 2002, Vol. 1

7

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1930 1935 1940 1950 1960 1965 1970 1973 1975 1980 1985 1990 1991 1993 1994 1996 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

Annual World Oil Production

(Billions of Barrels)

Estimates of Remaining Oil Reserves

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

1996 2050

Bil

lio

ns

of

Veh

icle

s

IndustrializedNations

World

Projected Growth inLight-Duty Vehicle Registrations

Can We Sustain Increasing Consumption?Can We Sustain Increasing Consumption?Can We Sustain Increasing Consumption?Can We Sustain Increasing Consumption?

8

HISTORYHISTORYHISTORYHISTORY

1970 (to present) – In response to environmental movements of the 1960’s, the Clean Air Acts establish standards for criteria emissions (carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons, nitrogen and sulfur oxides) from transportation vehicles and other sources.

1975 to 1986 (and to present) - Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 establishes Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards for light-duty vehicles.

1993-2002 – Clinton’s Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles (PNGV) between US government agencies and “Big Three” automakers indicates that high-fuel efficiency (80 mpg) family autos are probably technically viable at a slight cost premium through use of alternate power plants (mainly diesel-electric hybrids), advanced design and lightweighting materials, probably spurs automotive technology worldwide, and provides model for government-industry cooperation.

2002 - PNGV morphed by Bush to FreedomCAR (Cooperative Automotive Research) with more emphases on fuel-cell vehicles, all sorts of light-duty vehicles (not just cars) and limited to USCAR and DOE.

2003 – FreedomCAR expanded to include the Hydrogen Fuels Initiative to explore technologies for producing and delivering hydrogen for transportation and other uses (the “hydrogen economy”). Energy-supply industry brought in.

9

.

Distributed Generation

TransportationBiomass

HydroWindSolar

Coal

Nuclear

Natural Gas

Oil

Wit

h C

arb

on

S

equ

estr

atio

n

HIGH EFFICIENCY & RELIABILITY

ZERO/NEAR ZEROEMISSIONS

Why Hydrogen?: It’s abundant, clean, efficient,and can be derived from diverse domestic resources

10

HydrogenFuel Initiative

$158.5M

FreedomCAR$154.9M

Fuel Cells

($65.2M)

FY 04 FreedomCAR and Fuel PartnershipHydrogen* ($93.3M) + Fuel Cells ($65.2M) + Vehicle Technologies ($89.7M) = $248.2M

Hydrogen Fuel Initiative = Hydrogen* ($93.3M) + Fuel Cells ($65.2M) = $158.5M

FreedomCAR Partnership = Fuel Cells ($65.2M) +Vehicle Tech. ($89.7M) = $154.9 M

FY04-08 Commitment ($1.7B)

FY 04 Federal Share of the Budget

* Includes EERE ($82M), FE ($4.9M) and NE ($6.4M). **

Includes Omnibus Bill recision – passage

pending.

11

FY 03 Approp.

FY 04 Approp.

FY 05 Cong.

Vehicle Systems → Ancillary Systems $1.1 $1.2 $1.3

→ Simulation & Validation $2.4 $2.6 $3.5

Innovative Concepts → CARAT $0.5 $0 $0

→ GATE $0.5 $0.5 $0.5

Hybrid & Electric Propulsion → Energy Storage $21.6 $23.4 $28.7

→ Advanced Power Electronics $13.4 $13.5 $13.9

→ Light Vehicle & Ancillary Subsystems $3.1 $3.1 $3.7

Advanced Combustion Engines → Combustion & Emission Control $18.3 $19.4 $13.5

Materials Technologies → Automotive Propulsion Materials $1.9 $3.0 $2.0

→ Automotive Lightweight Materials $14.2 $16.6 $21.0

Fuels Technologies → Advanced Petroleum Based Fuels $5.0 $3.9 $0

→ Non-Petroleum Based Fuels & Lubes $0.3 $0.3 $1.4

Technology Introduction → Advanced Vehicle Competition $0.9 $0.9 $1.0

Technical Program Management Support $0.9 $0.8 $0.9

Biennial Peer Review N/a $0.5 N/a

FREEDOMCAR VEHICLE TECHNOLOGIES TOTAL $84.1 $89.7 $91.4

FreedomCAR Vehicle Technologies FreedomCAR Vehicle Technologies Activities ($million)Activities ($million)

12

HFCIT Fuel Cell HFCIT Fuel Cell Activities ($million)Activities ($million)

FY 03 Approp.

FY 04 Approp.

FY 05 Cong.

Transportation Systems $6.1 $7.5 $7.6

* Distributed Energy Systems $7.3 $7.4 $7.5

Fuel Processor R&D $23.5 $14.8 $14.0

Stack Component R&D $14.8 $25.2 $30.0

Technology Validation $1.8 $9.9 $18.0

Technical Program Management Support

$0.4 $0.4 $0.4

Fuel Cell Technology Total $53.9 $65.2 $77.5

* Distributed Energy Systems R&D was not included in the FreedomCAR Partnership in FY 2003.

13

FY 03 Approp.

FY 04 Approp.

FY 05 Cong.

Production & Delivery R&D (EE) $11.2 $22.6 $25.3

Storage R&D (EE) $10.8 $29.4 $30.0

Safety, Codes & Standards, and Utilization (EE) $4.5 $5.9 $18.0

Infrastructure Validation (EE) $9.7 $18.4 $15.0

Education and Cross-cutting Analysis (EE) $1.9 $5.7 $7.0

EE Hydrogen Technology Subtotal $38.1 $82.0 $95.3

HFCIT Hydrogen HFCIT Hydrogen Activities ($million)Activities ($million)

* With the exception of Education and Cross-cutting Analysis, portions of all other lines were not included in the FreedomCAR Partnership in FY 2003.** Hydrogen activities will be part of the new FreedomFuel initiative to be implemented beginning in FY 2005.

14

Transitional Phases

I. Technology Developm ent Phase

II. Initial Market Penetration Phase

III. Infrastructure Investm ent Phase

IV. Fully Developed Market and Infrastructure Phase

Strong Governm ent R&D Role

Strong Industry Com m ercialization Role

200

0

2020

201

0

2030

204

0

PhaseI

PhaseII

PhaseIII

PhaseIV

RD&D I

Transition to th e M arketplace

Com m ercialization Decision

II

E xpansio n of M arkets and In frastructure III

Realizatio n of the Hydrog en Eco nom y IV

TimelineTimelineTimelineTimeline

15

Potential Hydrogen TechnologyPotential Hydrogen TechnologyTransition PathwayTransition Pathway

16

Efficiency Power Energy Cost* Life Weight

Fuel Cell System60% (hydrogen)

45% (w/ reformer)325 W/kg220 W/L

$45/kW (2010)$30kW (2015)

Hydrogen Fuel/ Storage/Infrastructure

70% well to pump70% well to pump 2 kW-h/kg2 kW-h/kg

1.1 kW-h/L1.1 kW-h/L

$5/kW-h$1.25/gal (gas

equiv.)

Electric Propulsion >>55 kW 18 s 30 55 kW 18 s 30 kW cont.kW cont. $12/kW peak$12/kW peak 15 years15 years

Electric Energy Storage 25 kW 18 s25 kW 18 s 300 W-h300 W-h $20/kW$20/kW 15 years15 years

Materials SameSame SameSame 50% less50% less

EnginePowertrain System** 45% peak45% peak $30/kW$30/kW 15 years15 years

* Cost references based on CY2001 dollar values

** Meets or exceeds emissions standards.

2010 FreedomCAR Technology2010 FreedomCAR TechnologySpecific GoalsSpecific Goals

2010 FreedomCAR Technology2010 FreedomCAR TechnologySpecific GoalsSpecific Goals

17

Missions:

- Support development of cost-effective materials and materials

manufacturing processes required to achieve successful commercial

introduction of fuel-efficient, low-emission, terrestrial transportation vehicles.

- Maintain ORNL’s High Temperature Materials Laboratory.

Objectives:

By 2010: 50 % weight reduction in automobile structure at same cost, with

increased use of recyclable materials.

By 2006: 22% tractor-trailer weight reduction through material substitution

and innovative design approaches.

DOE Transportation Materials DOE Transportation Materials Missions and Objectives Missions and Objectives

DOE Transportation Materials DOE Transportation Materials Missions and Objectives Missions and Objectives

18

• Largest Focus Areas- Aluminum and magnesium casting- Aluminum sheet formation and fabrication- Polymeric-matrix composites processing

•Smaller Focus Areas- Aluminum and magnesium metal production- Metal-matrix composites - Titanium metal production and fabrication- Steel- General manufacturing (e.g., joining, NDE, IT) - Glazing (glass)- Crashworthiness- Recycling

Automotive Lightweighting Automotive Lightweighting MaterialsMaterials

19

Lightweight Material MaterialReplaced

Mass Reduction (%)

Relative Cost (per part)*

High Strength Steel Mild Steel 10 1

Aluminum (AI) Steel, Cast Iron 40 - 60 1.3 - 2

Magnesium Steel or Cast Iron 60 - 75 1.5 - 2.5

Magnesium Aluminum 25 - 35 1 - 1.5

Glass FRP Composites Steel 25 - 35 1 - 1.5

Graphite FRP Composites Steel 50 - 60 2 - 10+

Al matrix Composites Steel or Cast Iron 50 - 65 1.5 - 3+

Titanium Alloy Steel 40 - 55 1.5 - 10+

Stainless Steel Carbon Steel 20 - 45 1.2 - 1.7

Weight Savings and Costs for AutomotiveLightweighting Materials

* Includes both materials and manufacturing.Ref: William F. Powers, Advanced Materials and Processes, May 2000, pages 38 – 41.

20

Table 3. Material Use in PNGV Vehicles (lbs.)

Material1994 Base

VehicleP2000 ESX2

Plastics 223 270 485Aluminum 206 733 450Magnesium 6 86 122Titanium 0 11 40Ferrous 2168 490 528Rubber 138.5 123 148Glass 96.5 36 70Lexan 0 30 20Glass fiber 19 0 60Carbon Fiber 0 8 24Lithium 0 30 30Other 391 193 273Total Weight 3248 2010 2250

Source: Ducker 1998

Material Use in Some PNGV Concept Vehicles

21

AAT

Vehicle Systems

FreedomCar Composites ResearchOffice of Transportation Technologies

C. David (Dave) Warren

Technical Manager Transportation Composite Materials Research

Oak Ridge National LaboratoryP.O. Box 2008, M/S 8065

Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37831-8050Phone: 865-574-9693 Fax: 865-574-0740

Email: WarrenCD@ORNL.GOV

22

AAT

Vehicle Systems

Composite Material Advantages

Density (lb/cu. ft.) Strength (Kpsi) Modulus (Mpsi)

Automotive Steel 480 60-200 30

6061 Aluminum 167 30-40 10Glass Fiber Composite 93 30-100 5-8Carbon Fiber Composite 79 60-150 10-35

Less Expensive Tooling Raw Material Cost

Parts Integration Repair Processes

Net Shape Forming Processing Methodologies

No Corrosion Recyclability

Energy Absorption Design Databases

Advantages Disadvantages

23

AAT

Vehicle Systems

DOE/FreedomCar COMPOSITE MATERIALS RESEARCHResearch Program Organization

USCAR Program Coordination DOE/OTT

USAMP Program Management DOE/OAAT

ACC Technical Management ORNL

Materials Energy Management Processing Joining

Manufacturability Demonstration Projects

Car Platforms Automotive Suppliers

24

AAT

Vehicle Systems

COMPOSITE MATERIALS RESEARCHWhat Was Done --- Glass Fiber Composites

Energy Management

SCAAPNHTSA Modeling Energy Management

Processing

P4 PreformingSlurry ModelingSlurry Processing

Materials

DurabilityDeformation & DegradationMaterials Screening

Joining

Adhesive BondingAdhesive Modeling NDT Rapid TestingNDT Laser ShearographyTest Method Analysis

Focal Project II

FreedomCar and BeyondGoals

25

AAT

Vehicle Systems

Why Composites for Cars?

Glass Fiber Composites can reduce weight by 20 -30%Data BasesDesign MethodologiesProcessing TechnologiesMaterial Crash ModelsRapid Cure TechnologiesJoining MethodsNDTRecycling

Carbon Fiber Composites can reduce weight by 40-60%All of the aboveFiber Cost

Weight Reduction = Fuel Economy & Emission Reductions

26

AAT

Vehicle Systems

Approach

Composite

LCCF

CF Preform Dev.

Thermoset Resin System

Selection/Testing Composite ProcessingDevelopment

ManufacturabilityDevelopment

Low Cost PrecurserDevelopment

Optimized Thermal Processing

Development

Advanced Processing Method

Developmentand/or

and

Thermoplastic Resin System

Development/Testing

or

Joining of Similar and Dissimilar

Materials

and

27

AAT

Vehicle Systems

COMPOSITE MATERIALS RESEARCHWhat we are Doing --- Carbon Fiber Composites

Energy ManagementComputational Crashworthiness

Crash Energy ManagementIntermediate Strain Rate Testing

ProcessingP4 Carbon Fiber

Thermoplastic Composite FormingHigh Vol Processing of Composites

SRIM Composite Skid PlatesP4 Offsite Development

MaterialsCF Comp Durability

Creep Rupture Materials Screening

Recycling Thermoplastic Materials

JoiningHybrid JoiningCrash of Joints

Focal Project III& Offsite

FreedomCar and2011 Goals

Low Cost PrecursorsCommodity Textile PrecursorsOrganic/Recycled Precursors Microwave/Plasma Processing

28

Energy ManagementEnvironmental & Damage Effects Bonded & Mech Fastened StructuresNovel Design Concepts & Materials90o Impact & Design for Non-AxialCharacterization of Physical ParametersTP Materials CrashworthinessFailure and Damage ModelsComposite CAD/CAM Tools

ProcessingAdvanced Thermoplastic FormingAdvanced Processing TechnologiesCarbon Fiber Surface TailoringP4C Experimental DevelopmentClass “A” Structural Composites

MaterialsTP Resin DevelopmentMicro-Composite TechnologyNon-Thermal Curing of ThermosetsThermoplastic CrosslinkingInterfacial Optimization of CF

JoiningAdvanced NDE TechniquesGlobal/Local Stress AnalysisThermoplastic Welding

Low Cost Carbon FiberLCCF Follow-onCF Technology Deployment Line On-Line Feed Back Control for CFCold Plasma OxidationPlasma Modification of SurfacesE-Beam and UV Stabilization

Technology DemonstrationAdvanced Design & Manufacturing

DOE/ACC 5 Year Plan

29

DOE is increasing the composite materials emphasis in its High Strength, Weight Reduction materials for Trucks program.

Good potential for Large Scale implementationPremium for weight savingsLow volumes can be supported by CF industryNo model year changeoverLess capital to amortize

Currently 3 proprietary industry projects and 1 direct funded project.

AAT

Vehicle Systems

DOE HSWR Program

30

COMPOSITE MATERIALS RESEARCHCoordination with Existing --- Carbon Fiber Composites

Energy ManagementComputational Crashworthiness Crash Energy Management Intermediate Strain Rate Testing

ProcessingP4 Carbon FiberThermoplastic Composite FormingHigh Vol Processing of CompositesP4A Dev for Aerospace

MaterialsCF Comp DurabilityCreep Rupture Materials ScreeningRecycling

JoiningHybrid Joining

Focal Project III

FreedomCar and2011 Goals

Low Cost PrecursorsAdvanced Polymer Precursors Non-Thermally Stabilized Coal Based PrecursorsOrganic/Recycled Precursors

Carbon Fiber ProcessingMicrowave Processing Advanced Processing Methods

Green - Much in Common Blue - Some in Common Red - Not Much in Common or Not Yet Ranked

31

What is NOT yet being Done --- Carbon Fiber Composites

Energy ManagementEnvironmental & Damage Effects Bonded & Mech Fastened StructuresNovel Design Concepts & Materials90o Impact & Design for Non-AxialCharacterization of Physical ParametersTP Materials CrashworthinessFailure and Damage ModelsComposite CAD/CAM Tools

ProcessingAdvanced Thermoplastic FormingAdvanced Processing TechnologiesCarbon Fiber Surface TailoringP4C Experimental DevelopmentClass “A” Structural Composites

MaterialsTP Resin DevelopmentMicro-Composite TechnologyNon-Thermal Curing of ThermosetsThermoplastic CrosslinkingInterfacial Optimization of CF

JoiningAdvanced NDE TechniquesGlobal/Local Stress AnalysisThermoplastic Welding

Low Cost Carbon FiberLCCF Follow-onCF Technology Deployment Line On-Line Feed Back Control for CFCold Plasma OxidationPlasma Modification of SurfacesE-Beam and UV Stabilization

Technology DemonstrationAdvanced Design & Manufacturing

Green - Much in Common Blue - Some in CommonRed - Not Much in Common or Not Yet Ranked

32

Automotive Lightweighting Automotive Lightweighting MaterialsMaterials Technical ApproachTechnical ApproachAutomotive Lightweighting Automotive Lightweighting MaterialsMaterials Technical ApproachTechnical Approach

30% weight reduction 50% weight reduction

Aluminum Tailor Welded Blanks

40% weight reduction / 50% reduction in part count

Superplastic Forming

35% weight reduction / reduction in part count

40% weight reduction / 10 X reduction in part count

Hydroforming

Metal Matrix Composites

Powertrain components - 40% weight reduction

Reduces mass by 60%

Magnesium AlloyLightweight Glazing Thermoplastic Composites

Photo: Courtesy of GKN Aerospace

33

Summary of Recent Composite Predictive Summary of Recent Composite Predictive Modeling Research and Development Modeling Research and Development

Summary of Recent Composite Predictive Summary of Recent Composite Predictive Modeling Research and Development Modeling Research and Development

ATP – Consortium between GE, GM, sub-contractors (1998) “Short” (1 ~ 2 mm) glass fiber thermoplastic injection molding Shrinkage prediction tool Abaqus/C-Mold interface Abaqus/Moldflow

Elastic stiffness using Tandon-Weng / Mori-Tanaka models Experimental determination of fiber length, distribution, and orientation Unit-cell model for stress-strain behavior Tensile strength (Kelly-Tyson model) Creep – curve fit algorithm Fatigue (S-N) supported by testing

Demonstration on automotive parts – Intake manifold, radiator, fender

Moldflow/Delphi (including University of Illinois) Injection molding of short fiber glass reinforced TP Methods for fully developed flow Focus on warping and distortion control Limited predictive properties

34

State-Of-Predictive Modeling State-Of-Predictive Modeling Professor Charles Tucker (Univ. of Illinois U-CProfessor Charles Tucker (Univ. of Illinois U-C))

State-Of-Predictive Modeling State-Of-Predictive Modeling Professor Charles Tucker (Univ. of Illinois U-CProfessor Charles Tucker (Univ. of Illinois U-C))

Process Analysis

Capabilities(Mold-filling or Post)

ProcessMicromechanics

Structural Micromechanics

Integrated Software

Neat Resin Very goodApplies Hele-Shaw principles in 2.5D or mid-plane model

Not Applicable Not Applicable Moldflow – includes process simulation, linear & non-linear structural analysis (considered excellent)

Short-Fiber Composites

GoodExtended Hele-Shaw Used in decoupled models

Basic algorithms Predict effect of fiber content and fiber orientation. Best results for fully developed flow

Good - small strain modelsFair - non-linear stress strain.

Moldflow Considered good

Long-FiberComposites

No models or simulations for fiber orientation available

No algorithms available, but evidence that existing modeling framework will work (ref. C. Tucker)

No models exist for small or large non-linear strain. Foundation exists via PNNL LDRD work

No integrated package available

35

Engineering Property Prediction Approach to Long Fiber Engineering Property Prediction Approach to Long Fiber ThermoplasticsThermoplastics

Engineering Property Prediction Approach to Long Fiber Engineering Property Prediction Approach to Long Fiber ThermoplasticsThermoplastics

Definition of the problem – Long Fiber Orientation Models Challenge of measuring fiber length, distribution and orientation Geometrical restrictions on fiber motion Interaction between fibers and fiber domains: the fibers are organized in domains

and are locally aligned with one another Wall effect may dominate the orientation behavior

Possible solutions of the problem Explore the established framework based on decoupled fiber orientation &

flow kinematics: Express the fiber interaction coefficient CI in Advani-Tucker or Folgar-Tucker

model as a function of the fiber aspect ratio and volume fraction

Prescribe geometric constraint to the fiber movement in the thickness direction Develop a coupled approach (long-term solution ?):

Accounting for effects of fibers on flow kinematics Determining the effect of processing conditions and fiber characteristics on the

morphology of the composite

),(II ratioaspectfractionvolumeFiberCC

36

Structural Modeling Problem Linear and nonlinear constitutive models (e.g. damage, fatigue, creep &

impact) using a multiscale mechanistic approach: Damage evolution laws accounts for the governing mechanisms Fatigue damage expressed in terms of material and loading parameters in a

continuum formulation The creeping composite is obtained from creeping matrix and elastic fibers

through homogenization Impact is modeled as an extension of quasi-static damage and is based on

rate dependent state variable approach Model implementation into commercial FE code (e.g. ABAQUS) to create

specific computational tools Interface with process modeling to obtain the as-formed composite

microstructure on which the composite properties are computed Predicted process-structural properties verified on molded parts

Anticipated Research & Development Advances Anticipated Research & Development Advances Anticipated Research & Development Advances Anticipated Research & Development Advances

37

Homogenization (PNNL)

Microscale: Fibers, matrix, defects…

Process ModelingPNNL/ Processing Code Partner / University Participants

Constitutive Models (PNNL)• Evolution laws• Constitutive relations (damage, fatigue, creep, impact)• Finite element formulation• Implementation (e.g. ABAQUS)

Macroscale: Composite structure

Continuum

Mesoscale: Composite element

Adjustment of constituents’& process parameters

Anticipated Research & Development Advances Anticipated Research & Development Advances Anticipated Research & Development Advances Anticipated Research & Development Advances

Structural Analyses

Experiments (ORNL)• Fiber orientation• Process characterization• Material properties• Fatigue, creep & durability testing

38

Predictive Modeling of Polymer CompositesPredictive Modeling of Polymer Composites Predictive Modeling of Polymer CompositesPredictive Modeling of Polymer Composites

Technical Issues for Predictive Modeling Tools

•Prediction of fiber orientation

•Fiber/matrix interface and degradation

•Rheological property models for fiber reinforced polymers

•Fiber-fiber interactions

•Fatigue and damage models

•Warpage and residual stress predictions

•Crash energy behavior

•Etc…………

39

Predictive Modeling of Polymer CompositesPredictive Modeling of Polymer Composites Predictive Modeling of Polymer CompositesPredictive Modeling of Polymer Composites

Potential Roles for NSF/Academic Research

•Test methods and analytical tools

•Processing Technology

•Micromechanical characterization of basic constituent parameters

•Damage characterization using NDE methods

•Optimization and modeling of cure process

•Modeling and characterization of fiber-fiber interactions

•Modeling of moisture absorption and effects on properties

•Characterization and models for fiber-matrix interface properties

•Techniques for in-situ fiber orientation and distribution characterization

40

Predictive Modeling of Polymer CompositesPredictive Modeling of Polymer Composites Predictive Modeling of Polymer CompositesPredictive Modeling of Polymer Composites

Project Objective: Develop modeling tools that allow the engineering properties and performance of fiber-reinforced polymer composites to be accurately predicted and optimized

Project Task Plan

Task 1 – Develop material-process-performance test plan based around injection molding of fiber reinforced thermoplastics and liquid molding of fiber preforms

Task 2 – Evaluate property prediction capabilities of existing modeling codes

Task 3 – Develop models for enhanced composite property, geometry and durability predictions and experimentally validate

Task 4 – Characterization of composite property retention and durability

Task 5 – Integration of process modeling with structural analysis and predictive property codes

41

http://www.eere.energy.gov

Bringing you a prosperous future where energy is clean, abundant, reliable, and affordable

Office of Energy EfficiencyOffice of Energy Efficiencyand Renewable Energyand Renewable Energy

42

Back-upSlides

43

Source: H. H. Rogner, “An Assessment of World Hydrocarbon Resources,” Annual Review of Energy and Environment, 1997.

World Fossil Fuel PotentialWorld Fossil Fuel PotentialWorld Fossil Fuel PotentialWorld Fossil Fuel Potential

44

GJ per capita

DemandRange

Solar

Wind

Biomass

Hydro

Geothermal

0

200

400

600

800

1000

N. A

mer

ica

S. A

mer

ica

Eur

ope

FSU

Africa

Mid

dle

East

& N

. AfricaAsi

a

Tot

al

Renewable Resources are Adequateto Meet all Energy Needs

Source: adapted from UN 2000, WEC 1994, and ABB 1998. Figures based on 10 billion people.

45

billion barrels of oil equivalent

2000 $ per boe

Source:Shell, 2000

Unconventional Oil

35000

5

10

15

20

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000

Producedat

1.1.2000

4000

Oil and Substitute Costs

46

Life Cycle Comparisons of Cost, Energy Use, and Carbon Emissions

Source: “On the Road in 2020,” Massachusetts Institute of Technology Report # MIT EL 00-003, October 2000