Using Life Cycle Assessment to Determine Steel E-Motive Concept Vehicle Emissions

Using Life Cycle Assessment to Determine Steel E-Motive Concept Vehicle Emissions

The transportation industry’s contribution to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and global warming is well documented and understood. Vehicle OEMs, fleet operators, and transport users all have responsibilities to reduce environmental impacts on the planet and contribute to meeting global emissions regulations. 

Mobility as a Service (MaaS) solutions like WorldAutoSteel’s flaghip Steel E-Motive (SEM) program have the potential to contribute to a reduction in GHG emissions, helping to achieve these global targets and specific policy objectives. The Steel E-Motive engineering report, released in 2023, addresses the impact of emissions reduction using Life Cycle Assessment, with key results summarized in this article. 

Introduction to Life Cycle Assessment 

Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is a methodology that evaluates the environmental impact of a product across its entire lifecycle. By understanding the impact across the entire vehicle life cycle, vehicle manufacturers evaluate trade-offs and assess the net impact of the product they’re using. 

Cradle-to-grave assessments utilize a boundary that includes impacts from the production phase (including raw material extraction and vehicle production), the use phase (including fuel or electricity as well as consumables like tires and fluids) and the end-of-life phase, which could include disposal and/or recyling of the product, as shown in Figure 1. We applied LCA throughout the development of the SEM concept. 

Diagram of Life Cycle Assessment

Figure 1. SEQ Figure \* ARABIC 1 Life Cycle Assessment, considering the entire life of the vehicle, from raw material extraction to end of life

LCA can cover a range of environmental impacts; however, for the SEM program, we focused on GHG emissions through the GWP-100 indicator and total energy consumption using Cumulative/Primary Energy Demand and Fossil Energy Consumption indicators.  

Reference Taxi (Baseline) Vehicle 

A key consideration in LCA calculations is establishing an appropriate reference vehicle. For this program, the following criteria was used: 

  • Present day (~2020) battery electric vehicle (BEV) operating in taxi mode with a driver and one occupant with vehicle/battery lifetime assumptions of 300,000km, and use of 100 percent conventional steel/aluminum. 
  • Vehicle end-of-life methodology using the Avoided Burden Approach, where recycled metals are assumed to displace equivalent quantities of their virgin counterparts and assigned corresponding emission and energy demand credits.  
  • Assumption of 50 percent pyrometallurgical recycling for the battery packs. 
  • Estimated reference taxi vehicle curb weight using the statistical reference data study (Figure 2), resulting in an estimated curb weight of 1,949kg.  
  • Material utilization based on data from a similar vehicle specification, as shown in Figure 3. 
  • Vehicle occupancy rate assumptions of 1.4, based on a combination of both “empty” and passenger-carrying journeys. 
Chart showing Vehicle curb weight versus box volume comparison

Figure 2. Vehicle curb weight versus box volume comparison. Reference vehicle data; source www.a2mac1.com

 

Steel E-Motive “Default” Vehicle 

SEM vehicle life cycle calculations assume a hypothetical 2030 manufacture and start-of-operation date of 2030 to 2035. We updated the electricity grid supply mix to include the average of the International Energy Agency (IEA) scenario estimates for 2030 and 2040. 

  • We applied the nominal SEM1 vehicle curb weight of 1,512kg in the LCA model, and updated the vehicle Bill of Materials.  
  • As with the reference vehicle, we adopted the Avoided Burden Approach as the default for end-of-life calculation. 

Life Cycle Assessment Results 

Figure 3 below highlights absolute calculated life cycle GHG emissions, in units of kgCO2e/ passengerꞏkilometer  studied, with the individual contributions of vehicle manufacturing, vehicle use, and end-of-life phase presented.  

The analysis evaluated two reference/baseline conditions and nine SEM sensitivity studies, see Figure 4. These included alternative assumptions on LCA end-of-life modeling methodology, lifetime vehicle activity (and battery lifetime), alternative operational energy consumption sensitivities, sensitivities on the use of ‘green’ steel, and vehicle occupancy rates. 

The accompanying pie chart shows the breakdown and contributions to the vehicle manufacture GHG for the baseline SEM scenario (2). 

 

Life Cycle Assessment GHG results chart

Figure 3. SEQ Figure \* ARABIC 2 life cycle assessment GHG results

 

 

Chart of reference/baseline conditions and SEM sensitivity studies

Figure 4. Reference/baseline conditions and SEM sensitivity studies

 

 

Life Cycle Assessment Conclusions 

Based on the parameters outlined, applying LCA to SEM concept demonstrated the designs’ potential to reduce lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions by up to 86 percent compared to a present-day battery electric vehicle operating as a taxi. 

This potential can be realized by adopting the following measures: 

  • Reducing vehicle production and manufacturing embedded emissions by utilizing 100 percent reduced carbon (“green”) steel 
  • Improving battery technology and increasing the use of renewable electricity in battery manufacturing; as well as increasing/improving battery recycling 
  • Ensuring the vehicle weight of autonomous vehicles is managed, and the potential weight reduction benefits realized and implemented. The SEM body structure and battery housing demonstrate good weight efficiency.  
  • Increasing the overall lifespan of the vehicle and battery. The fatigue and durability properties of AHSS can enable enhanced vehicle lifetime. The SEM battery design allows easy replacement of specific modules, enabling an overall extended battery life. 
  • Autonomous vehicle control smooths the driving cycle. The vehicle acceleration and deceleration rates can be optimized to match the driving conditions and road topography, reducing energy consumption and subsequent GHG emissions. 
  • Increasing passenger occupancy rates to at least three per vehicle via MaaS.  

The projected net GHG emissions for the SEM vehicle operating with the flexibilities described above already represent a significant reduction when compared to the current baseline.  

Achieving net zero emissions would require additional measures like offsetting manufacturing impacts (e.g., through compensatory credits from atmospheric carbon capture and storage) and transitioning to a 100 percent renewable electricity grid. 

 

Moving Toward Net Zero 

Taking a Life Cycle Assessment approach to the SEM concept demonstrates the possibilities for engineering future mobility vehicles that continue to move us closer to a net zero future. For more information about the Steel E-Motive program, download the engineering report here: https://bit.ly/SEM_Eng_Report 

 

Life Cycle Assessment: Why is it Important?

Life Cycle Assessment: Why is it Important?

Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), and particularly vehicle product life cycle assessment, is a topic we are very passionate about here at WorldAutoSteel.  So much so that we focus on LCA intensively for the entire month of October across all of our communications channels. Though it’s not an AHSS forming or joining topic, it is one that is critical to truly reducing vehicle emissions for future generations.  Russ Balzer, Technical Director at WorldAutoSteel and our resident LCA professional, in this blog and the next, will talk about LCA, its importance, and the tools WorldAutoSteel has developed to provide environmental insight to design decision tradeoffs.

All over the world there are continuing and growing efforts to address transportation greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, which remain a major unresolved issue. These efforts are intended to help the transportation sector make its contribution to global emissions reduction goals. Unfortunately, much of this effort is focused on reducing emissions only from the vehicle tailpipe, with no consideration of the other sources of emissions in that vehicle’s life. This is not an effective way to meet these goals. In fact, this approach could lead to the unintended consequence of increasing GHG emissions in some cases. Fortunately, there is a better way – life cycle assessment (LCA), a tool for looking at the environmental impact of a product across its entire life cycle (Figure 1).

Figure 1: Vehicle LCA encompasses all phases of the product cycle, from raw material extraction to end of life recycling and disposal.

Figure 1: Vehicle LCA encompasses all phases of the product cycle, from raw material extraction to end of life recycling and disposal.

Focusing solely on the tailpipe emissions means ignoring other significant sources of GHG emissions, such as vehicle production and emissions generated (or avoided) at the end of the vehicle’s useful life (see Figure 2 on Page 2). An example of this is that tailpipe-only thinking can put too much emphasis on lightweighting. Don’t get me wrong, lightweighting can be an important part of the solution. Three of the four main drivers of fuel consumption (and therefore tailpipe emissions) – rolling resistance, acceleration and gravity (as in climbing a hill) – are dependent on the vehicle’s mass. So we can see why vehicle lightweighting is an obvious choice. It is a direct way to reduce these power demands and achieve better fuel consumption and fewer tailpipe emissions. The problem with lightweighting arises when we are so focused on reducing a vehicle’s mass that we fail to consider the consequences to the vehicle’s overall emissions.

One of the potential consequences arises from the use of lower-density materials like aluminium, magnesium and even carbon fibre to replace steel in a vehicle. From a tailpipe perspective, this can seem like a good (if expensive) solution. Vehicle mass may be reduced, resulting in improved fuel consumption and fewer tailpipe emissions. Sadly, it is not that simple. These low-density materials come with an environmental cost in addition to their higher financial cost. This cost comes in the form of higher GHG emissions in the production of the material itself. On a global average basis, GHG emissions from aluminium production can be as much as eight times as high per kilogram of material as the GHG emissions from steel production. For carbon fibre and magnesium the difference in production GHG emissions is even greater. This means that, even though you may save tailpipe emissions with some applications of these low-density materials, there is always a trade-off of higher production emissions.

Figure 2: The difference between a regulatory focus that includes LCA and current tailpipe emissions.

Figure 2: The difference between a regulatory focus that includes LCA and current tailpipe emissions.

In the best case, the reduction of emissions in the use phase does result in overall lower emissions, though, because of the trade-off between the tailpipe and production emissions, not as low as predicted by a tailpipe-only metric. Also possible is an intermediate case in which the use phase savings and the production phase increase are approximately equal, resulting in no net savings at all. In the worst case, the production emissions outweigh the use phase savings, resulting in the unintended consequence—higher overall emissions, the very opposite of what the regulation intends.

All three of these cases have two things in common. First, under a tailpipe-only regulation, we don’t know what the actual emissions are, because production emissions impacts are not being monitored. Second, because the low-density materials we are talking about are more expensive, all three of these cases come at a higher cost. So, we must ask ourselves: do we want to force automakers and consumers to pay more money without knowing the outcome? It’s time to consider another route to reducing emissions, and we believe that taking a life cycle approach is the correct route.

LCA assesses all the stages of a product’s life, from raw material extraction through production, use, and end of life processing. Though awareness of LCA has grown rapidly over the last 10-15 years, LCA methodology and practice have been developing since the early 1970s. Today, it is a mature assessment tool with global standards. Many car manufacturers are already using life cycle thinking and LCA, recognizing its importance and effectiveness in product and process design. LCA is equally accepted and used by material producers. In fact, together with many of their member companies, the trade associations of the steel, aluminium, and plastic industries are among the most active members of the global LCA community.

WorldAutoSteel has been directly involved with LCA since 2007, when we partnered with Dr. Roland Geyer of the University of California at Santa Barbara to develop an LCA tool for the assessment of material choices in passenger vehicles. The UCSB Automotive Materials Energy and Green House Gas (GHG) Comparison Model that Dr. Geyer developed on behalf of WorldAutoSteel is now in its fifth version and continues to be one of the most comprehensive publicly available vehicle LCA tools in the world.

The UCSB model is a full vehicle model assessing both GHG and energy effects of automotive material substitution over the entire life cycle of the vehicle.

Computation and parameter values are kept separate for maximum transparency and flexibility. This allowed the computational structure to be peer reviewed by members of the LCA community. The model calculates 27 main result values: three environmental indicators x three life cycle stages x three vehicles, as shown in Figure 3.

Figure 3: UCSB Model calculates 27 main result values.

Figure 3: UCSB Model calculates 27 main result values.

The model has the flexibility to allow a multitude of different scenario evaluations, offering 14 structural material categories, 24 total material categories, adjustable material recycling methodology, a variety of biofuel and electricity pathways, as well as the powertrains, driving cycles and vehicle classes noted in Figure 4.

Figure 4: UCSB Model analysis options.

Figure 4: UCSB Model analysis options.

To maximize flexibility and transparency, all calculations are shown, and no parameter values are locked or hidden. This makes the UCSB Model an excellent tool for teaching LCA, particularly automotive LCA.

GHG emissions in the transport sector must be reduced to meet global emissions reduction goals. Lightweighting of passenger vehicles can be an important part of the emissions reduction solution in the transport sector, but only if lightweighting scenarios are viewed in the context of the overall vehicle emissions. Many companies inside and outside of the transport sector use Life Cycle Assessment, which considers environmental impacts from the whole of a vehicle’s life cycle, as their primary method to develop this overall view. The UCSB Automotive Energy and GHG Model, developed on behalf of WorldAutoSteel, is a publicly available, peer-reviewed tool for the assessment of automotive emissions on a life cycle basis. Version 5 of the UCSB Model can be downloaded for free at the WorldAutoSteel website here.

At the UCSB Model download page, you’ll find a video workshop featuring Russ Balzer explaining the contents of the Model. A user guide is also available for download.

 

Russ Balzer, Technical Director, WorldAutoSteel

Russ Balzer, Technical Director, WorldAutoSteel

Russ Balzer is the LCA Technical Director at WorldAutoSteel and Phoenix Group. As Technical Director, Russ manages a variety of engineering projects, and has tactical and strategic responsibilities in WorldAutoSteel’s efforts to use and promote Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). Russ recently achieved ACLCA LCACP certification and was recognized for his work in the field of LCA with the ACLCA’s Rising Star Award.

More Reveals of the Steel E-Motive Autonomous Vehicle Demonstration

More Reveals of the Steel E-Motive Autonomous Vehicle Demonstration

WorldAutoSteel has a 30-year legacy of steel demonstration all the way back to the Ultra-Light Steel Auto Body (ULSAB), whose engineering report is still being downloaded from our worldautosteel.org site today. The one you may remember best is the FutureSteelVehicle (FSV), results of which we launched in 2011. FSV demonstrated steel innovation for not only Battery Electric vehicles (BEV) but also Fuel Cell vehicles (FCV). Steel E-Motive is the sixth of our global steel industry programs.

So Why Mobility as a Service?

The Automotive sector is undergoing the most rapid change in 40 years. This transformation shifts our thinking – from the movement of vehicles to the efficient movement of people and goods. Over the past eight years, we have conducted extensive research into global trends such as urbanization, transport emissions reduction, as well as the waning interest in vehicle ownership among the young and old. This is especially prevalent in megacities characterized by pollution, congestion, limited parking and enormous ownership costs. Our research concluded that mobility as a service (MaaS) will grow exponentially in high population areas and would place a significant challenge on vehicle design and manufacturing. Therefore, we needed to make sure we as an industry were active and visible in providing STEEL solutions in this new market place.

Steel E-Motive will demonstrate the benefits of steel, linking the properties of the material to the required architectures and attributes for MaaS vehicles.

This program will demonstrate the benefits of steel, linking the properties of the material to the required architectures and attributes for MaaS vehicles. It connects us with original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) and future mobility providers (FMPs), reinforcing steel’s advantages in strength, durability, sustainability and affordability.

An autonomous BEV structure aligns perfectly with steel’s best attributes, however most new concepts trial alternative materials. The global steel industry is investing significantly in product and fabrication development to continually prepare for the next challenge. High Strength and Advanced High-Strength Steel (AHSS) portfolios have grown from the 11 highlighted in the ULSAB program, to more than 60 grades available for use in designing and optimizing Steel E-Motive’s autonomous BEV architecture. Third Generation AHSS (3rd Gen AHSS) will have a prominent role in Steel E-Motive’s body-in-white, taking strength levels ever higher while improving manufacturability. And our industry continues to evolve Press Hardened Steels (PHS) with strength levels upwards of 2000 MPa.

Finally, efficient fabrication processes such as roll stamping, press hardening, and hydroforming use less steel and therefore contribute lower vehicle production emissions. These are the details being highlighted in Steel E-Motive, where we hope to demonstrate that only Steel can make it Real.

Steel E-Motive: A game changing, world first?

Many OEM’s and mobility service providers follow the typical vehicle development process where they adapt an existing vehicle structure to the new vehicle requirements. We don’t have that in Steel E-Motive We believe Steel E-Motive is one of the world’s firsts.

  • The first for a Level 5 autonomous vehicle that is compliant with global high-speed crash requirements.
  • The first autonomous vehicle to be a conventional high-volume stamped steel body construction, creating an affordable platform for the mobility service provider.
  • First to offer a competitive, robust, and sustainable MaaS solution.

For engineers, being first is very exciting but a little nerve wracking – there are no benchmarks out there. There is less to “hang on to.”  We’re on our own. Target setting is more challenging; we are the benchmark. Time will tell if we make it to the automotive hall of fame.

We are producing concepts for two BEVs based on a single modular platform.  SEM1 (Figure 1) is a front-wheel drive short wheelbase urban version for inter-city travel for four passengers. It has a compact design and vehicle footprint, comparable in footprint to a European B/C segment size. SEM2 (Figure 2) is an all-wheel drive, long wheelbase extra urban version designed to carry up to six passengers. It has an adaptable interior volume that can result in additional luggage capacity compared to SEM1.

Figure 1: SEM1 Vehicle Specifications

Figure 1: SEM1 Vehicle Specifications  (© WorldAutoSteel 2022)

 

Figure 2: SEM2 Vehicle Specifications

Figure 2: SEM2 Vehicle Specifications (© WorldAutoSteel 2022)

 

Body in White Steel Usage

Steel E-Motive benefits from a broad portfolio of steel grades and fabrication process, as identified by our member steel experts. The design is nearly finalized, and material selections are being evaluated against various performance targets with the representative structure shown in Figure 3 with high PHS usage at this stage in the design (as of May 2022). This is mainly driven by the safety requirements. Steel E-Motive BIW steel and steel technologies include:

  • Right steel grade in the right place
  • Significant proportion of >1500MPa grades, primarily for occupant and battery intrusion zones
  • Mixture of stamped, roll formed, roll stamped, press hardened steel and hydroformed parts
  • Spotweld, laser weld and structural adhesive

Figure 3: Steel E-Motive’s Body-in-White Steel usage as of May 2022. (© WorldAutoSteel 2022)

 

At the Core of the Steel E-Motive Concept Is an Innovative Battery Design

Figure 4 shows Steel E-Motive’s battery frame design’s construction:

  • Battery modules and cooling plates are mounted to an AHSS carrier frame (off-line).
  • The carrier frame is mounted to the body structure (in general assembly).
  • The BIW floor acts as the top cover and provides sealing.
  • The AHSS bottom cover plate provides impact protection.

This design provides significant cost and weight savings, as well as improved NVH. This extremely efficient package does not compromise safety and enables a flat floor with a lower step-in height.

Figure 4:  Steel E-Motive Battery package assembly. (© WorldAutoSteel 2022)

 

Competitive Body Stiffness with an Open B-Pillarless Body Structure

With clean sheet design, and generally less package constraints in a Level 5 vehicle, our design teams have had more freedom to engineer and optimize the crash and stiffness structural loadpaths. We used topology, optimization, and Virtual Reality tools to determine the most efficient structural loadpaths (Figure 5). The results informed the joint designs and enabled optimization of the joining and structural adhesives. These steps and the advantage of steel’s high modulus resulted in impressive performance.

Figure 4: Topology Load Path Optimization

Figure 5: Topology Load Path Optimization. (© WorldAutoSteel 2022)

 

The approach for achieving body stiffness was as follows. Results are shown in Figure 6 following.

  • Topology load path optimization
  • Appropriate section size, profiles, part integration and flange / joint design
  • Strut towers integrated with key body members, such as A-pillars, vertical dash brace
  • Contribution from structural battery frame and battery cover closing, roof structure trusses
  • Rigidly connected front and rear subframes
  • Optimized joining and use of structural adhesives
  • Capitalizing on the Inherent high modulus of steel

Figure 6: SEM Torsional Rigidity animation. (© WorldAutoSteel 2022)
Static torsional stiffness 38,000Nm/deg
Global trimmed BIW modes >28Hz
Local attachment static stiffness ten times bushing stiffness

Front Crash Structure Engineered to Balance the Requirements of 56kph USNCAP FFB, IIHS ODB, IIHS SORB and EuroNCAP MPDB Load cases

One of the most challenging aspects of the Steel E-Motive program has been achieving the front crash performance that minimizes occupant injury. The challenge has been compounded by the overall compact size of the vehicle and the short front overhang dimensions, meaning less space to manage and balance the required crush energy with intrusion resistance.

For the IIHS 25% Small Overlap test, we worked from the outset to achieve a barrier “glance off.” The goal is to deflect the vehicle off the barrier by the time the barrier reaches the hinge pillar. This results in a reduced amount of vehicle kinetic energy converted to crush energy. The vehicle continues after the impact with some onward velocity and kinetic energy. This strategy results in reduced intrusion to the passenger compartment and a much lower vehicle pulse (below 20g), which translates into lower occupant injury. We are very excited by this outcome, as in our benchmarking we have not seen many (if any) vehicles of this size managing to achieve a glance off for this test. Figures 7 and the bullets following provide a look at the results.

Figure 7: IIHS 25% Small Overlap test. (© WorldAutoSteel 2022)

  • IIHS “good” rating achieved (based on predicted intrusions).
  • Our strategy for IIHS Small Overlap test was to achieve a “glance off” the barrier, which is a significant challenge given the vehicle’s short front overhang.
  • Front suspension engineered to detach on impact. This is important for achieving glance off.
  • Glance off results in some continued onward vehicle velocity after the impact.
  • This results in reduced crush energy, lower vehicle pulse and intrusions = enhanced occupant protection

 

Figure 8 points out features of the front crash structure. Most of the crush energy in FFB and ODB is absorbed by conventional longitudinal mid-rails, which are made of cold stamped, tailor welded blank Dual Phase steels. The plan view angle of the longitudinals has been optimized to provide load reaction early in the SORB event while remaining largely inside of the SORB barrier.

Front crash structure engineered to balance the requirements of 56kph USNCAP FFB, IIHS ODB, IIHS SORB and EuroNCAP MPDB load cases.

Figure 8: Front crash structure engineered to balance the requirements of 56kph USNCAP FFB, IIHS ODB, IIHS SORB and EuroNCAP MPDB load cases. (© WorldAutoSteel 2022)

 

Following in Figures 9 and 10 are animations of the FFB results:

Figure 9: USNCAP 56kph Rigid Barrier – Top View. (© WorldAutoSteel 2022)
Figure 10:  USNCAP 56kph Rigid Barrier – Side View. (© WorldAutoSteel 2022)

 

MaaS vehicles will need to accommodate quick ingress and egress as well as provide comfort and safety for the occupants. Consequently, we have flipped the front occupant around to a rear facing configuration and provided a B-Pillarless wide door aperture to enable comfortable and quick access for passengers. This changes the approach required for occupant protection in a front crash. Effectively we are dealing with a high-speed rear impact situation for the occupant. Current rear impact tests cover lower speed rear end shunts. Figure 11 notes the key points and challenges that Steel E-Motive is designed to meet.

Different approach and considerations are required for the protection of rear facing front occupants. We are effectively dealing with a high speed rear impact event

Figure 11: Different approach and considerations are required for the protection of rear facing front occupants. We are effectively addressing a high-speed rear impact event.  (© WorldAutoSteel 2022)

 

Side Crash Structure Consists of Absorption and Intrusion Prevention Zones, Compensating for Large Body Aperture

The side structure includes roll-stamped martensitic door waist rail beams and a one-piece Tailor Welded Blank, Press Hardened Steel door ring outer. A- and C-pillars in line with occupants provide good side impact protection. (You can learn more about the door design in our May blog).

In the section AA schematic in Figure 12 the TRIP690 hydroformed tube interlocking door B-pillar is shown (wrapped over the rocker and cantrail). The load travels through the side impact crush “hex” beam, which is a two-piece roll formed DP590 component.

SIDE CRASH STRUCTURE CONSISTS OF ABSORPTION AND INTRUSION PREVENTION ZONES, COMPENSATING FOR LARGE BODY APERTURE

Figure 12: Side crash structure consists of absorption and intrusion prevention zones, compensating for large body aperture. (© WorldAutoSteel 2022)

 

 

Steel E-Motive Design Demonstrates Good Side Crashworthiness and Good Levels of Occupant and Battery Protection

In addition to occupant protection tests, additional side impact load cases have been simulated to ensure optimal battery protection. The design maintains a less than 30 mm clearance to the battery.

In reviewing the design according to IIHS standards and based on the predicted intrusions, we are confident this vehicle would achieve an IIHS “good” rating.  See Figures 13 and 14 following:

Figure 13: USNCAP 32kph side pole (battery protection). (© WorldAutoSteel 2022)
In addition to occupant protection test, additional side pole load cases to ensure battery protection
>30mm clearance to battery maintained

 

Figure 14: IIHS 60kph side barrier II (occupant protection). (© WorldAutoSteel 2022)
IIHS “good” rating (based on predicted intrusions).

 

Total Cost of Ownership: Vehicle and Body Is Designed for Conventional Fabrication and Assembly Processes

The Steel E-Motive body has been designed with low cost in mind to provide the foundation for a lower total cost of ownership for fleet owners. The steel body design is optimized to maximize material utilization and minimize scrap rate. Steel E-Motive is suitable for >250,000 units/year production and is compatible with existing global automotive manufacturing facilities using conventional press and fabrication tools. We are also using Life Cycle Assessment as an integral part of the engineering process to ensure that Steel E-Motive is responsible for the lowest possible emissions throughout its entire life cycle. We will report on environmental performance and sustainability as a part of our final results.

Steel E-Motive Key Outcomes

The Steel E-Motive program is delivering an exciting futuristic vehicle, optimized from the ground up for autonomous MaaS application. We are addressing key challenges through careful design, application of simulation tools and efficient use of the latest Advanced High-Strength Steels and fabrication processes. Steel’s inherent characteristics of low production emissions, lightweighting capabilities for mass efficiency, infinite recyclability and product durability underscores its suitability as an integral part of stakeholder strategies to offer sustainable mobility solutions, today and in the future.

Be sure to follow us on our journey as we enter our final months of design, engineering and reporting by subscribing at the Steel E-Motive website. We welcome your questions about this program using the Comment box below.

 

Images are not for use without permission. Contact steel@worldautosteel.org.

 

 

 

Submitting Your Content

WorldAutoSteel will consider appropriate articles from expert sources for publication on our AHSS Insights blog.  In order to be considered, you must meet the requirements set forth below.  Please keep in mind, however, that we do not pay for, or charge for, posting guest blogs.  But we are more than willing to consider articles that are relevant to educating on best practices and new processes in the forming and joining of Advanced High-Strength Steels (AHSS) in vehicle applications.

If you still have questions about being a Guest Blogger for WorldAutoSteel after reading this page, you may contact the AHSS Guidelines Editor, Lori Jo Vest

Fundamentals

Please keep in mind the following fundamentals before you start writing your blog.

  • Your submission must contain references to Advanced High-Strength Steel (AHSS) in vehicle applications. Note that the name of our blog is AHSS Insights, therefore, readers will be expecting to expand their AHSS knowledge base.
  • Your submission must be geared towards a technical audience, with appropriate data references. Our audiences include automotive engineers that specialize in design, materials, manufacturing and the environment.  We generally do not accept thought-starter type guest blogs.
  • Your submission must not be a marketing piece for your organization, proprietary products or services, nor should it contain marketing messages and solicitations.  Our readers are smart people.  They will appreciate and gain much more insight into your company by simply demonstrating your expertise and showing your products’ purpose in AHSS use, than they would in a sales pitch.
  • It should contain information pertinent to our audiences on an aspect of AHSS, such as AHSS characteristics, use, metallurgy, forming or joining. It also may address vehicle or steel industry life cycle assessment or other environmental issues related to automotive and AHSS use.
  • Your submission must include graphic references. You may decide what kind of graphics you would like to add such as charts, videos, infographics, etc. We welcome videos as long as they do not include a sales pitch. Graphics need to be submitted as PNG or SVG files, and videos must be a standard format, such as MP4 or WMV.

 

Submission Requirements

Please meet the following submission requirements before you submit your entry for consideration.

  • Submissions should be approximately 1,000 words in length, and include graphics.
  • Please include a title.
  • Graphics should be provided as separate 72 dpi (PNG or SVG) files, if possible, and sourced appropriately, especially if you do not specifically own the rights. Videos should be 720p resolution.
  • Please clearly provide any reference sources in the following format: Author, full title of the work, year published, and if available and it will add to the blog’s content value, provide an internet link to the work.
  • Please notify us with your intention to submit with an brief abstract of the information you will cover. This will help us determine if it is a good fit and enable us to potentially provide provisional approval.
  • Your first draft must be submitted a minimum of 30 business days prior to any agreed upon publish date. This allows our team to have ample time for review, give you feedback and pursue any required further editing. It also provides time for translation to our Chinese blog edition.
  • As your blog will be translated to the Chinese language and published on our channels in China, please do not use English jargon that will be difficult to translate.

We will notify you in advance as to when your entry is scheduled to publish. We strongly encourage you to use your social contact network to share the blog article. Your shares should include our blog hashtag, #AHSSblog.

 

Submitting Video and Animation Assets

We are always looking for video and animations to help support existing articles with visual information.  If you think you have something that would enhance an article, please contact us at the email link above.  You can send us a link to what you have, and we will review it.  Note, the video must be owned by you in order to be considered and not contain any sales pitches.  If we agree to use it, we’ll need to receive the original video file so that it can be uploaded directly to our site.  You/your company will receive full citation as a the source of the video.  Have a look at our Roll Forming page to see an example of how we have used a video received from Shape Corp.

 

We look forward to receiving your submission. It is our pleasure to collaborate on AHSS education with you. Thank you!