# Future of all Automobiles is in Composites...



## dcarlock (Jan 28, 2007)

Fellow Goat owners,

I am a composites engineer who is currently working on the Boeing 787 airplane fuselages. I am very interested in the Carbon Fiber aspect of our automobiles and searched through the threads here for information but I was disatisfied to find so little information on this vital topic. I can find thousands of articles on the SAP, but I am really not interested in this as it does jack for the performance. If anyone is knowing anything relevant to carbon fiber I suggest it is posted here as our make could use a little fiber to get the weight down. With gas pump prices being so unpredictable I see composites booming. Like wise the composites company I am currently employed with has more work than it can handle. 10-100 lbs. here or there is what winning races is all about. There is wonderful information here on headers, cold air, etc. etc, but I think we need a seperate forum on this as it should not be grouped with the exterior, or SAP kit, as it truely is a performance item. Hopefully my work is not getting me to carried away with carbon fiber


----------



## koman (Sep 25, 2006)

unfortunately the expense versus gain is usually impractical to the hot rodder who looks for his gains in a price to gain ratio. i like biking but i've yet to have the desire for a carbon fiber bike due to the price versus practicality of it. 2k for a bike that's going to give me about the same returns as a 500 dollar bike? so what if i have an extra 2-3 lbs to lug around, it'll just make me stronger. how much are repairs on carbon fiber? i'm not knocking it but these are the reasons i've never really considered carbon fiber/composite parts. i'm sure there as some here who have though. :cheers


----------



## Wing_Nut (Mar 6, 2005)

Dream on..........Flying Cars, Autopilot, Turbines, High Quality Fiats

Composites have a long way to go to become economically feasible for mass produced cars with a relatively short lifespan. Airframes have a 30 year lifespan and, strength to weight ratio is critical to the economics of an airliner. Also, when your 787 crashes, you're generally not concerned with fixing the cosmetic damage.

Some Of The Problems To Be Solved.....

Cost to manufacture
Structural attachment to metal components
Repair technology
Infrastructure for mass production
Infrastructure for repairs (Joe Bob's auto body isn't equipped or trained to work with composites)
Ability to resist minor damage (composites are light and strong but rigid and subject to damage from minor impacts)
Weaving logos, car names, flames into the fiber mat.

Composite material might find its first use on a mass produced car in non-structural components that are easily replaced as an entire unit. Hood, rear decklid, door skins, cosmetic tack-ons like front air dams or rear wings, mirrors, rear hatch, seat frames. Wheels.....that's an enticing idea. A 15Lb composite wheel on a Lotus Exige type car with a carbon fiber body. 

Right now, composites are in their infancy relative to steel and aluminum which benefit from huge industries with over 100 years of economic and itellectual capital invested. No contest.

In short, your attempts to save some weight and lower your fuel bill would cost you dearly in terms of the life-cycle costs of your car.

Now give it 20 years and $100 Billion of capital investment.....maybe.


----------



## Wing_Nut (Mar 6, 2005)

On the other hand, the house I'm currently selling in PA is made of glue and wood chips. It was built in 2004 of engineered wood beams and laminated wood beams. The subfloor is another OSB product designed to work with the engineered wood beams. The exterior sheathing is yet another form of OSB. All of the plumbing hot & cold supply lines are cross linked polyethyelene running into a plastic manifold. The drains are all PVC. The house is draped in a combination of brick and vinyl. The exterior deck is synthetic material. The windows are all vinyl capped. It's amazing how synthetic materials are supplanting traditional materials in the ho-hum residential construction industry. Of course this didn't happen overnight. But for the most part, the synthetic materials are easier for tradesmen to work with, require less maintenance, and perform better than traditional solutions.

The house in CT was built in 99 and it uses dimensional lumber, and copper supply lines for hot and cold water. But, PVC is used to carry away wastewater. It's still clothed in a combination of brick and vinyl. Both homes use extruded aluminum gutters, vinyl soffits and aluminum fascia covering. The CT house has a traditional pressure treated wooden deck.

Anyway, here's a case of two homes built 5 years apart with a good deal of change in materials in a relatively short time. 

Maybe it will happen this fast for the auto industry as well. Innovation is tough to predict.


----------



## GM4life (Mar 18, 2007)

If you can make me a carbon fiber roof panel for my Goat dirt cheap I would love that. But cars that are made of carbon fiber is expensive, I don't think it is cost effective for automakers, great idea though. But automakers are making cars more aerodynamic and looking into alternative fuels.
Heres a great idea of a carbon fiber car:


----------



## koman (Sep 25, 2006)

balsa wood is pretty lightweight, why not make cars out of balsa?


----------



## dcarlock (Jan 28, 2007)

Wing_Nut said:


> Dream on..........Flying Cars, Autopilot, Turbines, High Quality Fiats
> 
> Composites have a long way to go to become economically feasible for mass produced cars with a relatively short lifespan. Airframes have a 30 year lifespan and, strength to weight ratio is critical to the economics of an airliner. Also, when your 787 crashes, you're generally not concerned with fixing the cosmetic damage.
> 
> ...


Ok where to start. First off, you have wrote this but conceded in a later response. Let me point out what you do not understand about engineering and composites. I would like to thank you for commenting on "if the 787 crashes," and insulting the efforts of people who are working at Boeing and its suppliers. Think before you type please. If you had any sort of idea as to the extent of NDI and FEA that fiber is under, and the criteria it must meet before it is in even assembled to a Jet frame, you would not have made that comment. It is thrice that of steel or aluminum. Suggestion, don't talk about airplanes unless you have something constructive to say. Cost to manufacture... Is no doubt expensive, but, the real cost is getting to be the fiber itself, Carbon fiber machines are not infants anymore, new players, but not infants. Structural attachments to metal components???? You're kidding right...I am not even going to address that. Repair technology, is certainly well behind in that but perfection requires practice, so lets get going. Infrastructure for mass production... It is time to start for automakers if you ask me, remeber when GM decided to keep going SUV, and now them and Ford are getting their ass kicked by Japanese automakers??? Abilty to resist minor damage... Composistes are brittle, but do you realize the strength of composites, at this point I have evidence you do not. Weaving logos.... At this point only you are worrying about this, that is trivial.

As you said:

Right now, composites are in their infancy relative to steel and aluminum which benefit from huge industries with over 100 years of economic and itellectual capital invested. No contest.

Actually there is a contest, and rest assured composites are the way of the future, steel and aluminum are winning the battle now, but they will lose the war.

Now give it 20 years and $100 Billion of capital investment.....maybe. You mean give it another 20 years and 100 Billion of invesmtent and you watch how far we go. I will think of you when my 787 is taking off. In fact the first is rolling out of the plant this Sunday. Welcome to the world of composites. If we can build a feasible jet, you damn better believe were going to take on automobiles. Luckily in the fiber industry we are not full of pessimists like you.


----------



## PEARL JAM (Sep 6, 2005)

dcarlock said:


> remeber when GM decided to keep going SUV, and now them and Ford are getting their ass kicked by Japanese automakers??? .


Actualy, Ford is on top right now for quality, and Toyota has fallen behind.

http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/06/11/ford-ousts-toyota-for-top-spot-in-overall-auto-quality/

I do agree that there is a home for composites in auto manufacturing, (hell, if someone had told me 20 years ago that in 20 years cars would have upwards of 15 computer modules in them, I would have laughed. But here we are.) 
But right now I don't think it's cost effective.


----------



## dcarlock (Jan 28, 2007)

PEARL JAM said:


> Actualy, Ford is on top right now for quality, and Toyota has fallen behind.
> 
> http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/06/11/ford-ousts-toyota-for-top-spot-in-overall-auto-quality/


Yeah just caught that news myself this morning, to me this is good news, and news I havent seen in a good deal of time.


----------



## GTO JUDGE (May 14, 2005)

*Keep in mind the government would get involved with this... Safety would be a concern. Crash test findings would not sit well with the safety. The added steel in a car helps protect occupants. Yea vets are fiberglass. You'd think if weight was the issue for fuel consumption more cars would be fiberglass. Ralph Nadar would have a new reason for living if carbon fiber like cars were contemplated.*


----------



## Wing_Nut (Mar 6, 2005)

dcarlock said:


> Ok where to start. First off, you have wrote this but conceded in a later response. Let me point out what you do not understand about engineering and composites. I would like to thank you for commenting on "if the 787 crashes," and insulting the efforts of people who are working at Boeing and its suppliers. Think before you type please. If you had any sort of idea as to the extent of NDI and FEA that fiber is under, and the criteria it must meet before it is in even assembled to a Jet frame, you would not have made that comment. It is thrice that of steel or aluminum. Suggestion, don't talk about airplanes unless you have something constructive to say. Cost to manufacture... Is no doubt expensive, but, the real cost is getting to be the fiber itself, Carbon fiber machines are not infants anymore, new players, but not infants. Structural attachments to metal components???? You're kidding right...I am not even going to address that. Repair technology, is certainly well behind in that but perfection requires practice, so lets get going. Infrastructure for mass production... It is time to start for automakers if you ask me, remeber when GM decided to keep going SUV, and now them and Ford are getting their ass kicked by Japanese automakers??? Abilty to resist minor damage... Composistes are brittle, but do you realize the strength of composites, at this point I have evidence you do not. Weaving logos.... At this point only you are worrying about this, that is trivial.
> 
> As you said:
> 
> ...


Spoken like a true engineer who is drinking the Kool-Aid. You seem to have some knowledge of the technology and virtually no understanding of the business. 

In an industry that's faced with global hyper-competition, what auto maker do you think is going to invest heavily in some whiz bang technology that doubles the price of a car so that people can save a $1,000/year on gas only to have that savings dwarfed by repair bills? I'll bet they're all lining up to invest billions in fixed assets so they can be the first to go out of business. The technology actually makes economic sense for an airframe where weight and strength are absolutely critical to performance and the asset will be in service for several decades. The same technology would kill a car where there are cheaper, perfectly acceptable solutions and the "asset" will be in service for maybe 1 decade. 

This is exactly why engineers aren't allowed to run businesses! Form of autism. 

Why so defensive about the "crash comment"? Perhaps you focused on math skills at the expense of your reading comprehension skills. I was not commenting on the air worthiness of the 787 which I'm sure is typical Boeing A++. I was simply pointing out that when an aircraft crashes, it is usually catastrophic and therefore no one is worried about fixing the cosmetic damage. 

Now, when you have a fender bender in your Ford 500 (I'm sure you own one of these) I'll bet you want to get that body panel fixed. And I'll bet you want it rejoined to the unibody. And I'll bet you want it to match up. And I'll bet you dont want to pay 5 times what you'd pay for repairs to steel. And I'll bet that you don't want to wait 3 times as long to get your car back.

Of course, you're in love with the technology so, I could be wrong.

As a last point, my comment on weaving a logo or flames into the composites. Once again either your reading comprehension or your sense of humor failed you. I WAS KIDDING tard again!


----------



## GTO JUDGE (May 14, 2005)

Wing_Nut said:


> who is drinking the Kool-Aid.


*LOLOLOL......Caution....you are about to enter THEEEE NO SPIN ZONE. The Factor starts right NOW.

Keep it pithy. LOLOOL.....Kool-Aid*


----------



## dcarlock (Jan 28, 2007)

Wing_Nut said:


> Spoken like a true engineer who is drinking the Kool-Aid. You seem to have some knowledge of the technology and virtually no understanding of the business.
> 
> In an industry that's faced with global hyper-competition, what auto maker do you think is going to invest heavily in some whiz bang technology that doubles the price of a car so that people can save a $1,000/year on gas only to have that savings dwarfed by repair bills? I'll bet they're all lining up to invest billions in fixed assets so they can be the first to go out of business. The technology actually makes economic sense for an airframe where weight and strength are absolutely critical to performance and the asset will be in service for several decades. The same technology would kill a car where there are cheaper, perfectly acceptable solutions and the "asset" will be in service for maybe 1 decade.
> 
> ...



No understanding of the business...Really my theory is that it is time to start taking risks in composites. Isn't there an age old saying," Business is all about taking risks."

You think this is whiz bang technology, did you say the same thing about fuel injection and computers in cars too? (I am starting to suspect you are a little too young for that though...)

"I'll bet they're all lining up to invest billions in fixed assets so they can be the first to go out of business. " You probalbly said the same thing about Boeing 10 years ago, get ready for Sunday when the 787 is unleashed, not a pretty day for Airbus, who is way way way behind on this. 

"The technology actually makes economic sense for an airframe where weight and strength are absolutely critical to performance and the asset will be in service for several decades." Who says we cannot move in a direction where cars can be in service for thirty or forty years... I cannot accept this... Who says they can't only last like a jet? You????

Why so defensive about the "crash comment"? Because as I already explained in my previous post it was completely disrespectful, and was said in a form of certainty, as if though it[crash] were destined to happen. 

"I was simply pointing out that when an aircraft crashes, it is usually catastrophic and therefore no one is worried about fixing the cosmetic damage." ---- Really it is usually catastrophic? Please think before you type... Ever hear of minor runway collisons?, weather damage? Obviously not (What did I say about thinking before you type). Again you make pointing out all your flawwed arguments very very easy. It is like shooting fish in a barrrel. 

"Now, when you have a fender bender in your Ford 500 (I'm sure you own one of these) I'll bet you want to get that body panel fixed. And I'll bet you want it rejoined to the unibody. And I'll bet you want it to match up. And I'll bet you dont want to pay 5 times what you'd pay for repairs to steel. And I'll bet that you don't want to wait 3 times as long to get your car back." ----- And to think, your the guy criticizing my reading comprehension, did you not read my initial post. Here I will restate it for you I own a GTO. (Whats so wrong with Ford, from what GTOJudge is saying it sounds like they got something to be proud of, they beat toyota. Good for them, havent heard GM doing that in a long time. I give credit where credit is due, and Ford beat GM here, and this is coming from a GM guy.) You wanna talk Ford, lets go somewhere else. This thread is for composites, don't change the subject.

"As a last point, my comment on weaving a logo or flames into the composites. Once again either your reading comprehension or your sense of humor failed you." ---- Sorry I am not a mind reader, but this is a discussion board if you want a comedy act go somewhere else, I am not here for comedy. You do not start an argument with them and then say you were joking about your previous statement. Because now I get to say to you... What else were you joking about? Should I take anything else you say seriously? The answer to that looks like a NO at this point. Stand your ground in an argument don't say you were kidding or switch to a Ford topic. 

Listen... Were talking composites here. I only want to talk composites here, that is why I posted this thread, but if you do not have any intellectual information, then get lost. I am on hear to find people who have valuable information on composites, and share my likewise interest in the Pontiac GTO. Not argue with someone who is not presenting factual arguments or is going to say he was kidding about something or another. I know an awful lot about composites, if I am not working on my goat or house, I am working on composites. It is the future, any technology is expensive and difficult to produce at first. Even cars themselves, at one point were in this way. Believe me someday you will see carbon fiber in cars. Mark my words. 

P.S. If you post another reply you will further embarass yourself.


----------



## Wing_Nut (Mar 6, 2005)

dcarlock said:


> P.S. If you post another reply you will further embarass yourself.


Only in your warped mind tard again! There is no arguing with the faithful.

I love the ones that list every statement from a post and present their opinion in response as if it were fact. Definitely an engineer, linear thought process.:rofl: Takes up a lot of space though.

OK Kool-Aid boy dredge up some evidence that anyone is even seriously toying with the idea of significant composites content in a current production car. Waiting.........

Oh, and now that I know you guys working on the 787 are sniffing the glue dripping from the molds, I'll be sure and fly Airbus. Europeans may be drunk but they're not high.

Pssst we have a live one! And he's an engineer. And can't spell or type. But he's smarter than all of the top minds at automakers across the planet.

I double dog dare you to respond.


----------



## Wing_Nut (Mar 6, 2005)

dcarlock said:


> I am not here for comedy.


But you serve the purpose so well!:lol:


----------



## PEARL JAM (Sep 6, 2005)

Wing Nut DcarLock

...II...............II




So far its a tie.........


----------



## Wing_Nut (Mar 6, 2005)

Homes should be made of composites. And bridges. And skyscrapers. And fasteners. And clothing. And the temple of holy carbon.

Hallelujah, I have seen the light. Praise be to the holy prophet dcarlock! arty:


----------



## Wing_Nut (Mar 6, 2005)

Pearl_Jam

I love it. Keep that pot stirred lest the fixins start stickin to the bottom.


----------



## GTO JUDGE (May 14, 2005)

*I have a brilliant idea..... I am going to start a new trend... Fart can plumbing vents on the roofs of houses.....

The idea..... when you flush a commode, the fart can on the roof will emit the infamous fart can bellow when exhaling air. If you flush multiple commodes at the same time, it will sound like your home is shifting gears. Now only if there is a way I can devise a roof of a house to be installed backwards and to the side. Siding on the bottom of a home instead of the top could reference pants being worn below the spinchter. :willy: :willy: *


----------



## Wing_Nut (Mar 6, 2005)

dcarlock,

I've been pondering your typing, spelling, and grammar. Or lack thereof. 

Are you an engineer or production line worker?

What's the tensile and flexural modulus of the materials you work with?

What's the primary raw feedstock for carbon fiber production? Hint, it's also one of the three main components of ABS plastic in another form.


----------



## SloTymer (Sep 16, 2005)

What about the Fiero, it was a type of plastic, and it was pretty cool. I would love to stuff an LS2 in one of them.


----------



## Wing_Nut (Mar 6, 2005)

SloTymer said:


> What about the Fiero, it was a type of plastic, and it was pretty cool. I would love to stuff an LS2 in one of them.


Yup, the Fiero was GM's first attempt at unstressed polymer body panels in quasi mass production. Special factory, lots of expensive tooling, and a fair amount of innovation. 

Much of this was underwritten by the plastics industry in the hope that they could indeed replace steel in a car. Success in the plastics industry is measured by pounds of material you can get on a vehicle. This was the holy grail for Plastics execs and scared the crap out of north American steel execs at a time when they were already under fire (pun intended) from Asian competitors. 

All of this energy expended just so GM could eventually launch Saturn and start a revolution. Oh, and Saturn is now walking away from its hallmark polymer body panels. Saturn's three newest platforms (Aura, Sky, Outlook) all sport good old stressed steel body panels. And, in twenty years, no one else in the industry ever followed. Guess why! Well, at least give GM credit for trying. No one else in the industry saw any potential worth all the risk. 

This is the lesson our engineering friend hasn't learned yet. Business is about taking prudent risk and controlling risk wherever possible. It's about being reasonably sure that you're not pissing investor's money away. Especially when you're the investor. And it's about balancing risk with potential gains.

Yep, there will always be a one in a million long shot that makes it big. And every loser who is bad at math plays the lottery. Just because there's a winner every week doesn't mean it's a good risk.

Synthetic materials just aren't there yet. There is huge potential but it will be years before you're zipping around in a car made out of buckyballs with a 3Lb/Hp power to weight ratio.


----------



## koman (Sep 25, 2006)

whatever happened to the new wave saturn brought in with the polymer body panels? i feel like that would have been more practical than composites. yes i'd say composites have made it a long way. as far as fuel injection that has been around since the 50s. 53 vette was a fuelie if my memory serves me correctly. funny thing is i went looking for a fuelie set up and was laughed out of the chevrolet place, would have been better off looking for a rochester quadrajet. efi came out in the mid 70s in cadillac cars. personally looking back 20 years from today i don't feel as if we are as advanced as i had hoped we would be. ECM have actually gotten better but i did a slight comparison with feel and what i heard between my 92 fox body and my 06 goat both have a similar feel as far as how the engine responds and controls itself. MAF technology. as far as th feel i prefer the 92 to the 06 because the 06 feels like i have not as much control. part of the drive-by wire problems. i hit the gas, a half a second or more later it responds. it annoys me that i can flip the starter switch, remove my hand, kick the car out of gear and start buckling right before the car starts all while my hand is not on the key. it is about as bad as me being 2-3 years old going out and starting my parents 73 superbeetle after locking myself inside. technology is great but as with anything else there's limitations to it all.


----------



## dcarlock (Jan 28, 2007)

Wing_Nut said:


> Only in your warped mind tard again! There is no arguing with the faithful.
> 
> I love the ones that list every statement from a post and present their opinion in response as if it were fact. Definitely an engineer, linear thought process.:rofl: Takes up a lot of space though.
> 
> ...



I love the ones that list every statement from a post and present their opinion in response as if it were fact. ---- Actually I am arguing in an intellectual way. I am not afraid to argue you point to point, and call you out on your ability to overlook simple possibilities such as runway crashes. I wouldn't call things like that fact, rather common sense.

OK Kool-Aid boy dredge up some evidence that anyone is even seriously toying with the idea of significant composites content in a current production car. Waiting......... Blue Devil Corvette, and that will be a low unit car less than 2000 is what I understand, but rest assured, it is going to be the first of many.

Oh, and now that I know you guys working on the 787 are sniffing the glue dripping from the molds, I'll be sure and fly Airbus. ----You can fly on their foreign garbage, you hate Ford but promote airbus, some American you are.

And can't spell or type. -I agree, but I do have common sense, and argue from an intellectual point of view. Little skills like these are overlooked when a person has more desireable skills.

But he's smarter than all of the top minds at automakers across the planet. ---- Only you said that, but if that is how you feel, then maybe your not as stupid as I previously thought. 

I double dog dare you to respond. ---- Anyday arguing with you is like shooting fish in a barrel. You have to run from all your previous arguments and create new ones, with some childish insults included, because you are not able to continue with the old ones. Either you like the attention from losing an argument, or you are here on childish pretenses... whatever it is, you end up looking like an ******* with each subsequent post. I am sure you will respond. Only to have your ass handed back to you again and again. Please, please think before you type...


----------



## dcarlock (Jan 28, 2007)

Wing_Nut said:


> dcarlock,
> 
> I've been pondering your typing, spelling, and grammar. Or lack thereof.
> 
> ...


I've been pondering your typing, spelling, and grammar. Or lack thereof. ---- Already called you out on this in a previous post.

What's the tensile and flexural modulus of the materials you work with? ----Look it up on the internet, I am not working on that portion of the manufacturing process, Alex Trebec.


What's the primary raw feedstock for carbon fiber production? Hint, it's also one of the three main components of ABS plastic in another form. ---- 

Polymerisation of acrylonitrile produces PAN, the most common carbon fiber feedstock. Whether or not that has anything to do with ABS, I do not care, again, Alex Trebec.

What are we playing quiz time now???

I have a riddle for you then. Let's see if you can play your own game...

This is tough....

Two men are on the street. Joe says to Sam, guess how old my daughters are. They have ages which sum to the address of that house and multiply to 36. Joe say his oldest is having read hair. So how old are his daughters? What is the number of the house? A double riddle. That is all the information you need. 

Really let us see if you can figure it out. I answered your questions, and your the one who wanted to ask questions, so now it is my turn to go Trebec on you. Bet you will google for the answer, and not use your own wits. Ill be able to tell, as the secret to this riddle is there is a common incorrect, and a very uncommon correct solution. I may not be able to spell, but I can think. Good luck.


----------



## dcarlock (Jan 28, 2007)

koman said:


> whatever happened to the new wave saturn brought in with the polymer body panels? i feel like that would have been more practical than composites. yes i'd say composites have made it a long way. as far as fuel injection that has been around since the 50s. 53 vette was a fuelie if my memory serves me correctly. funny thing is i went looking for a fuelie set up and was laughed out of the chevrolet place, would have been better off looking for a rochester quadrajet. efi came out in the mid 70s in cadillac cars. personally looking back 20 years from today i don't feel as if we are as advanced as i had hoped we would be. ECM have actually gotten better but i did a slight comparison with feel and what i heard between my 92 fox body and my 06 goat both have a similar feel as far as how the engine responds and controls itself. MAF technology. as far as th feel i prefer the 92 to the 06 because the 06 feels like i have not as much control. part of the drive-by wire problems. i hit the gas, a half a second or more later it responds. it annoys me that i can flip the starter switch, remove my hand, kick the car out of gear and start buckling right before the car starts all while my hand is not on the key. it is about as bad as me being 2-3 years old going out and starting my parents 73 superbeetle after locking myself inside. technology is great but as with anything else there's limitations to it all.



53 vette was a fuelie if my memory serves me correctly. Thank you, I needed someone else to help me out here! The Corvette has always been way ahead of its time. The Blue Devil Vette is again ahead of its time like the 53 vette. Some day the Blue devil will be talked in the same light. Ill probrably be pushing up daisies, at that point.


----------



## Wing_Nut (Mar 6, 2005)

dcarlock said:


> Joe say his oldest is having read hair.


 WTF??? Is this a clue or a combination of poor grammar, spelling, and typing in a single sentence?

Alex Trebec here, I'll try and respond in your language. 

Alex say you try change subject to something completely unreadlated to composites. What you think you smart are bekause you herd a riddul and repeeted it?

So, you're an engineer who what, designs parts for aircraft but doesn't know the physical properties of the materials he's working with. C'mon are you a sanitation engineer? Working on (cleaning) the composite toilet seats in that 787? You seem to be very knowledgeable about the fecal matter of bovines.

And you played the Bah Merican card. :rofl: That was only a matter of time. Now I'm sure you're a production line worker.

And, no you didn't answer my questions. You begged off both modulus questions. Apparently you have short term memory loss from sniffing that damn glue dripping from the molds.

You got the feedstock question right though. Periods of lucidity punctuated by delusions of grandeur.

How about an intelligent question applying your vaunted logic to the challenge of adoption of composite materials by the global auto industry.


----------



## Wing_Nut (Mar 6, 2005)

Almost forgot.....Ten years ago, ceramics were going to revolutionize the auto industry. People were playing with ceramic engine blocks. They're still playing.

Apart from a very few high cost, low volume applications like brakes, ceramics have not found their way into cars. Like composites, they have a lot of potential but huge economic obstacles.

Don't look for that ceramic engine in a composite chassis running off a hydrogen fuel cell any time soon George Jetson.


----------



## dcarlock (Jan 28, 2007)

Wing_Nut said:


> WTF??? Is this a clue or a combination of poor grammar, spelling, and typing in a single sentence?
> 
> Alex Trebec here, I'll try and respond in your language.
> 
> ...


WTF??? Is this a clue or a combination of poor grammar, spelling, and typing in a single sentence? --- I have already acknowledged I am not a good speller, what are you going to do keep pointing that out. However it is completely comprehendable.

What you think you smart are bekause you herd a riddul and repeeted it?
----Nice spelling jag---.

So, you're an engineer who what, designs parts for aircraft but doesn't know the physical properties of the materials he's working with. ---- Who said I was a design engineer, I could be a stress engineer, a production engineer, an industrial engineer. In your mind it is obvious engineering is just a small field concerned with modulus. I am a numerical control engineer. So really I would not carry that information on modulus off hand. Now would I? So I have business not answering or not knowing that question off hand.

C'mon are you a sanitation engineer? Working on (cleaning) the composite toilet seats in that 787? You seem to be very knowledgeable about the fecal matter of bovines. ---- I knew that the term "fecal matter" would come out 
of your **** filled mouth sooner or later.

"You got the feedstock question right though." ---- Yeah, and any ******* who looks on google for two or three minutes could have answered your measily question, dumbass.

"And you played the Bah Merican card." You rip on any American company and I am going to defend it you stupid *******, I dont care it is Ford, 3M, etc... Any time someone rips on hardworking Americans, or American products they get the double f--k you from me, and I am glad to hear you don't like it. Anyone who is anti-America should get the f--k out. Like it or leave it. Period. Fly airbus, *******.

"And, no you didn't answer my questions. You begged off both modulus questions." ----I already explained why I do not have this answer. I never claimed to be the expert. I said I was here to learn from others who actually know something about composites. Instead I am responding to some keyboard tough guy with a little bit of a chip on his shoulder, eh.

Apparently you have short term memory loss from sniffing that damn glue dripping from the molds. ----This comment proves how much you understand about "the glue" the composites industry is currently working on. Another poorly thought out statement. What did I say about thinking before typing? Does your teacher ever tell you that in your "English class." I'll guve you grammar and spelling, now only if you could use that to demonstrate some intellectual knowledge on this topic. BAM, the bull**** stops here! :cool 

How about an intelligent question applying your vaunted logic to the challenge of adoption of composite materials by the global auto industry.

----Backing down on the riddle.. I wouldn't trade my math skills for spelling skills any day of the week. I have people who type for me when it comes to work. Grammar, spelling can be learned by anyone, math by few.

I am just here to talk composites and not bicker with some assclown who is looking for trouble. You want trouble find it somewhere else kid. I want to see other people who can act mature and talk composites at the same time. For future reference... If you have an opposing view point to someone that is fine. If you want to be an ass to someone who has an opposing viepoint, bring something intelligent to the table besides comments about sniffing glue and "tard". You really do demonstrate your age well. Anyways Trebek, or by your writing skills, Shakespeare, come up with something good if you have it, besides a little quiz. And answer my riddle, it would be a good math challenge. Actually that is not a riddle I just heard somewhere, I read it in a Calculus thesis from Georgia Tech, from a research proffesor. So you have spelling skills, but do you have math skills. I do not think so. You called out my grammar, and now I am calling you out on your weakness. Solve this riddle before I give you any further acknowledgement. Time for you to put your money where your mouth is. Hint, there are two answers so if you really beat your head against the wall, you will can come up with the one that will impress me. You can use calculus(differential equations), or basic math to find both answers.  Im waiting... If you post a response without the answer, you will be placed on ignore from my profile because I will not waste any more time bickering with you.


----------



## Chrisco (Mar 19, 2007)

Wow, you guys should just get married. How did a thread like this turn into a pissing match of who knows more about what?


----------



## koman (Sep 25, 2006)

NC engineer? isn't NC the dinosaur of machine tool? what do you NC? many of the newer machinetools have deleted the NC tape of the 70s in favor of being completely CNCed. just curious.
back to the post. ceramic engine blocks did seem interesting at a time just as did polymer blocks which at one time i thought those would be out. i think most of the auto industry is looking for those "engineer" types which has degrees and mc's but that's not going to help much in my opinion as far as getting the ball rolling on anything practical because there's a lack of "how do i get what i have been given more efficient and easily produced" i've always said and will say give me 5 years at ANY R and D engine prototype department and i'll make far more advances in those 5 years than have been made in the past 15. but i don't have the "engineering" degree. i'd give them everything they need, the cnc programs to run the parts, the tooling and fixtures needed to manufacture, and still design and develop the product from raw material to a final part/prototype. the R and D departments across america i feel are just too stuffy with stale sheepskins, until that changes and we get some real people involved then i doubt we'll see any great advances. another example of how stale we are in comparison from my 92 fox and the 06 goat, i get slightly better gas mileage from the 92 fox on the highway than the 06 goat and i don't have the extra gear in it. 23 mpg compared to 21.8 mpg. yes the goat has more power and carried around slightly more weight but that's 14 years that have passed by and my gas mileage isn't much better. besides one is really 14 years old with 181k miles on the clock getting that gas mileage and the other is less than a year with 19k miles on the clock. when i ran open headers on the fox i got 20 mpg. we just don't have the capability to make many advancements at a rate that's beneficial in the R and d department of automotive technology. as far as the advancements i staked claim at i stand behind my word on that one.


----------



## Wing_Nut (Mar 6, 2005)

dcarlock said:


> "And you played the Bah Merican card." You rip on any American company and I am going to defend it you stupid *******, I dont care it is Ford, 3M, etc... Any time someone rips on hardworking Americans, or American products they get the double f--k you from me, and I am glad to hear you don't like it. Anyone who is anti-America should get the f--k out. Like it or leave it. Period. Fly airbus, *******


SCORE......:cheers 

You make your arguments in an elegant and eloquent fashion. Your logic is clear for all to see. Your power of persuasion is indeed strong. I for one am comforted knowing we have skilled technical "minds" such as yours working on the aircraft we will all be flying for the next 30 years. I'm liking trains all of a sudden. The Europeans are way ahead in rail technology as are the Japanese. The fact that you like Ford is even further evidence of your intelligence. I'm sure you are equally skilled as a machinist, technical visionary, and economist.

What is most comforting to me though is that you most certainly will not be making the economic decisions that will guide this economy through the next century. I can sleep at night knowing that you are confined to a production line making parts.


----------



## GM4life (Mar 18, 2007)

Sooo how about that carbon fiber disscussion? 
*dcarlock* is there any possable way to manufacture carbon fiber or any other composite cheaper? I think that be the key to mass produce a lighter automobile.


----------



## Wing_Nut (Mar 6, 2005)

gm4life said:


> Sooo how about that carbon fiber disscussion?
> *dcarlock* is there any possable way to manufacture carbon fiber or any other composite cheaper? I think that be the key to mass produce a lighter automobile.


See if this helps. The info is a little dated but directionally correct.

Cut From....Materials Research to Meet 21st Century Defense Needs (2003)
National Materials Advisory Board (NMAB)


The significance of materials costs to integrated systems costs is discussed in Appendix C, but the essential points are covered here. Forty years ago, Westbrook1 noted that structural materials vary in price by seven orders of magnitude and that the usage of a material in pounds per annum is inversely related to the cost per pound; for example, reducing materials cost by a factor of two can result in a four-fold increase in usage. For a vehicle, another important factor is the value of weight saved over its service life. Table 3-2 summarizes the impact on the market when gasoline is $2.00 per gallon, an automobile has a 100,000-mile life, commercial aircraft has a 100,000-hour life, and spacecraft goes into orbit once.

The cost of materials is a relatively small fraction of the fabricated cost of a structure, typically 10 to 20 percent. Thus, combining these fabricated costs of the structure with the value of a pound saved gives the average maximum cost that can be tolerated in a particular application. For the automobile example, where the value of a pound saved is $2.00 times a 20 percent material cost as a fraction of total cost, the upper limit is $0.40 per pound for the primary structural material of the automobile, which is about the cost of automobile-quality steel. It is also possible to conclude that aluminum will not be a cost-effective substitute for steel in automobiles until gasoline costs $4.00 per gallon.2 As noted in Appendix C, these calculations must be fine-tuned to align with factors such as the speed at which the object moves and the complexity of the structure fabricated. For example, the value of a pound saved in the rotating part of the gas turbine in an airplane is 10 times the value of a pound saved in the fuselage. Also, materials costs for complex composite structures are as little as 2-5 percent of the total fabricated cost.

This only covers the materials and fabrication of something useful made from the raw material. It doesn't even attempt to address the total life cycle costs and infrastructure investment to support composites in a widespread consumer application like autos. 

Start to understand?


----------



## Wing_Nut (Mar 6, 2005)

If the prior post didn't make you cross-eyed and sleepy, here's what the dummies at Oak Ridge National Laboratory had to say on the subject in work for the U.S. Dept Of Energy. 


Carbon-Fiber Composites for Cars
To make a vehicle that gets 80 miles per gallon of gasoline to satisfy one goal of the U.S. Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles (PNGV), the automobile industry is seeking a lighter structural material. Steel is the material of choice today because of its strength and low cost. But steel is heavy, so the industry is starting to use lighter materials instead. Fiberglass has long been used extensively in the Chevrolet Corvette and more recently in some body panels of the Saturn car. Audi's A8 automobile and the hood and engine parts of the Ford F150 pickup are made of aluminum.

To meet the ultimate PNGV mileage goal, one potentially enabling technology is to use carbon-fiber composites, which form the structure of U.S. fighter jets. Carbon-fiber composites weigh about one-fifth as much as steel, but can be comparable or better in terms of stiffness and strength, depending on fiber grade and orientation. These composites do not rust or corrode like steel or aluminum. Perhaps most important, they could reduce vehicle weight by as much as 60%, significantly increasing vehicle fuel economy.

The problem is that carbon-fiber composites cost at least 20 times as much as steel, and the automobile industry is not interested in using them until the price of carbon fiber drops from $8 to $5 (and preferably $3) a pound. Production of carbon fibers is too expensive and slow. The raw material is typically pitch, or polyacrylonitrile (PAN) precursor. It is converted to carbon fibers using thermal pyrolysis, a slow, energy-consuming process that is combined with stressing to achieve the right properties. The precursor, the energy needed to heat it to make fibers, and the large ovens and other capital equipment required in the process contribute to the high cost. As a result, carbon-fiber composites cannot compete economically with steel in the auto industry.

Researchers Alicia Compere and Bill Griffith in ORNL's Chemical and Analytical Sciences Division and several industrial teams are exploring alternative precursors to reduce carbon fiber raw material costs. One promising candidate is lignin, a waste produced during pulping to make paper. This is one project in a joint program of research between ORNL and North Carolina State University (NCSU). The program was recently formalized in a memorandum of understanding between the UT-Battelle management team and NCSU, one of the team's six core universities.


Photomicrograph of a carbon fiber precursor produced by firing a fiber that is 99% lignin. Lignin is dissolved out of wood to separate it from the cellulose used to make paper. 
The Composite Materials Technology Group in ORNL's Engineering Technology Division (ETD) is collaborating with the automobile industry to improve the processes of manufacturing and characterizing carbon-fiber composites under program manager Dave Warren. This group, led by Bob Norris, is also developing materials for NASA's Advanced Space Transportation Program, armor protection for Army aviation and the Federal Aviation Administration, and high-temperature shafting for the Comanche helicopter.

Felix Paulauskas is leading a team of ETD and Fusion Energy Division investigators and industrial collaborators who are working to demonstrate that microwave heating of PAN precursor in a plasma instead of using less-energy-efficient thermal processing increases the speed and reduces the cost of producing carbon fibers. The project showed that a properly designed and implemented microwave-assisted plasma energy delivery system might quadruple production speed and reduce energy needs and fiber price by up to 20%.

Several methods for fabricating carbon-fiber composites have been developed by ORNL researchers and others. For most automotive composite applications, carbon fibers are aligned into a preform, which is placed in a mold. The resin is then injected into a mold and preform and heated to activate and cure the resin. As a result, the fibers are glued together, providing tremendous strength. ETD researchers are working with the auto industry to develop techniques that will automatically align fibers for the preform and will infuse resin effectively into the preform to create finished composites.

Several ETD mechanical test machines will be moved to the National Transportation Research Center. One device being built by ETD specifically for this program is an intermediate strain rate test machine. The device requirements were developed by ETD's Ray Boeman in collaboration with the automobile industry. In this machine, samples will be compressed at a very fast rate, and measurements will be made to determine the effect of the speed of deformation on the material's properties.

"It's like silly putty," says Dick Ziegler, manager of ORNL's Transportation Technology Program. "If you pull it in two directions slowly, it simply stretches. If you pull it fast, it breaks." The data from this device will be valuable for computer simulations of crashes involving cars made of carbon-fiber composites. (See Supercomputers Help Model Cars in Collisions.)

Because of their high strength, carbon-fiber composites could make cars safer. But they won't be used in cars until ways are found to reduce this low-weight material's high cost.

dcarlock makes parts for airplanes and can't seem to comprehend that a material that is wonderful in one application makes absolutely no economic sense in another application.......No matter how cool the material is! This is a common affliction with engineers and is the main reason they are kept on a short leash by the people running the show. An unguided nerd can be hazardous to your invested capital.

But dcarlock knows better. I'd trust him. Pay a half million dollars for a car so that you can save a few thousand dollars in fuel.

Composites will one day get there but there's a lot of innovation and a lot of investment that must occur first. Think decades IMHO.


----------



## dcarlock (Jan 28, 2007)

*Back to the discussion...*

Wingnut = Ignore.

I would like to explain why I made this thread in the first place. I am a firm believer that whether or not carbon fiber comes out in cars today, or tomorrow, or forty years from now, the research and development should start today. What it has done for the airplane industry in the last ten years cannot be measured. The amount of profit and faith which has come forth in this industry has been overwhelming.

Anyways, I have been doing a good deal of research on composites. As far as making it cheap, obviously this technology is not available quite yet. The only way I know of to make carbon fiber cheap is to produce it by hand in a third world country. It is quite obvious that this is not the solution to cheap carbon fiber products because quality is a huge question, and on moral grounds it involves the exploitation of humans. 

Now I have a general idea of what it costs for a section 46 and section 44 of the Boeing airplanes are being sold to Boeing for. The cost is outrageuoes. However, they are developing carbon fiber, and if Boeing or Airbus, or their suppliers has an eye-opening discovery in the field of composites, then the cost can go down. Any technology is expensive at first, and it takes time, sometimes a lot of time, for these products to go down in price. The reason why composites were successful in the Airline industry does not just have to with the size, lifespan, or any other features that seperates a car from an airplane. What is seperating the automotive and the airline industry is the automotives preference to steal, for the price. No person is questioning that. What is true however is that mechanical and electronical components in cars have come a long way in recent years. If this trend is continuing in this way but were still placing steel on our cars, were not moving forward with technology in all areas. There is one huge, huge, advantage to composites, and if undamaged they are maintenance free. The maintenance free aspect of house siding was not such a bad idea. Also the auto industry will follow, the when, where, how, and all that I do not know, and that is why I satrted this thread to see who else knew something. Because, in the world of carbon fiber there are no experts, only inovators.


----------



## GM4life (Mar 18, 2007)

Like you said composites are made by hand, but if somehow a automated system was developed to do it mechanicaly, would it be cheaper in the long run once its up and running? Because from my understanding composites is made up of layers in differant directions with some type of resin between them, and then "pressure cooked". Automakers use automated systems to stamp out, sheer, hydroform parts once tooled. I watch alot of discovery channel:lol: and know that automated systems can do almost anything, so why not "tool" one up that can make composite parts from molds and cook them. Is their something I'm missing in the composite development prosess, besides cost but QA, curing prosses or something?


----------



## dcarlock (Jan 28, 2007)

gm4life said:


> Like you said composites are made by hand, but if somehow a automated system was developed to do it mechanicaly, would it be cheaper in the long run once its up and running? Because from my understanding composites is made up of layers in differant directions with some type of resin between them, and then "pressure cooked". Automakers use automated systems to stamp out, sheer, hydroform parts once tooled. I watch alot of discovery channel:lol: and know that automated systems can do almost anything, so why not "tool" one up that can make composite parts from molds and cook them. Is their something I'm missing in the composite development prosess, besides cost but QA, curing prosses or something?


Actually you have hit it on the head. Automated systems are not working their way into the automotive industry yet. The auto industry actually cannot have hand made parts, just like aerospace for the need for consistence and quality. The only thing that is really truthfully preventing the automakers from buying a R&D machine is the cost. One of the reasons why airliners are making parts easier is because they are large parts, and those on cars are much smaller, current fiber placement technology is really limited when a piece is very small in size. The cost to develop a machine for small applications is the real problem as a machine an automaker would need would cost well above 20 million per machine. This is the truthfully difficult part about getting carbon fiber into the automotive industry, not the cost of fiber, or anything else. I think if the car has a substantial amount of composite material it will be able to sell for more, what that limit is I cannot say, people certainly do not enjoy rust. However from what I have read on the Eurofighter, they are actually making precision size pieces that an automobile would also require. Knowing this knowledge, one can begin speculation that machines which are developing parts for jets will eventually be developing machines for cars, as they have small and similar applications. The cost for these machines will decrease, but when I do not know, and then automakers will probalbly buy machines quite similar to these. So probalbly I predict that the fighter(military), and small jet technology will invest the real R&D money into the small composite applications, and someday then the automaker will be able to buy the technology which is so expensive today at a lower cost.

I really think the Blue Devil Corvette is integrating a considerable amount of composites, and the corvette seems to always be a machine of innovation and excellence. If I recall it was one of the first to have fuel injection.

Now this is all speculation on my part, as I could be completely wrong, but I think this will be the path that will lead to eventual integration of composites in automobiles. I am doing some very wonderful things, that I cannot mention here due to propietary information, but I am making my living in composites, and everyday brings new excitement. When it comes to smaller applications in composites there is considerable money to be made.


----------



## GM4life (Mar 18, 2007)

Thats true about the Corvette it is GM's test bead for new technology, it has proven time and time again that it can put the smack down on cars that have more power than it does unsing lighter weight materials. When it comes to the C6 ZO6, it uses carbon fiber finders, balsa wood floor, alumuinum structure and magnesium. It is the only car in the world that is exempt from the gas gusseler tax, that is amazing for a car that puts out 505hp and run 10's in 1/4 and near 200mph top speed.


----------

