Ford F-150

[Ed Huntress]

I just got back from an engineering conference in Detroit on
"lightweighting" cars and trucks, which was an exceptionally good one,
but one mundane fact set me back in my chair. Ford has four stamping
plants making body parts for the new aluminum F-150. At the biggest
one, at the old Rouge plant, their stamping line fills an
11-ton-capacity truck with aluminum stamping scrap every 20 minutes.
The trucks are lined up to haul it back to the mills.

That's a lot of aluminum. All of the US and European car makers have
high-quantity aluminum vehicles in the works, and the world's aluminum
producers have been building new plants just to deal with it.

Ford will make around 600,000 F-150s this year, so the scrap rate
isn't three-shifts every day, but still...

--
Ed Huntress

[Jim Wilkins]

"Ed Huntress" <hunt...@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:b9i0jat17o5iskme7...@4ax.com...

Did they tell you what the alloy is?
-jsw

[Ed Huntress]

Yes. It is a story I will write for the August or, more likely, the
September issue of Fab Shop.

There are four of them. None is a standard Aluminum Association alloy
designation. The way Ford handled it is brilliant. GM, Honda, Toyota
and others rose to compliment the Ford matreials engineer to designed
the system.

It's built "backwards" from the scrap stream and the real behaviors of
aluminum alloys. Expect the other major automakers to adopt it.

--
Ed Huntress

[Steve W.]

So what your saying is Ford starts as scrap and ends as scrap.... :-)


--
Steve W.

[cl...@snyder.on.ca]

On Thu, 16 Apr 2015 22:02:22 -0400, "Steve W." <csr...@NOTyahoo.com>
wrote:

I'm told it is "close to 6061" - a heat treatable weldable high
strength alloy.

[Ed Huntress]

The four alloys are defined in ways that give them specific
properties, rather than specific secondary alloy constituents. The
primary constituents establish the performance parameters, and they
are defined in a way that allows the secondary melters to "up-alloy"
the scrap in the most efficient way, while staying within the
performance catagories. They have four different scrap streams to make
this happen.

The system makes sense when you see it in graphical form. It allows
very tight control of the alloys while using 1/3 secondary (remelt)
material. As the system is put into wider use, the percentage of
secondary material will increase and still stay within the designed
parameters. Without that, aluminum is going to be too expensive to get
very far in car bodies and chassis.

There isn't a lot of welding on the aluminum body of the F-150. There
is spot welding and some friction welding, but a lot of it is
weld-bond: welding through adhesive. There also are continuous laser
welds around the door frames.

Overall, it's much stiffer than earlier aluminum chassis/body
structures and it outperforms them in other ways. The
joining/assembly-fastening is very complex. On top of that, the body
is designed with "break points" that allow easy disassembly for
repairs.

There was a new Cadillac chassis on display at the conference. That
thing has diecast and extruded aluminum structures all over the place.
The diecastings used for the shock towers are amazing. I've never seen
anything like them. The result is a huge consolidation of parts --
often 10 to 1, throughout these new structures.

--
Ed Huntress

[Martin Eastburn]

11 ton truck toting how much ? maybe a ton or two.
Maybe 5. How packed is it and how much of it is air.

Might be high in air just to get the stuff moving.
I doubt it is chipped into billets.

Martin

[Tim Wescott]

And did that 11-ton truck have an overhead cam engine? Did it? Huh? DID
IT? Or did it have a PUSHROD engine because the designers knew it was
superior for the task of powering a big, manly truck?

(Sorry. Had to. Some passing stupidity wave, I think.)

--
www.wescottdesign.com

[Steve W.]

It will be interesting when they start getting body damage. 99% of the
repairs will be full panel replacement, but the common bed rail dings
and minor dents that can be taken out with paint less dent tools will be
fun.

Adhesive bonded panels are not bad but I'm not sure what they will do
with the welded seams. Some are laser welded at the factory. I'm
thinking they may allow TIG like a few other aluminum repair certs do
but I haven't looked into it very hard. I really don't plan on getting
certified to repair them.... BTDT, wastes a LOT of money. Especially
when the companies spec different equipment to do the same job... For a
while Ford and GM had different specs on spot welds, The weld itself was
the same in the end but they wanted you to use a specific brand of
welder to make the weld. Ford liked the Miller units and GM wanted Lenco.



--
Steve W.

[Ed Huntress]

On Thu, 16 Apr 2015 23:05:59 -0500, Martin Eastburn
<lion...@consolidated.net> wrote:

>11 ton truck toting how much ?

11-ton capacity. It was stated as 11 tons of scrap every 20 minutes.

> maybe a ton or two.

Nope.

[Ed Huntress]

On Fri, 17 Apr 2015 00:05:27 -0500, Tim Wescott <t...@seemywebsite.com>
wrote:

<g> I don't know what kind of engine is in the scrap truck. However,
I'll get a chance to look them over in a month or two and I'll report
back.

--
Ed Huntress

[David Billington]

An interesting way to go with the alloys and use of recycled material. I
guess they can get the properties they want that way for those parts. A
mate that works in engine development mentioned all the main players
using virgin aluminium for cylinder heads to guarantee the properties
required which couldn't be done with recycled because of contamination.

[Ed Huntress]

On Fri, 17 Apr 2015 12:05:22 +0100, David Billington <d...@invalid.com>
wrote:

Right, but the plot thckens as you dig deeper into it. Ford's
recycling is "tolling," which means that the content of the scrap is
known and it goes right back into the same stream. There is no other
scrap in the stream aside from dropouts from those Ford plants.

The result is quit different than ordinary scrap.

--
Ed Huntress

[dca...@krl.org]

On Thursday, April 16, 2015 at 7:52:04 PM UTC-4, Ed Huntress wrote:


> Ford will make around 600,000 F-150s this year, so the scrap rate
> isn't three-shifts every day, but still...
>
> --
> Ed Huntress

The Wall Street Journal had an article on Jan 8th about the shift to Aluminum. According to the article in ten years 18% of all vedicles made in the U.S. will have aluminum bodies. It said there were four companies that could supply the aluminum sheet. Alcoa, Novells, Logan Aluminum, and Constellium. Did you find out who is supplying Ford? I would expect more than one company is making the aluminum.

Dan

[Ed Huntress]

Alcoa and Novelis.

--
Ed Huntress

[Jim Wilkins]

"Ed Huntress" <hunt...@optonline.net> wrote in message

news:6qr0ja9d9vp7s6j1v...@4ax.com...

>
> The four alloys are defined in ways that give them specific
> properties, rather than specific secondary alloy constituents. The
> primary constituents establish the performance parameters, and they
> are defined in a way that allows the secondary melters to "up-alloy"
> the scrap in the most efficient way, while staying within the
> performance catagories. They have four different scrap streams to
> make
> this happen.
>
> The system makes sense when you see it in graphical form. It allows
> very tight control of the alloys while using 1/3 secondary (remelt)
> material. As the system is put into wider use, the percentage of
> secondary material will increase and still stay within the designed
> parameters. Without that, aluminum is going to be too expensive to
> get
> very far in car bodies and chassis.

> --
> Ed Huntress

In Chemistry we covered the job of the metallurgist in a steel mill,
who has to analyze the melt as quickly as he can to minimize the fuel
and throughput cost of keeping it molten. In the 60's they said it
took about half an hour.

Today handheld X-Ray Fluorescence analyzers make the chemical analysis
quick and easy.
https://www.bruker.com/products/x-ray-diffraction-and-elemental-analysis/handheld-xrf.html
Is that enough to adequately predict the final properties or do they
have to make Charpy etc measurements of cooled samples?

-jsw

[cl...@snyder.on.ca]

You should see theBPR Rotax engine plant. All of the machining is
done dry so there is no coolant contamination in the feedstock of the
"remelt" - their recycling of scrap is 100% - aluminum and steel are
both done the same way (obviously separated completely)

[Jim Wilkins]

"Ed Huntress" <hunt...@optonline.net> wrote in message

news:dmt1jadkc897rld2r...@4ax.com....

>
> Right, but the plot thckens as you dig deeper into it. Ford's
> recycling is "tolling," which means that the content of the scrap is
> known and it goes right back into the same stream. There is no other
> scrap in the stream aside from dropouts from those Ford plants.
>
> The result is quit different than ordinary scrap.
>
> --
> Ed Huntress

I hope they won't hit consumers with a disposal cost like CRTs when
these need to have the aluminum cleanly separated.

-jsw

[Ed Huntress]

Are they doing their own remelting as part of their casting operation?
That would explain the need to eliminate coolant. On the scale Ford is
producing scrap, it isn't an issue. They're recycling 100%, too, in
four streams.

When their alloys are specified in AA grades, and using multiple
suppliers, they need 11 streams. Why that is necessary is kind of
complicated. I'll link to my story when it's published.

--
Ed Huntress

[Ed Huntress]

There are separate issues here. One is the tolling of their own
production scrap. The other is the post-market scrapping of the
trucks. The latter is becoming more complicated as aluminum's use in
vehicles becomes more sophisticated, because they're using multiple
alloys and separating them when trucks are scrapped, so far, does not
have a solution.

--
Ed Huntress

[Ed Huntress]

As a practical matter, I don't know what testing they're doing. As the
system is set up, none is necessary. The scrapping, like the
production itself, is set up along "zero defects" principles.

--
Ed Huntress

[Ed Huntress]

I think my last post left some important things unsaid, so let me
complicate it further. <g>

If Ford were to spec their sheet aluminum by AA grade, it would
require 6 grades but 11 scrap streams. That's because, say, 6061 from
Alcoa is not 6061 from Novalis. If they're required to toll the scrap
back to the original AA designation, Alcoa won't accept Novalis scrap,
and vice-versa. This has to do with the way each company handles the
secondary ingredients in the alloys.

My alloy example may not be one that actually causes trouble; it may
be other alloys. But that's the principle.

You probably have heard that high-volume auto-body stamping of
aluminum is a real headache because of inconsistencies in the aluminum
properties. The above situation is a major source of that problem.

So Ford set up their own system based on performance, with some
allowance for secondary chemistry but with other tight controls,
especially temper. This allows them to stamp one of their four grades
with greater consistency -- which means, for the most part, consistent
springback.

The root and source of most "transportation grade" aluminum alloys is
the aerospace industry, as it always has been. They have different
requirements than automotive applications. So the old system of AA
grades does not work well for the car industry.

--
Ed Huntress

[cl...@snyder.on.ca]

On Fri, 17 Apr 2015 09:26:46 -0400, Ed Huntress

The remelt is done at their casting facility

[Tim Wescott]

On Fri, 17 Apr 2015 05:11:20 -0700, dca...@krl.org wrote:

> On Thursday, April 16, 2015 at 7:52:04 PM UTC-4, Ed Huntress wrote:
>
>
>> Ford will make around 600,000 F-150s this year, so the scrap rate isn't
>> three-shifts every day, but still...
>>
>> --
>> Ed Huntress
>
> The Wall Street Journal had an article on Jan 8th about the shift to
> Aluminum. According to the article in ten years 18% of all vedicles
> made in the U.S. will have aluminum bodies.

And controlled fusion will be practical. Wind power for everyone, too, so
we'll have a choice. Or we'll be transitioned to the "hydrogen
economy" (with molecular hydrogen appearing magically, because of course
it doesn't have to be _made_ from _water_ using way more energy than you
get out of it later).

And we won't be buying cars from the major manufacturers any more, because
they'll be 3D printed locally from 100% recycled aluminum cans and plastic
soda bottles.

Damn, but it's a good thing I'm never cynical nor sarcastic!

--

Tim Wescott
Wescott Design Services
http://www.wescottdesign.com

[rangerssuck]

On Thursday, April 16, 2015 at 7:52:04 PM UTC-4, Ed Huntress wrote:

Did you get a handle on what percentage of a sheet becomes scrap? It would be interesting (from a musing standpoint, if not a metallurgical or economic one) to know how many times a given piece of aluminum has been through the punch/scrap/remelt process before it actually becomes part of a truck.

[Ed Huntress]

On Fri, 17 Apr 2015 12:12:34 -0400, cl...@snyder.on.ca wrote:

<snip>

>>>
>>> You should see theBPR Rotax engine plant. All of the machining is
>>>done dry so there is no coolant contamination in the feedstock of the
>>>"remelt" - their recycling of scrap is 100% - aluminum and steel are
>>>both done the same way (obviously separated completely)
>>
>>Are they doing their own remelting as part of their casting operation?
>>That would explain the need to eliminate coolant. On the scale Ford is
>>producing scrap, it isn't an issue. They're recycling 100%, too, in
>>four streams.
>
>The remelt is done at their casting facility

Well, there's their tradeoff: a slight disadvantage in machining
(possibly; but not necessarily, surface finish may be harder to
achieve) for a savings in the complexity of re-melting the scrap. With
a high value-added product like a Rotax engine, it sounds like the
logical way to go.

Ford is using stamping lubricant and it's worth it to go through the
scrap cleaning step.

--
Ed Huntress

[Ed Huntress]

<g> It appears the WSJ is right. Every major Western and Japanese
manufacturer is in the process of developing, or is nearly ready to
produce, high-aluminum-content cars. Ford is looking into what they
can do with magnesium.

In the very short run, there appears to be a lot of development space
left for advanced high-strength steels. (AHSS). And the more
sophisticated vehicles are using a fair amount of boron steel in
hot-stamping, which achieves over 200,000 psi yield. Door pillars and
crush areas are major applications for hot-stamped steel.

--
Ed Huntress

[Ed Huntress]

Not yet. I'll be spending more time with them to find out things like
that.

If grain direction doesn't matter, a yield of 70% from a sheet is
pretty reasonable. If grain direction does matter, it will be somewhat
lower, depending on how the parts nest on the sheet.

--
Ed Huntress

[David Billington]

The Audi A8 has been around for a couple of decades now. I wonder how
the older ones fair these days and if they suffer from any problems with
the use of aluminium structurally.

[Pete Keillor]

On Sat, 18 Apr 2015 10:20:58 +0100, David Billington <d...@invalid.com>
wrote:

A lot of the F-150's I see on the road aren't hauling anything in the
bed. But I wonder how they'll hold up for lawn service, plumbers,
farmers, etc. with a lot of stuff banging around in the back all the
time. I'm not a pickup or Ford guy, so don't really care that much.
Time will tell.

[Ed Huntress]

On Sat, 18 Apr 2015 10:20:58 +0100, David Billington <d...@invalid.com>
wrote:

I don't know. But, without them saying anything negative about it, it
was clear that the engineers at that conference consider the A8 to be
a "first generation" effort with aluminum, not practical for a
high-production car.

--
Ed Huntress

[cl...@snyder.on.ca]

On Sat, 18 Apr 2015 06:42:50 -0500, Pete Keillor
<Pete.K...@gmail.com> wrote:


>A lot of the F-150's I see on the road aren't hauling anything in the
>bed. But I wonder how they'll hold up for lawn service, plumbers,
>farmers, etc. with a lot of stuff banging around in the back all the
>time. I'm not a pickup or Ford guy, so don't really care that much.
>Time will tell.

Look at all the dump trucks hauling gravel. LArge percentage are
aluminum boxes, and they stand up better than most steel boxes.

6061T6 or T653 is pretty tough stuff - and there are tougher alloya
apparently.

[Ed Huntress]

Remember that the stiffness and strength of a panel varies with the
*cube* of its thickness. An aluminum panel as strong as a steel panel
will still be much lighter than the steel panel. You can make the
aluminum panel a great deal stronger than the steel panel, and it is
still a lot lighter.

That's the whole principle behind replacing steel with aluminum. It's
not only lighter; it's also stiffer and stronger, in terms of plate
stiffness and strength. (Not to complicate this point, but the tensile
and compression strengths of aluminum alloys are nearly identical to
those of steel panels of equivalent weight. But we're talking here
about denting or bending a panel, which is where the cube rule
applies.)

Where it can get complicated is in things like dent resistance. This
can be a complex resolution of forces. When the aluminum panel is a
lot stiffer, that also means that the area surrounding a dent is
putting up a lot more resistance to being bent. So, instead of
oilcanning and bouncing back, as a thin steel panel might do, the same
blow to aluminum might cause a dent, because the surrounding aluminum
is resisting oilcanning and that can allow a concentration of the
denting force in one local spot.

A little thought about this makes it clear that you can't generalize
about the dent resistance of aluminum. It depends a lot on the shape
of the panel. That steel panel might resist oilcanning because it has
a curved shape; it might, therefore, dent more easily than an aluminum
panel. A completely flat steel panel, in contrast, might just spring
away, or "oilcan," when the same force is applied. But you'll notice
that there is more crowning of panels in vehicles today, which is done
to improve stiffness as high-strength steel panels keep getting
thinner. That's how they save weight with the high-strength steels
used in car bodies today. They have to recover the lost stiffness by
crowning and reinforcing the steel.

An aluminum truck can be stronger, stiffer, and lighter than a steel
one. But its ability to resist dents and dings depends on the panel
shape -- in particular, how much it is curved, or crowned.

--
Ed Huntress

[mog...@hotmail.com]

Its good that you wonder that. I am no car person, believe me. I don't know about their aluminum use before 2015. But, I keep hearing that Toyotas are the ones that have rarely needed any kind of repair on average. I don't think Volkswagon and Audi are known for that reputation.

Also, SUV's of many types rarely need repair, too. "though I hate defending SUV's).

[Joe Gwinn]

In article <qpn4jatbgt70qlcq4...@4ax.com>, Ed Huntress

My big worry with aluminum and such alloys is fatigue resistance. All
the aluminum products I've had fail did so because a boss or weld or
the like fatigued and broke free. Typically not economically
repairable, although in a car the economics will differ.

Joe Gwinn

[Ed Huntress]

On Sat, 18 Apr 2015 11:21:17 -0400, Joe Gwinn <joeg...@comcast.net>
wrote:

That's true for aircraft. Fatigue is much less of a problem for
automobiles. Weld failures on highly stressed parts are a big problem
with aluminum, but the car makers aren't using much welding, except in
combination with adhesive bonding (weld-bonding).

Joining and assembly are perhaps half of the story about different
manufacturing methods for the aluminum-bodied cars.

--
Ed Huntress

[Phil Kangas]

<cl...@snyder.on.ca> wrote in message
news:86k4ja1bfrp9ajvdu...@4ax.com...

I would think it is a 5xxx series alloy. It is
work hardening
and corrosion resistant. The more it is abused the
stronger it gets. Boats are typically made from it
for that
reason. Salt hauling trailers are also made from
it.
If it is made from 6061 there will be corrosion
complaints.

[mog...@hotmail.com]

Now, I hate aluminum wire (versus copper wire) because of the increased fire factor.

I remember reading somewhere that "Aluminum fires are more tenacious", but compared to what, I don't know. I imagine the stuff can't be any safer than the steel that was used in car manufacturing back in the 1950's.

[Ed Huntress]

We're talking mostly about crash repairs, which know no brands.

[Ed Huntress]

Ford is using both 5xxx and 6xxx grade equivalents in the body and
structure of the F-150. There's some 7075 in there, too.

--
Ed Huntress

[David Billington]

I guess we'll have to wait for the first serious fire in one and see
what's left afterwards. The British found out that aluminium
superstructures and exocet missiles don't go well together with the
resulting fire during the Falklands war.

[cl...@snyder.on.ca]

The 3/16" 6061 T6 skid plate on the old Datsun 510 rally car took one
heck of a beating and didn't show a dent, while friends with heavier
steel plates had them all mangled in one season. It was a bugger to
get bent to the correct shape to fit in the first place - much more
difficult than the thinner and heavier steel plates. It had no
compound curves to add stifness either.

[cl...@snyder.on.ca]

On Sat, 18 Apr 2015 11:21:17 -0400, Joe Gwinn <joeg...@comcast.net>
wrote:

With aluminum you need to make it stout enough that it doesn't move,
because ANY movement causes stress fatigue - unlike steel where as
long as you don't excede the elastic limit the stress does not build
up

[Leon Fisk]

On Sat, 18 Apr 2015 11:21:17 -0400
Joe Gwinn <joeg...@comcast.net> wrote:

<snip>

>My big worry with aluminum and such alloys is fatigue resistance. All
>the aluminum products I've had fail did so because a boss or weld or
>the like fatigued and broke free. Typically not economically
>repairable, although in a car the economics will differ.

And mine is how will they hold up to all the deicing chemicals spread
willy-nilly on our roads all winter long?

I think the electric vehicles are going to have problems due to the
salt and cold too. Only time will tell I guess...

Heck they can't even keep their brake-lines from rusting through in the
rust belt. NHTSA says that people have to wash their vehicles more
often...

http://www.abc2news.com/business/consumer/no-gm-brake-line-recall-govt-says-wash-your-car

--
Leon Fisk
Grand Rapids MI/Zone 5b
Remove no.spam for email

[Ed Huntress]

Hmmm....not quite. True fatigue occurs at cyclic loadings somewhat
below the yield strength of any common structural metal. The
differences between steel fatigue and aluminum fatigue have to do with
the "endurance limit" of steel. Below certain levels of loading, steel
will not fatigue.

That's not true for aluminum. Somewhere in the range of 10^6 and 10^7
cycles, steel's tendency to break from fatigue flattens out. With
aluminum, the curve never flattens. Even small loads, repeated often
enough, will cause aluminum (or copper) to break from fatigue.

But all of this occurs at loadings lower than the yield strength of
the material.

These two Wikipedia descriptions are pretty good, and succinct:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fatigue_%28material%29

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fatigue_limit


Or, if you're in need of a good read, here's ASM's discussion:

http://www.asminternational.org/documents/10192/1849770/05224G_Chapter14.pdf

--
Ed Huntress

[Ed Huntress]

Very likely it was the lack of curves that gave you better
performance. My description above may have led to the wrong
conclusion: it's a LACK of locally-stiffening compound curves that
allows the sheet to spring away and avoid a dent, if the impact has a
sufficiently short travel. In other words, a short, sharp blow will
allow a flat plate to spring away, but a curved panel puts up local
resistance surrounding the impact and the result is that the impact
overloads the yield stength of the panel in that local spot. Curved
panels make the material stiffer but also more prone to dent.

Your skid plate probably was stiffer and almost certainly stronger, at
T6, than the thinner steel plates. But, being flat, the panel as a
whole could spring away from an intrusion by a rock. The steel, having
lower stiffness and strength, was simply overloaded at the point where
it would bottom on a rock.

Or something like that. <g>

--
Ed Huntress

[Ed Huntress]

On Sat, 18 Apr 2015 14:28:44 -0400, Leon Fisk
<lf...@no.spam.iserv.net> wrote:

>On Sat, 18 Apr 2015 11:21:17 -0400
>Joe Gwinn <joeg...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
><snip>
>>My big worry with aluminum and such alloys is fatigue resistance. All
>>the aluminum products I've had fail did so because a boss or weld or
>>the like fatigued and broke free. Typically not economically
>>repairable, although in a car the economics will differ.
>
>And mine is how will they hold up to all the deicing chemicals spread
>willy-nilly on our roads all winter long?

Probably much better than steel. They make salt water workboats out of
5052 and 6061.

>
>I think the electric vehicles are going to have problems due to the
>salt and cold too. Only time will tell I guess...
>
>Heck they can't even keep their brake-lines from rusting through in the
>rust belt. NHTSA says that people have to wash their vehicles more
>often...
>
>http://www.abc2news.com/business/consumer/no-gm-brake-line-recall-govt-says-wash-your-car

--

Ed Huntress

[jon_banquer]

Doesn't really matter if it's aluminum or steel. slow eddy couldn't repair it properly.

[Ned Simmons]

On Sat, 18 Apr 2015 10:01:13 -0400, Ed Huntress
<hunt...@optonline.net> wrote:


>

>Remember that the stiffness and strength of a panel varies with the
>*cube* of its thickness.

Stiffness in bending varies with the cube of thickness. Strength is
proportional to the thickness _squared_. For simple cases and for the
sake of rough comparisons, anyway.

--
Ned Simmons

[Ed Huntress]

On Sat, 18 Apr 2015 15:46:21 -0400, Ned Simmons <ne...@nedsim.com>
wrote:

Ah, right, Ned. Thanks. I always forget that because I'm almost always
looking at stiffness.

--
Ed Huntress

[et...@whidbey.com]

On Sat, 18 Apr 2015 11:31:13 -0400, "Phil Kangas"
<pka...@upalphacomm.net> wrote:

>

Aluminum boats are primarily 5000 series alloys because of corrosion
resistance. Next in line of importance is the welding of it doesn't
have the same weakening effect in the HAZ that it does on 6000 series
alloys.
Eric, from Whidbey Island, where lots of aluminum boats are built, and
where I deal a lot with aluminum boat builders.
Eric

[David R. Birch]

Braggart!

David

[Ed Huntress]

Oh, jesus. <g> No, not that kind of stiffness. Chassis stiffness. Tool
stiffness -- and not that kind of tool, either. Whipped egg-white
stiffness. You know. d8-)

--
Ed Huntress

[Phil Kangas]

<et...@whidbey.com> wrote in message
news:hbj5jah279gcjd9gj...@4ax.com...

+ 1 phil k.

[Richard]

On 4/16/2015 6:52 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
> I just got back from an engineering conference in Detroit on
> "lightweighting" cars and trucks, which was an exceptionally good one,
> but one mundane fact set me back in my chair. Ford has four stamping
> plants making body parts for the new aluminum F-150. At the biggest
> one, at the old Rouge plant, their stamping line fills an
> 11-ton-capacity truck with aluminum stamping scrap every 20 minutes.
> The trucks are lined up to haul it back to the mills.
>
> That's a lot of aluminum. All of the US and European car makers have
> high-quantity aluminum vehicles in the works, and the world's aluminum
> producers have been building new plants just to deal with it.

>
> Ford will make around 600,000 F-150s this year, so the scrap rate
> isn't three-shifts every day, but still...
>

I don't mean to be a killjoy here, but I can't imagine what these things
are going to cost!

[Jim Wilkins]

"Richard" <cave...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:79adnU38cspLna7I...@earthlink.com...

They start at $25,000.

-jsw

[Ed Huntress]

On Sat, 18 Apr 2015 20:12:14 -0500, Richard <cave...@earthlink.net>
wrote:

They start around $26,000 and go north, fast.

They're already on the market, Richard. You can check out the actual
prices.

--
Ed Huntress

[mog...@hotmail.com]

Well, I hate to harp on Aluminum, but let see here: The quote "Flammability of Aluminum" turns up 25,300 search results.
The quote "Flammability of Steel" turns up only 10 search results.

[Ed Huntress]

Try taking a piece of aluminum sheet and see if you can start a fire
with it.

When you get frustrated, come on back and we can talk about why that
happened.

--
Ed Huntress

[Ed Huntress]

I think you need to do a little further checking, especially regarding
the cause of fires from aluminum wiring -- since you apparently are an
electrician.

In such a fire, the aluminum wire doesn't burn. It starts a fire in
the surrounding material through one of two causes: a high-resistance
overheating, caused by loosening of the connection (aluminum's thermal
expansion rate makes it unsuitable for use with conventional wiring
connections); or from arcing caused by "micro-fretting" of the
aluminum. If you're involved in electrical wiring for buildings, you
should know this.

The flammability of aluminum, contrary to popular mythology, is very
low. The flammability tests performed at atmospheric pressure, in air,
consistently show that it won't sustain a fire. The flammability tests
you're probably seeing are conducted in pure oxygen at pressures above
atmospheric.

Aluminum powder is combustible and explosive. Wrought or cast aluminum
is not. The British warship that burned in the Falkland Islands war,
the Sheffield, did not have an aluminum superstructure, contrary to
ill-informed media reports. It was steel. And it did not burn. Diesel
fuel is what burned.

The video of a Ford truck prototype burning, that someone posted here
yesterday, apparently do not show the aluminum burning. It shows the
vinyl "disguise" cover burning, and burning of the plastics and
probably some fuel, but the aluminum just melted into a heap.

So be careful about the ideas you're promoting about aluminum burning.

--
Ed Huntress

[jon_banquer]

Do you mean the same aluminum sheet you gave up trying to form and quit on?

Talk about not being able to handle frustration!

The reason slow eddy is a worthless, ad copy writer with no clues is that he has no talent for metalworking. slow eddy thinks he can learn metalworking from reading a book. The same applies to race engine building... another one of slow eddy's many failures.

[jon_banquer]

On Sunday, April 19, 2015 at 10:53:16 AM UTC-7, Ed Huntress wrote:

> I think you need to do a little further checking, especially regarding
> the cause of fires from aluminum wiring -- since you apparently are an
> electrician.

Apparently?

Why doesn't slow eddy just ask him?

Is this yet another example of slow eddy getting it wrong because he makes assumptions rather than having the guts to ask?

[dca...@krl.org]

On Sunday, April 19, 2015 at 10:54:42 AM UTC-4, mog...@hotmail.com wrote:

>
> Well, I hate to harp on Aluminum, but let see here: The quote "Flammability of Aluminum" turns up 25,300 search results.
> The quote "Flammability of Steel" turns up only 10 search results.

I do not think that means very much. I did a search on " Flammability of water " and got 6,470,000 search results. Do you think that water is much more flammable than steel?

Aluminum powder will burn fairly easily, but if you use a oxy acet torch on aluminum , you just get blobs of melted aluminum. Steel on the other hand can be cut with a oxy acet torch.

Dan

[cl...@snyder.on.ca]

And then grab a piece of steel wool, and light a match to it - let us
know what happened.

[Richard]

pass.

[jon_banquer]

Good move.

[Martin Eastburn]

Oxidation of Aluminum causes heat.
Martin

[Martin Eastburn]

Don't drop aluminum foil into a beaker of HCL or for that much FeCl.
Either will cause explosions (steam) and extreme heat with light.

Martin

[Ed Huntress]

On Sun, 19 Apr 2015 21:32:22 -0500, Martin Eastburn
<lion...@consolidated.net> wrote:

>Don't drop aluminum foil into a beaker of HCL or for that much FeCl.
>Either will cause explosions (steam) and extreme heat with light.
>
>Martin

Moral of that story: Don't soak your truck in hydrochloric acid. d8-)

--
Ed Huntress

[walter_...@post.com]

Aluminum is not the end of the world. Regardless of the purpose, there is simply less of a fire safety question with steel. Search engine inquiries show that.

If only you'd stop missing or diverting from the point that steel, copper and most other metals are in fact looking safer than aluminum (which was the original point).

[walter_...@post.com]

The poster said he was not licensed as an electrician. So that's not even an issue.

[Ed Huntress]

On Mon, 20 Apr 2015 12:13:51 -0700 (PDT), walter_...@post.com
wrote:

Go look at your "search engine inquiries" and find us an example of
aluminum sheet, plate, wire, or casting burning in air.

You'll be looking for a long time.

--
Ed Huntress

[Ed Huntress]

On Mon, 20 Apr 2015 12:15:25 -0700 (PDT), walter_...@post.com
wrote:

He's mentioned wiring in his work several times in recent months, but
without further comment. So, licensed or not, he appears to be an
electrician of some sort.

--
Ed Huntress

[jon_banquer]

Typical slow eddy bullshit. slow eddy refuses to ask and would rather make his usual wild guesses.

slow eddy is not only a liar of epic proportions (think Mark Wieber) but he's also very lazy.

[dca...@krl.org]

On Monday, April 20, 2015 at 3:13:55 PM UTC-4, walter_...@post.com wrote:
>>>

> Aluminum is not the end of the world. Regardless of the purpose, there is simply less of a fire safety question with steel. Search engine inquiries show that.
>
> If only you'd stop missing or diverting from the point that steel, copper and most other metals are in fact looking safer than aluminum (which was the original point).

But Aluminum is safe enough for use in airplanes and trucks. Safer than most other metals as Titanium, Magnesium, Lithium, beryllium, sodium, potassium and Zinc.

Dan

[Ed Huntress]

And hundreds of thousands of aluminum-bodied cars have been built
since the 1920s -- Land Rover, Jaguar, Audi, and dozens of specialty
makes, from Shelby to Ferrari, Lotus to Maserati.

Their aluminum bodywork does not burn.

--
Ed Huntress

[John B.]

BUT! if one does not use a certain specific CAD program they might
burn :-)
--
cheers,

John B.

[Ed Huntress]

On Tue, 21 Apr 2015 07:13:04 +0700, John B. <johnbs...@gmail.com>

That's Ok. Just wait a week, and it will be a different CAD program...
d8-)

--
Ed Huntress

[Martin Eastburn]

That moral has an extension - keep any truck away from HCL.

We have tankers of HCL and other nasty stuff float through
town from time to time. The Railroad hauls them and some truckers.

Saw my first liquid Nitrogen - NOx truck here was used to it in San
Jose. Also saw a first Oxygen tanker. Both give me willies.

Oxygen if flowing on blacktop will detonate under your feet if you
run through a cloud of it flowing on the highway. Shatter your tires...

Fun stuff. Propane cooks and floats. LOX freezes/shatters/bleaches....
and when mixed with tar a dense hydro-carbon - it is fun city. If water
is in or under the road, sections (pothole making) well up and here
comes movement.

Not as bad as the RED trucks toting Hydrogen.

Martin

[jon_banquer]

On Monday, April 20, 2015 at 5:24:00 PM UTC-7, slow eddy wrote:

> That's Ok. Just wait a week, and it will be a different CAD program...
> d8-)
>
> --
> Ed Huntress

The only CAD program slow eddy can use is Rhino and he's not very good at it.

slow eddy is still stuck in the Cadkey days.

[David R. Birch]

On 4/20/2015 7:23 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:

> That's Ok. Just wait a week, and it will be a different CAD program...
> d8-)

I recommend EZCAD, my first CAD program, all on a 360k floppy and ran on
DOS. It really zoomed after I installed an 8087!

David

[Ed Huntress]

But was it seamless, integrated, pasteurized and defenestrated? If
not, it's not modern and advanced. d8-)

--
Ed Huntress

[jon_banquer]

No matter what it was slow eddy wouldn't be able to master it, just like he has never mastered any CAD program in his entire life.

[David R. Birch]

All that and still too complex for Jon Boy!

David

[Ed Huntress]

On Tue, 21 Apr 2015 06:54:35 -0500, "David R. Birch"

<dbi...@wi.rr.com> wrote:

>On 4/20/2015 11:33 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
>> On Mon, 20 Apr 2015 23:09:26 -0500, "David R. Birch"
>> <dbi...@wi.rr.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 4/20/2015 7:23 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
>>>
>>>> That's Ok. Just wait a week, and it will be a different CAD program...
>>>> d8-)
>>>
>>> I recommend EZCAD, my first CAD program, all on a 360k floppy and ran on
>>> DOS. It really zoomed after I installed an 8087!
>>>
>>> David
>>
>> But was it seamless, integrated, pasteurized and defenestrated? If
>> not, it's not modern and advanced. d8-)
>
>All that and still too complex for Jon Boy!
>
>David

If it only had pushrods...

--
Ed Huntress

[jon_banquer]

As David R. Bitch proved when he complained about SolidWorks older versions not being able to read newer SolidWorks version files... he's a complete CADCAM moron with no clues. He never had them and he never will have them.

David R. Bitch was told by many posting in a thread he started to complain about SolidWorks that he was a complete idiot and totally unreasonable. It's time for David R. Bitch to retire. Technology has passed him by. It passed him by decades ago which is why he works in sheet metal shop in the IT department.

David R. Bitch doesn't do any advanced CNC machining. Never has. Never will.

[jon_banquer]

On Tuesday, April 21, 2015 at 6:59:43 AM UTC-7, slow eddy wrote:

> If it only had pushrods...
>
> --
> Ed Huntress

If only slow eddy had a clue and wasn't a worthless, pay for play, ad copy writer with no modern, state of the art, hands on, CNC machining job shop experience.

[Jim Wilkins]

"Ed Huntress" <hunt...@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:1kkbjah3g6npu6uo4...@4ax.com...

If it isn't Systematic, Hydromatic and Automatic it isn't Greased
Lightning:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4l2tLIZHlBQ

[Ed Huntress]

Ha-ha! Man, oh, man...chromed pushrods and Banquer fins!

--
Ed Huntress

[jon_banquer]

You mean the pushrod motor that has won 2 out of 3 races this year in IMSA Tudor prototype racing beating Ford's overhead CAM motor? :>)

Time to regurgitate some more worthless ad copy for your next pay for play assignment.

[jon_banquer]

Are you sure you don't want to experience these types of problems :>)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AwKKBAc5OPw

[walter_...@post.com]

Jon (and everyone else here), Aluminum isn't bad. Its just that its tough to imagine a customer pondering trusting a largely aluminum car to carry his young family around. But then again, I guess if the engineers and their salesmen can come-up with such a good sales pitch (whatever that may be), then hey !!

Ed's right.

[jon_banquer]

I'll pass on the EcoBoost and stay with a quality, reliable, proven, economical pushrod V6 or V8

By all means you feel free to buy the overpriced F150 with the EcoBoost in it because "Ed's right".

[Ed Huntress]

On Wed, 22 Apr 2015 09:39:10 -0700 (PDT), walter_...@post.com
wrote:

Safety and structural integrity are the products of good engineering,
not just materials. The aluminum F-150 has a safety rating of five
stars from NHTSA. The previous, steel-bodied F-150s never scored above
four.

Those are independent and very thorough tests. The engineering behind
the crash/crush-structure and intrusion protection of the 2015
vehicles, including those made of aluminum, is vastly better than they
were a decade or two ago.

So your family is safer in one of these, whether steel or aluminum,
than in practically anything built 20 years ago.

--
Ed Huntress

[David Billington]

In looking at some information about this vehicle I ran across Range
Rover having started producing their premium vehicles in aluminium back
in 2013.

[Ed Huntress]

On Wed, 22 Apr 2015 19:19:37 +0100, David Billington <d...@invalid.com>
wrote:

And Land Rover was aluminum-bodied since 1948.

--
Ed Huntress

[dca...@krl.org]

On Wednesday, April 22, 2015 at 12:39:15 PM UTC-4, walter_...@post.com wrote:

>
> Jon (and everyone else here), Aluminum isn't bad. Its just that its tough to imagine a customer pondering trusting a largely aluminum car to carry his young family around. But then again, I guess if the engineers and their salesmen can come-up with such a good sales pitch (whatever that may be), then hey !!
>
> Ed's right.

Aluminum is really good stuff. Look at all the airplanes built with aluminum. The major problem is the cost. And it looks like that has been solved with the recycling of the scrap pieces.

Dan

[Jim Wilkins]

"David Billington" <d...@invalid.com> wrote in message
news:mh8olu$e3t$1...@dont-email.me...

Land Rovers have had aluminum bodies since 1948.

-jsw

[walter_...@post.com]

Well, I bet you'll certainly never be brave enough to take a spin or so in a mostly-aluminum car. Or will you? Did the almighty salesman convince you?

I doubt they could convince hardly anyone after the word "all aluminum" gets out.

(but then again, I guess I've seen a lot of things)

[jon_banquer]

I don't have any issue with Ford's use of Aluminum for the body.

I have issues with the Ford EcoBoost engine.

I've got better things to do with my money than to pay to be a beta tester for Ford.