UCSB GHG Model Version 3.

0 Workshop
Case Study 2 – Battery Electric Vehicle

BACKGROUND
Automakers are coupling advanced
powertrains and aggressive light-
weighting in an effort to meet more
stringent emissions regulations. There
are several A-class vehicles under
development that utilize a battery electric
powertrain, to minimize use-phase
emissions which are related to the
energy consumed during battery
recharging. As use phase emissions are
driven to ultra-low values, material
production emissions account for a
greater percentage of total vehicle life
cycle emissions. In fact, depending
upon the energy source, production
emissions may become the dominant life cycle phase. It is important for the steel industry to be able to
evaluate these competitive threats, in terms of mass, cost and environmental performance.

CASE STUDY 2 – BATTERY ELECTRIC VEHICLE (BEV)

Vehicle Selection and Material Composition

1) Powertrain Selection: BEV.
2) Vehicle Class: This case study involves an A-class vehicle; the curb weight is 1097 kg.
3) Body Structure: The conventional steel body structure from which the program was derived
weighted 260 kg and used stamping processes for 100% of the sheet metal fabrication. A new
AHSS body structure utilizes advanced fabrication techniques that average 22% engineered scrap.
It weighs 65 kg less than the original body structure. *Please determine the material replacement
coefficient for AHSS in this structure.
4) Material Composition: please compare the AHSS-intensive vehicle with a multi-material vehicle,
characterized by the following composition: 35% AHSS, 40% Al, 10% SMC and 15% CFRP. Al
components are hydroformed and stamped, with an average manufacturing yield = 65%. AHSS
components are roll-formed and stamped, with an average manufacturing yield = 70%.
Replacement coefficients for the multi-material vehicle:
a. AHSS = 70%.
b. Aluminium = 65%.
c. Composites= 50%.
5) Please compare secondary mass reduction rates of 30% and 45%.

Vehicle Use Phase

1) Vehicle lifetime is anticipated to be 150,000 km.
2) Please explore both the NEDC and HYZEM in this case study.
3) This vehicle is sold in Japan and Europe.
4) Powertrains are re-sized for equivalent performance.

Material Recycling
1) Please conduct your GHG assessment using an Alpha value = 0.1.

Page 1 of 2
 UCSB GHG Model Version 3.0 Workshop
Case Study 2 – Battery Electric Vehicle

Report-Out
Please compare emissions performance for the various material platforms in all life cycle phases, including
Total Vehicle Life Cycle Emissions. If possible, please calculate the cross-over distance, where the multi-
material vehicle shows equivalent emissions performance with the AHSS- intensive vehicle.

In kg of CO2e
Vehicle
Final Body Vehicle Life
Body Structure Mass (kg) Mass (kg) Material Recycling Use Cycle
Conv Steel
AHSS
Multi-Material Vehicle

OBSERVATIONS / CONCLUSIONS

1. _______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________

2. _______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________

3. _______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________

4. _______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________

5. _______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________

Page 2 of 2
 UCSB GHG Model Version 3.0 Workshop
Case Study 1 - Multi-Material Vehicle

BACKGROUND

Automakers are coupling advanced powertrains and

aggressive light-weighting in an effort to meet more
stringent emissions regulations. Many vehicles under
development employ a multi-material body structure,
where low density materials have replaced steel in
conceptual designs. It is important for the steel industry
to be able to evaluate these competitive threats, in
terms of mass, cost and environmental performance.

CASE STUDY 1 – MULTI-MATERIAL VEHICLE CONCEPT

Vehicle Selection and Material Composition

1) Powertrain Selection: Please compare vehicle life cycle performance for both ICE-gasoline and
HEV powertrains.
2) Vehicle Class: This case study involves a C-class (compact) baseline vehicle.
3) Material Composition: Please develop (1) an AHSS-intensive vehicle, (2) an Aluminium-intensive
vehicle, and (3) a multi-material vehicle, based on the SLC material composition. The AHSS
vehicle has a body structure that is 33% less than a conventional steel body structure.
Replacement coefficients (compared to conventional steel):
a. Aluminium = 65%
b. Carbon Fiber = 45%
c. Magnesium = 50%
4) Secondary weight savings are uncompounded, and expected to average 30% of primary mass
savings.

Vehicle Use Phase

1) Vehicle lifetime is anticipated to be 200,000 km.
2) Please explore both the NEDC and U.S. (SAE J1711) Drive Cycles in this case study.
3) Fuel contains 0% ethanol.
4) Use energy demand and energy savings based on the latest powertrain engine maps.
5) Powertrains may or may not be re-sized for equivalent performance, depending upon cost.

Material Recycling
1) Please conduct your GHG assessment using an Alpha value = 0.1.

Page 1 of 2
 UCSB GHG Model Version 3.0 Workshop
Case Study 1 - Multi-Material Vehicle

Report-Out
Please compare emissions performance for the various material platforms in all life cycle phases, including
Total Vehicle Life Cycle Emissions. If possible, please calculate the cross-over distance, where the multi-
material vehicle shows equivalent emissions performance with the AHSS- intensive vehicle.

In kg of CO2e
Vehicle
Final Body Vehicle Life
Body Structure Mass (kg) Mass (kg) Material Recycling Use Cycle
Conv Steel
AHSS
Aluminium
Multi-Material Vehicle

OBSERVATIONS / CONCLUSIONS

1. _______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________

2. _______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________

3. _______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________

4. _______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________

5. _______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________

Page 2 of 2