Ford F-150

On Thu, 16 Apr 2015 19:52:00 -0400, Ed Huntress wrote:


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

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

I'll get a chance to look them over in a month or two and I'll report back.
--
Ed Huntress

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thursday, April 16, 2015 at 7:52:04 PM UTC-4, Ed Huntress wrote:

The Wall Street Journal had an article on Jan 8th about the shift to Alumin um. 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 cou ld supply the aluminum sheet. Alcoa, Novells, Logan Aluminum, and Constel lium. Did you find out who is supplying Ford? I would expect more than on e company is making the aluminum.
Dan
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 17 Apr 2015 05:11:20 -0700 (PDT), " snipped-for-privacy@krl.org"

Alcoa and Novelis.
--
Ed Huntress

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 17 Apr 2015 05:11:20 -0700, snipped-for-privacy@krl.org wrote:

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
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 17 Apr 2015 11:40:18 -0500, Tim Wescott

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

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 18/04/15 02:46, Ed Huntress wrote:

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.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
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.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 18 Apr 2015 06:42:50 -0500, Pete Keillor

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.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 18 Apr 2015 08:42:15 -0400, snipped-for-privacy@snyder.on.ca wrote:

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

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

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
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
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

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
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
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 18 Apr 2015 14:23:35 -0400, snipped-for-privacy@snyder.on.ca wrote:

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

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 18 Apr 2015 11:21:17 -0400
<snip>

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
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 18 Apr 2015 14:28:44 -0400, Leon Fisk

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

--
Ed Huntress

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Saturday, April 18, 2015 at 10:01:17 AM UTC-4, Ed Huntress wrote:

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.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 18/04/15 16:31, snipped-for-privacy@hotmail.com wrote:

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.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Saturday, April 18, 2015 at 12:12:22 PM UTC-4, David Billington 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.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sun, 19 Apr 2015 07:54:40 -0700 (PDT), snipped-for-privacy@hotmail.com wrote:

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

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.