Jump to content

EV architecture divide automakers


Recommended Posts

EV architecture divide automakers

September 21, 2019 12:05 AM 

NICK GIBBS

https://www.autonews.com/manufacturing/ev-architecture-divide-automakers

 

Quote

A new debate is raging among the world's automotive companies, and it will likely take years to sort out. Its simple question: Should electric cars be constructed differently from combustion-engine cars?

Ulf Sudowe says yes.

The r&d director for chassis at Spanish supplier Gestamp Automoción gives the example of the time it tested an electric motor on the subframe of a standard Volkswagen Up minicar.

"Everything was destroyed," Sudowe said. The ramp-up of torque for an electric motor happens so fast, he said, that a standard subframe couldn't cope.

For the electric e-Up, Gestamp developed a unique subframe. But the difference between the two meant that new stamping dies were needed for the new subframe, increasing the costs and complexity of producing the electric version.

 

Volkswagen Group worked hard to avoid such complexity when creating its Modular Electric Toolkit, commonly known as MEB. The $7 billion investment is expected to enable VW Group to build everything from compact cars to large minivans using many of the same parts, providing the crucial economies of scale that the company says will enable it to make electric vehicles profitably.

VW will build MEB vehicles in eight locations globally starting in 2022, and the company predicts it will sell 15 million vehicles on the platform in the next decade.

But what if it doesn't?

"If the EV demand isn't there, Wolfsburg is going to have a big, big problem," Max Warburton, an analyst at research and brokerage firm Sanford C. Bernstein, wrote in a report.

Other manufacturers have the same fears.

 

"If we predict the success of the 3 series, we are pretty much spot on," Oliver Zipse, the new CEO of BMW Group, said just before his appointment was announced in July. "Predicting electromobility is much more difficult."

This is not 2030

BMW, Jaguar Land Rover and PSA Group have rejected VW's solution of a stand-alone platform. Instead, they are creating flexible platforms that encompass combustion and electric drivetrains.

"In 2030, we might have a different approach," Zipse acknowledged. "But we are not living in 2030, and we believe very firmly this is the right answer to keep the company afloat and profitable."

By keeping platforms flexible, BMW can adjust production of a drivetrain based on demand, Zipse said. Factories can be easily adapted. "To integrate different drivetrains in one plant without losing efficiency, that's the secret," he said. "Either you can do that or you cannot. And we can do it."

And customers won't care, Zipse said.

"You will not feel any difference between a single-purpose platform, a conversion platform or a flexible architecture," he said. "Maybe two kilograms here or there. But it's not relevant for a buying decision."

Not everyone agrees.

"In an ideal world, you would do everything on a bespoke platform," said Tim Urquhart, principal automotive analyst at IHS Markit. "The whole point of an EV platform is that it doesn't have to be too complex. You have the skateboard platform and have a blank canvas. It will afford you many more advantages."

Simplifications to an EV-only platform might include dropping the brake calipers and drums on the rear axle because brake regeneration means they're no longer needed, said Patricio Barbale, senior chassis analyst at IHS Markit. And using electric power to introduce more energy-hungry electric systems, such as steer-by-wire, saves space.

For the MEB platform, VW has switched to rear-wheel drive on the simpler versions, which means the instant power delivered won't corrupt the steering. VW also emphasizes that its cabins will be larger because they can push farther forward into space that no longer contains an internal combustion engine.

"The length of a Golf, the room of a Passat" is how VW describes the first car on the MEB platform, the ID3, which was unveiled this month at the Frankfurt auto show and will go on sale next year.

The fossil age

An automaker that builds on a unique platform can market the car differently from a similar-size combustion-engine version of the model. That will be important given that — for a few years yet, anyway — the expense of the battery pack will price electric models higher. VW is already doing this.

"The Modular Electric Toolkit jettisons all the ballast of the fossil age," VW declared in its marketing. MEB, it said, led to "fundamental" changes for everything from body design to interior packaging.

Meanwhile, an EV on a flexible platform could inspire unfavorable comparisons to its cheaper combustion-engine version.

But VW isn't the only one investing in EV-only platforms. Daimler is working on the Electric Vehicle Architecture, or EVA2, which is expected to reach the market in 2021. Two sedans and two SUVs will likely use it first.

Meanwhile, Renault-Nissan-Mitsubishi is developing the CMA, an electric-only, flat-floor version of its broader Common Module Family architecture. It is expected in 2022. And in Japan, Toyota is working with Subaru on an EV-only platform it announced in June. No timing has been given.

EV-only platform designs with the batteries sandwiched in the floor present their own problems. The batteries raise the height of the floor, reducing rear foot space, as a quick test of the ID3's rear seats at Frankfurt revealed. And in vehicles in which the battery box's size pushes toward the edges of the structure, more crash protection is needed.

"In a side impact, you have a very limited zone of deformation to the battery — about half," said Niclas Brännberg, director of computer-aided engineering for the Chinese EV brand Nio. That means extra stiffness, meaning more expensive extruded aluminum beams for Nio. But Brännberg, who previously worked for Volvo and Saab, estimates that the cost of developing an EV-only platform is similar to that of a combustion-engine platform.

VW is way ahead on cost with MEB, said Sudowe of Gestamp, which builds battery boxes and chassis parts for vehicles using that platform. "MEB will be the benchmark for everyone," he said. "It's very good on the price perspective." For example, all MEB models except the minivan will use the same control arms, saving money on dies.

Sudowe estimated that MEB is around half the cost of the EV-only platform Jaguar Land Rover developed for the Jaguar I-Pace.

The I-Pace platform, designed as a halo car to beat Jaguar's premium rivals to market, is not expected to be further developed. Instead JLR will migrate models to its new flexible Modular Longitudinal Architecture starting next year. The first model to use it will be an electric version of the XJ large sedan.

Hedging

In some cases, suppliers are being asked to plan flexibility into their EV-specific parts, in case production volumes prove to be lower than forecast — or higher.

"Today, probably none of our customers are absolutely sure how fast the market is going to move to EVs," Gestamp Executive Chairman Francisco Riberas told Automotive News Europe. VW recently doubled its order of battery boxes for MEB cars from Gestamp to 570,000 a year. The order indicates growing confidence that customers will switch to EVs as European laws tighten to combat carbon dioxide emission levels starting in 2020.

VW's confidence is partly because it has the scale. That is increasing now that Ford Motor Co. has agreed to use VW's MEB for a range of European electric cars. For automakers without the brand reach to spread the investment, a flexible platform makes more sense.

"They want to minimize the risk," Riberas said. "Even if maybe a platform is not the best for EVs, they adapt it so they have a bit more flexibility in terms of volumes. It might not be the best solution, but it will probably be the most intelligent."

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quite the Euro-centric article - but look at the author. We know for a fact that Ford have 2 different EV chassis on the way, and that's just for cars (Mach E) and CUV's (the twins under development); if we include F150 EV and Transit for Europe, that's 4. Yet this guy is hung up on writing down BMW's excuses for not being able to build a business case to design a bespoke chassis. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think having an EV centric platform is definitely the way to go. Sure, BMW’s strategy of developing one platform for both ICE and battery vehicles is probably cheaper now, but they are failing to see the future. There are so many things you can do with a vehicle if you don’t have to design for an engine, or drive shaft, or any other part that an electric vehicle doesn’t need. Look at Rivian vs any other electric vehicle on the market as an example. The reason I like the Rivian so much despite its face is all the innovated new features they brought to the table. My favorite was the storage area behind the rear seats. That’s just the tip of the iceberg too. Without the design constraints of an ICE platform, who knows what designers will come up with in the future.

 

rivian-kitchen.jpg?w=730&crop=1GettyImages-1072928622.jpg?w=730&crop=1

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Harley Lover said:

Yet this guy is hung up on writing down BMW's excuses for not being able to build a business case to design a bespoke chassis. 

 

The author may be doing that to highlight the struggles of Europe's auto industry as it prepares for the inevitable transition to BEV. Of the carmakers he mentioned in the article, BMW is probably the one clinging most strongly to the "fossil age". VW + Ford partnership by contrast seems to be most focused on the industry's future, which as T-dubz said will benefit from EV-centric platforms.

 

Would be nice to get the author's opinion of Daimler's EV product development strategy and how it compares to VW, Ford, JLR, PSA Group, Toyota, Subaru, and Renault-Nissan-Mitsubishi Alliance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Harley Lover said:

Quite the Euro-centric article - but look at the author. We know for a fact that Ford have 2 different EV chassis on the way, and that's just for cars (Mach E) and CUV's (the twins under development); if we include F150 EV and Transit for Europe, that's 4. Yet this guy is hung up on writing down BMW's excuses for not being able to build a business case to design a bespoke chassis. 

Under Fields Ford was heading down the path of conjoining BEV vehicles with the newer C2 Architecture, he advocated for more HEV PHEV direction than pure BEV but now we’re in a different time where money is no object, VW spending $7 billion on its BEV architecture 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jpd80 said:

Fixing the silent danger of BEVs,

Give the Mach E the shake and rattle  sound track of a 429 Boss....

I am really hoping Ford has plans for a Mustang engine soundtrack for the Mach-E considering it's 'Mustang-inspired'. Drivers having an option to turn it on or off and the soundtrack plays through the sound speakers as if the big block V8 is roaring when the Mach-E is accelerating. I do recall they played the V8 sound effect at the Detroit Auto Show in 2018 where they announced the Mach-E.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/22/2019 at 3:29 AM, pffan1990 said:

I am really hoping Ford has plans for a Mustang engine soundtrack for the Mach-E considering it's 'Mustang-inspired'. Drivers having an option to turn it on or off and the soundtrack plays through the sound speakers as if the big block V8 is roaring when the Mach-E is accelerating. I do recall they played the V8 sound effect at the Detroit Auto Show in 2018 where they announced the Mach-E.

 

One of the requirements is that BEVs generate noise at lower speeds for vision impaired people and pedestrians in an Urban/city environment. The sound of a big block V8 would work :)

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't understand how these automakers expect the U.S. to take on millions of EV's within a relatively short time frame. I live in Central Pennsylvania (which has a few highly traveled Interstate Highways), and EV charging ports are still a rarity. Those of us who live outside of places like California don't have access to chargers. The infrastructure simply isn't there yet. Will there be any move in that direction? I'm not seeing many more EV chargers being installed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Dequindre said:

I live in Central Pennsylvania (which has a few highly traveled Interstate Highways), and EV charging ports are still a rarity. Those of us who live outside of places like California don't have access to chargers. The infrastructure simply isn't there yet. Will there be any move in that direction? I'm not seeing many more EV chargers being installed. 

 

In 2011, Pennsylvania DEP planned to install EV charging stations at every service plaza on the PA Turnpike. But they terminated that project in 2017. At that point, service plazas on much of the Turnpike east of New Stanton and west of Bowmansville did not get charging stations. See gray pinpoints on the map.

 

PlugInSites_PATurnpikemap2.png?w=625&ssl

 

Good news is that Pennsylvania's government recognizes the importance of increasing EV use and  the "need for greater focus on EVSE (charging station) deployment to help support EV market penetration". http://files.dep.state.pa.us/Energy/OfficeofPollutionPrevention/StateEnergyProgram/PAEVRoadmap.pdf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, rperez817 said:

 

In 2011, Pennsylvania DEP planned to install EV charging stations at every service plaza on the PA Turnpike. But they terminated that project in 2017. At that point, service plazas on much of the Turnpike east of New Stanton and west of Bowmansville did not get charging stations. See gray pinpoints on the map.

 

PlugInSites_PATurnpikemap2.png?w=625&ssl

 

Good news is that Pennsylvania's government recognizes the importance of increasing EV use and  the "need for greater focus on EVSE (charging station) deployment to help support EV market penetration". http://files.dep.state.pa.us/Energy/OfficeofPollutionPrevention/StateEnergyProgram/PAEVRoadmap.pdf

And those stops have what, potentially two chargers a piece? That is no where near enough to support a nation with millions of EV's. Charging isn't like "gas and go"... it takes longer. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Dequindre said:

And those stops have what, potentially two chargers a piece? That is no where near enough to support a nation with millions of EV's. Charging isn't like "gas and go"... it takes longer. 

 

Not sure what your commute is like, but technically you can top off every night at your house. It might pose an issue if your traveling long distance, but if the demand is there for more charging stations, they'll add them. The way the market is going and the age of vehicles, its not going to be like someone added millions of BEVs over night-its going to be a gradual process over the next 10-15 years where it becomes more common place. We aren't going to see more then 40% of market place penetration for another 15 years or so, given the fact the average age of a car on the roads is about 10-12 years old. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With a 200+ mile range charging stations should only be needed for long trips out of town or folks who drive all day.    Most others can charge at home overnight and/or at work.

 

The problem is convincing people that the inconvenience on long trips a few times a year is worth it.   That's why I think a PHEV fits better today because you can use EV mode 95% of the time but don't have to worry when you do need to take a long trip.

 

If PHEVs can reduce fuel consumption by 80% with none of the charging concerns then why isn't that a better interim step (along with BEVs for those that want them) for the next few years?

Edited by akirby
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, HotRunrGuy said:

All joking aside, does this "ebuggy" concept of battery trailers available for hook-up & go capacity make any sense for extending range on a as-needed basis?

 

https://www.greencarreports.com/news/1091768_ebuggy-electric-car-trailer-boosts-range-by-300-miles-looks-a-bit-silly

 

HRG

 

Or, you can get one of these babies, although, they may want to re-think the branding...a certain manufacturer may have issue with the model name.


https://www.solardirekt.com/en/products/ikube-f150/

 

Related image

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, HotRunrGuy said:

All joking aside, does this "ebuggy" concept of battery trailers available for hook-up & go capacity make any sense for extending range on a as-needed basis?

 

https://www.greencarreports.com/news/1091768_ebuggy-electric-car-trailer-boosts-range-by-300-miles-looks-a-bit-silly

 

HRG

ebuggy-electric-range-extending-trailer-concept_100465369_h.jpg

 

Wouldn't you reduce your range by towing a heavy battery trailer?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...