Radiation Curing of Composites For Vehicle Components

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 8

1 AP/IA-04

Radiation Curing of Composites for Vehicle Components


and Vehicle Manufacture
M.R. Cleland1, R.A. Galloway1, D. Montoney2, D. Dispenza3, A.J. Berejka4
1
IBA Industrial, Inc., Edgewood, New York, USA
2
Strathmore Products, Inc., Syracuse, New York, USA
3
Nordan Composite Technologies, Patchogue, New York, USA
4
Ionicorp+, Huntington, New York, USA

Abstract. Some ordinary uses of metals in vehicle components and vehicle manufacture, such as steel (specific
gravity 7.8) or aluminum (specific gravity 2.7), can be replaced by carbon fiber composites (specific gravity 1.6)
to provide significant weight savings while still maintaining structural integrity. The aircraft and aerospace
industries have adopted this concept. The motor vehicle industry is using composite materials for some non-
structural components in automobiles, but have been reluctant to widely adopt this technology because of
concerns about thermal curing times and other issues in high-volume manufacturing processes. A typical steel
auto body weighing ~750 kilograms would weigh only ~155 kilograms if replaced with carbon fiber composites.
Structural members, such as the vehicle chassis and body frame, could also be made out of carbon fiber
composites. With only 20% of the typical body weight, smaller, lighter, less powerful and more fuel efficient
engines could be used in such vehicles. Commercial aircraft manufacturers have adopted large carbon fiber
structures in lieu of aluminum for a 40% weight reduction and estimate a 20% savings in fuel costs for large
planes. These aircraft still use conventional materials for motors, tires and interior components. The fuel
efficiency of an automobile could be doubled with an 80% weight reduction. As with aircraft, conventional
motors, tires and interior components could be used in automobiles. Radiation curing can simplify the
manufacture of carbon fiber composites. Penetrating X-rays generated with high-energy, high-power electron
beam (EB) accelerators can cure structural composites while they are constrained within inexpensive molds;
thus reducing cure times, eliminating heat transfer concerns and potentially hazardous volatile emissions during
the curing process. Since X-rays can penetrate mold walls, the curing process is quite versatile, enabling diverse
components with varying designs to be cured using a common X-ray generator or multiple parts of the same
design could be cured at the same time. Since the power output of an EB accelerator can be tightly controlled,
EB processing can be used to produce “B” staged, fiber-reinforced composite materials for sheet molding
compounds (SMC) and prepregs. Such materials can significantly reduce the time-to-cure should alternative
energy sources or subsequent X-ray curing be used. In the EB mode, SMC materials can be made at more than
100 meters per minute. The polymeric matrix systems are proprietary formulations based on common radiation
responsive materials which are used in a variety of radiation curing applications.

1. Introduction

Radiation processing is not an entirely new concept for the automobile industry. Several
vehicle parts are already being made with radiation processing, such as tires, foam panels and
high-performance electrical wires. An automobile tire consists of several different
components: an innerliner, several fabric-reinforced body plies, a rubber-encased steel belt,
the sidewalls and the tread. Before the tire is assembled, some components are partially cured
with an electron beam (EB) to stabilize their thickness and to control the positioning of the
steel belts during the thermal curing process. The complete tire is then cured (vulcanized)
using crosslinking agents in the rubber compound by heating the tire in a mold. This EB
process produces a more uniform and better balanced tire, which allows a reduction in the
thickness and weight of the tire. This reduces its production cost by savings on materials [1].

Closed cell polyethylene (PE) foam panels are used inside the passenger compartment for
side panels and for the ceiling header. This foam is made by mixing a blowing agent into the
PE, extruding the PE into a form, crosslinking it with a medium-energy electron beam and
then heating the irradiated PE to convert the blowing agent to a gas and produce a foam. This
process produces controlled small closed cells in the PE. The cell size and the stiffness and
2 AP/IA-04

cushioning properties of the foamed material can be controlled with the radiation dose, the
amount of blowing agent and the grade of material used. The advantage of this method is that
the crosslinking and foaming steps are separate processes. The moderate temperature rise
during irradiation is not enough to initiate blowing [2, 3].

The insulation on high-performance electrical wire can be crosslinked with a medium-energy


electron beam. This allows such wire to be used in high-temperature areas, such as near the
engine or exhaust pipe of an automobile. Crosslinked insulation will not melt or flow when
heated. Flame retardant compounds can be added to the insulation so that it cannot propagate
a fire. Crosslinking also improves the abrasion resistance, toughness and the resistance to oil,
gasoline, and other organic solvents [4].

Some ongoing applications for thermally cured composite materials in automobiles are the
outer body and leaf springs of the GM Corvette, the subframe of the Porsche Carrera GT, and
the entire body of the new electric car being developed by Tesla Motors. High-speed racing
cars use composite materials to reduce weight and increase performance. Information about
these vehicles can be found on the world-wide-web. The Automotive Composites Consortium
(ACC) performed crash tests of an experimental Ford car with a front end section made with
composite materials and concluded that it was as safe as a typical all-metal car [5].

2. X-Ray Curing versus Thermal Curing

High-energy X-rays can be used to cure a composite part while it is inside an inexpensive
mold, which can be made of aluminum, plastic or a cured composite material. In contrast to
thermal curing, whereby the mold must have several heaters strategically placed within it to
achieve a nearly uniform temperature inside a part with a complex shape, X-ray curing
eliminates the need to heat the mold. This simplifies the design of the mold and allows it to
be made with cheaper materials. X-ray curing also eliminates the time required to heat and
cool the mold and its contents, and it reduces the time to complete matrix curing. High-
energy, high-power X-ray generators are now capable of delivering the dose for curing
composite parts within a few minutes.

A thermally cured composite material requires the addition of a catalyst that reduces the
shelf-life of uncured material. In contrast, the matrix formulations for X-ray cured composites
do not require catalysts and are shelf stable. This reduces waste material and provides more
latitude for scheduling manufacturing processes. X-ray curing uses less energy than thermal
curing. The X-ray curable matrix materials contain near-zero volatile organic compounds
(VOCs) and do not pollute the air. Metal parts such as plates for fastening can be embedded
within a composite part and become tightly bonded to the cured composite. Internal shear
stresses at the interfaces between metal and composite are greatly reduced as well as the
stresses between matrix and fibers, that are caused by differences in thermal expansion [6, 7].

3. Physical Properties of High-Energy X-Rays

High-energy X-rays (bremsstrahlung) are emitted by energetic electrons when they strike any
material. The efficiency for converting electron beam power to X-ray power increases with
the energy of the electrons and the atomic number of the target material. Tantalum, tungsten
and gold have properties suitable for X-ray targets, but tantalum is the most convenient and
economical material for making high-power, large-area targets. The efficiencies for X-ray
emission in the forward direction are about 8% with an electron energy of 5.0 MeV, 12%
3 AP/IA-04

with 7.5 MeV and 16% with 10 MeV. The maximum electron energy used for high-power
industrial X-ray generators is usually less than 7.5 MeV. This choice avoids inducing nuclear
reactions in tantalum targets. The low X-ray conversion efficiencies are overcome by using
high-energy, high-power electron beams to obtain the dose rates needed for industrial
radiation processing [8].

The broad energy spectrum of the X-ray photons extends from about 30 keV up to the energy
of the incident electrons. The average photon energy with 5 MeV electrons is near 1.0 MeV
but the peak of the photon spectrum (most probable energy) is about 300 keV. With electron
energies above 2.0 MeV, the angular distribution of the emitted radiation is concentrated in
the direction of the incident electron beam and the X-ray dispersion decreases as the electron
energy increases. The divergent angle at half intensity with a maximum energy of 7.5 MeV is
only about 15 degrees. The forward concentration of high-energy X-rays is different from the
isotropic emission of gamma rays from large area cobalt-60 sources, that are mainly used to
irradiate products which are too thick to be penetrated with primary electron beams. The
narrow angular distribution enhances the utilization efficiency of high-energy X-rays and
increases their penetration in irradiated materials in comparison to cobalt-60 gamma rays. It
also makes it feasible to process single containers of different products which can be rotated
in front of the X-ray target to obtain satisfactory dose uniformity [9].

The absorbed doses with high-energy X-rays decrease exponentially with depth in the treated
material. The tenth-value layers increase with increasing maximum energy. They are 39, 44
and 49 cm in water for maximum energies of 5.0 MeV, 7.5 MeV and 10 MeV, respectively.
The penetration of a broad beam of X-rays with energies above 3.0 MeV is greater than that
from a large area source of cobalt-60 gamma rays, which has a tenth value layer of 31 cm in
water. Optimum product thicknesses for two-sided treatment with a max/min dose uniformity
ratio (DUR) of about 1.5 are 34, 38 and 43 cm in water, or plastic materials with nearly the
same density, for maximum energies of 5.0 MeV, 7.5 MeV and 10 MeV, respectively. The
optimum thickness for cobalt-60 gamma rays is 28 cm of water. Product thicknesses greater
than the optimum values can be irradiated if higher max/min dose ratios are acceptable. The
optimum product thickness makes the most efficient use of the emitted X-ray power. The
characteristic values listed in Table I have been calculated with Monte Carlo codes [10, 11].

TABLE I. PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF HIGH-ENERGY X-RAYS

Electron Mean Emission Tenth Value Layer (cm) Optimum Thickness


Energy Energy Efficiency Present Work Double Sided
(MeV) (MeV) (%) Calculated Measured Previous (g/cm2) Max/Min
10 1.56 16.2 49.0 47.9 49.0 43 1.54
7.5 1.38 13.3 44.3 N/A N/A 38 1.54
5.0 1.19 8.2 39.0 39.5 38.0 34 1.54
Co-60 1.25 31.0 28 1.75

4. High-Energy, High-Power X-Ray Generators

Several industrial irradiation facilities can now provide electron beam and X-ray processing
for a variety of applications. There are three such facilities in Japan. One of these is equipped
with a 5.0 MeV, 150 kW Cockcroft Walton accelerator [12]. Another has a 5.0 MeV, 200 kW
Dynamitron® accelerator [13], and the third facility has a Rhodotron® accelerator with two
beam lines rated for 135 kW at 5.0 MeV and 200 kW at 10 MeV [14]. There are two facilities
4 AP/IA-04

in the United States, which can also provide both electron beam and X-ray processing. One of
these has an L-band microwave linac rated for 150 kW at 5.0 MeV [15]. The other one has a
Rhodotron accelerator with three beam lines rated for 135 kW at 5.0 MeV, 190 kW at 7.0
MeV and 200 kW at 10 MeV [16]. In addition, there is a facility in France, which has an S-
band microwave linac rated for 20 kW at 10 MeV [17]. These facilities use removable X-ray
targets and can irradiate products with either electrons or X-rays.

Recent developments have increased the beam power ratings of high energy electron
accelerators in order to get higher throughput rates for X-ray processing. The Dynamitron
accelerator, made by IBA Industrial, Inc. (formerly Radiation Dynamics, Inc.) in the USA,
has been upgraded from 200 to 300 kW at 5.0 MeV [18]. With 8% power conversion
efficiency, the emitted X-ray power would be 24 kW. This is nearly equivalent in processing
capacity to the gamma-ray power emitted by 2 MCi of cobalt-60. At a typical price of $2.25
per curie, the user’s cost of the cobalt-60 sources at this capacity would be substantially more
than the cost of a 300 kW Dynamitron. The Rhodotron accelerator, made by IBA in Belgium,
has been upgraded from 200 to 500 kW at 5.0 MeV and to 700 kW at 7.0 MeV [19]. The
emitted X-ray power at 5.0 MeV and 500 kW with 8% conversion efficiency would be 40
kW. This would be equivalent to the gamma-ray power emitted by about 3 MCi of cobalt-60.
The emitted X-ray power from the same accelerator operated at 7.0 MeV and 700 kW with
12% conversion efficiency would be 84 kW. This would be equivalent to the gamma ray
power emitted by about 6 MCi of cobalt-60, which just for the cobalt-60 sources would be
substantially more the user’s cost of a 700 kW Rhodotron.

A new Rhodotron facility will soon be completed in Switzerland. It will be used to sterilize
medical products exclusively with X-rays. Continuous operation of this facility will show that
X-ray processing is a practical alternative to gamma-ray processing. More information about
this project can be found on the IBA website: http://www.iba-worldwide.com.

5. Vehicle Components Cured with X-Rays

Several experiments have been done with the 3.0 MeV, 90 kW Dynamitron accelerator in the
facility of IBA Industrial, Inc., which is located in Edgewood, Long Island, New York, to
demonstrate the feasibility of curing carbon fiber reinforced composite materials with X-rays.
These included evaluating several shelf-stable matrix formulations, showing that the liquid,
uncured matrix material can be drawn into an evacuated mold and wet several layers of
woven, carbon fiber twill, and determining the X-ray dose needed to cure the composites.

Several parts with different shapes were cured with X-rays while in simple molds. These
included flat panels, small cups, a motorcycle fender and an automobile fender. See Figures 1,
2, 3, 4 and 5. They were fully cured and had smooth, Class A, surfaces when removed from
their molds. Materials impacted with a round tipped steel rod, a falling tup, have shown that
carbon fiber reinforced composite panels have more impact resistance than aluminum panels
with the same thickness [20]. The next step will be to produce structural pieces that could be
used to make the chassis or the body frame of an automobile.

6. Conclusions

Modern, high-energy, high-power X-ray generators can cure fiber reinforced composite parts
while still in the mold in less time than is needed for thermal curing. Inexpensive molds made
of aluminum, plastic or composite materials can be used because they need not be heated to
5 AP/IA-04

affect a cure. Common radiation curable polymeric materials can be used in formulating
matrix systems suitable for X-ray curing.

More extensive applications of carbon fiber reinforced composite materials in automobiles


would substantially reduce their weight and increase their fuel efficiency. Replacing most of
the steel parts, including the chassis and frame, with composites could reduce the weight by
80%, which would double the fuel efficiency. In contrast to steel, composite structures would
not need corrosion protection coatings, being inherently corrosion resistant. This would
reduce the total production costs of vehicle manufacture by eliminating an entire process
operation.

Automobile owners would benefit from greater use of composites through greater fuel
efficiency. Societies would benefit from the decreased dependence on fossil fuels and from
the reduction of environmental emissions.

7. References

[1] HUNT, J.D., ALLIGER, G., Rubber – Application of Radiation to Tire Manufacture,
Radiat. Phys. Chem. 14 (1979) 39-53.
[2] TRAGESER, D.A., Applications in Foam Plastics, Radiat. Phys. Chem. 9 (1977) 261-
270.
[3] SAGANE, N., HARAYAMA, H., Plastic Foam – Radiation Crosslinked Polyethylene
Foam, Radiat. Phys. Chem. 18 (1981) 99-108.
[4] CLELAND, M.R., GALLOWAY, R.A., Electron Beam Crosslinking of Wire and Cable
Insulation, Technical Information Series TIS 01812, IBA Industrial, Inc., Edgewood, New
York (2009).
[5] THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERS, Composite Car
Structures Pass the Crash Test (1996).
[6] BEREJKA, A.J., Barriers to the Commercial Acceptance of Radiation Processing in the
Manufacture of Fiber Reinforced Composites, Proc. SAMPE Conf., Society for the
Advancement of Material and Process Engineering, Baltimore, Maryland, June (2007).
[7] GALLOWAY, R.A., et al., Processes for Chemically Affecting Reactive Materials with
X-rays, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US 2008/0196829 A1, August 21 (2008).
[8] MEISSNER, J., et al., X-ray Treatment at 5 MeV and Above, Radiat. Phys. Chem. 57
(2000) 647-651.
[9] STICHELBAUT, et al., The Palletron: A High Dose Uniformity Pallet Irradiator with X-
rays, AIP Conference Proceedings, 680 (2003) 891-894, American Institute of Physics.
Mellville, New York.
[10] CLELAND, M.R., Application of High-Power X-ray Generators for Processing Bulk
Materials, in Advances in Radiation Chemistry of Polymers, IAEA-TECDOC-1420, (2003)
111-123, International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, Austria.
[11] CLELAND, M.R., STICHELBAUT, F., Physical Aspects of X-ray Processing, Proc.
AccApp ,07 Conf., American Nuclear Society, Pocatello, Idaho, July (2007).
[12] TAKEHISA, M., et al., Characteristics of an Electron Beam and Bremsstrahlung (X-
ray) Irradiation Facility of Radia Industry, Radiat. Phys. Chem. 42 (1993) 495-498.
[13] AIKAWA, Y., A New Facility for X-ray Irradiation and Its Application, Radiat. Phys.
Chem. 57 (2000) 609-612.
[14] WATANABE, T., Best Use of High-Voltage, High-Powered Electron Beams: A New
Approach to Contract Irradiation Services, Radiat. Phys. Chem. 57 (2000) 635-639.
6 AP/IA-04

[15] MILLER, R.B., A Description of SureBeam Food Irradiation Facilities, AIP Conference
Proceedings 680 (2003) 871-872, American Institute of Physics, Melville, New York.
[16] STICHELBAUT, F., et al., X-ray Dosimetry: Comparing Monte Carlo Simulations and
Experimental Data, Radiat. Phys. Chem. 71 (2004) 345-349.
[17] BEZIERS, D., DENOST, J., Composite Curing: A New Process, 25th Joint Propulsion
Conference, AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE, Monterey, California, July (1989), American Institute
of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc., Washington, D.C.
[18] GALLOWAY, R.A., et al., A New 5 MeV - 300 kW Dynamitron for Radiation
Processing, Radiat. Phys. Chem. 71 (2004) 551-553.
[19] ABS, M., et al., The IBA Rhodotron TT1000: a Very High Power E-Beam Accelerator,
Radiat. Phys. Chem. 71 (2004) 287-290.
[20] ASTM D-2794, Standard Test Method for Resistance of Organic Coatings to the Effects
of Rapid Deformation (Impact), ASTM International, vol. 6.01, West Conshohocken,
Pennsylvania.

FIG. 1. Tup impacted at the same force: a four-ply X-ray cured


carbon-fiber composite panel and aluminum plate of the same thickness.
Carbon-fiber was indented; aluminum plate was fractured.
7 AP/IA-04

FIG 2. Carbon-fiber composite cups X-ray cured in a thin steel mold beneath
a 2 centimeter thick aluminum plate to simulate a thick walled metal mold.

FIG 3. Six-ply carbon fiber cup X-ray cured in a thin


steel mold beneath the 2 centimeter aluminum plate.
8 AP/IA-04

FIG 4. X-ray cured six-ply carbon fiber


composite motorcycle fender.

FIG 5. X-ray cured six-ply carbon fiber


composite sports car fender.

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy