Light-Duty Vehicle Technology
Cost Analysis, Advanced 8-Speed
Transmissions
Revised Final Report
&EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
-------
Light-Duty Vehicle Technology
Cost Analysis, Advanced 8-Speed
Transmissions
Revised Final Report
Assessment and Standards Division
Office of Transportation and Air Quality
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Prepared for EPA by
FEV, Inc.
EPA Contract No. EP-C-07-069
Work Assignment No. 3-3
NOTICE
This technical report does not necessarily represent final EPA decisions or
positions. It is intended to present technical analysis of issues using data
that are currently available. The purpose in the release of such reports is to
facilitate the exchange of technical information and to inform the public of
technical developments.
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
EPA-420-R-13-007
April 2013
-------
Report FEV 07-069-303
Light-Duty Vehicle Technology Cost Analysis,
Advanced 8-Speed Transmissions
Contract No. EP-C-07-069
Work Assignment 3-3
Prepared for:
Brian Nelson
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
2000 Traverwood Dr.
Ann Arbor, MI 48105
Submitted by:
Greg Kolwich
FEV, Inc.
4554 Glenmeade Lane
Auburn Hills, MI 48326
April 12, 2013
-------
Analysis Report FEV 07-069-303
April 22, 2013
Summary Page ii
Engine Technology
Updates to "Light-Dutry Vehicle Technology Cost Analysis, Advanced 8-Speed
Transmissions"
The overall goal of this study was to provide accurate technology assessments through highly
detailed and transparent cost analysis methodologies that compare and contrast differences and
similarities between these transmission systems. Based on that goal, FEV is hereby issuing an
update to the previously released report dated 10/3/11. Minor revisions have been made to some
of the electronic hardware and controls to more accurately account for all components as well as
including required communication and feedback loops between these components with both
high-side and low-side electronic drivers. These updates are described below and are comprised
of refinements in cost analysis results obtained as well as detailing the electronic control system
differentials between the compared transmissions. This is done in an added table detailing the
various solenoids, valves, sensors, wiring and various drivers that differentiate each unit.
• Revision to List of Tables on page iii due to inclusion of new Table 2-1 in report body.
Electronic Hardware Comparison
• This is done with the addition of a detailed paragraph and Table (2-1) on page 2-13 that
detail a direct side-by-side comparison of the two transmission variations being studied.
• This is done with the addition of a detailed paragraph and Table (2-3) on page 2-20 that
detail a direct side-by-side comparison of the two transmission variations being studied.
Updates to Previous Text Descriptions and Tables in the Report Body
• Update Table ES-1 on page 1-1 due to the new cost differentials related to the insertion of
electronic controls costs in the various transmission systems.
• Revision to text at the top of page 2-12 identifying the cost differential to the net
incremental direct manufacturing cost.
• Revision to text at the top of page 2-13 describing the cost differential to the net
incremental direct manufacturing cost.
• Update Table 2-2 on page 2-14 due to the insertion of electronic controls costs.
• Revision to text at the top of page 2-19 describing the cost differential to the net
incremental direct manufacturing cost.
• Update Table 2-4 on page 2-21 due to the insertion of electronic controls costs.
FEVInc Page 1 of 1 20Marl3
n
-------
Report FEV 07-069-303
April 12,2013
CONTENTS
Section Page
Executive Summary 1-1
1 Introduction 1-2
1.1 Objectives 1-2
1.2 Study Methodology 1-2
1.3 Manufacturing Assumptions 1-5
1.4 Subsystem Categorization 1-8
2 Case Study Results 2-9
2.1 Case Study #1005 Results 2-10
2.1.1 6-Speed AT Hardware Overview - Baseline Technology
Configuration 2-10
2.1.2 8-Speed AT Hardware Overview - New Technology
Configuration 2-11
2.1.3 Net Incremental Direct Manufacturing Cost Impact (AT
Analysis)2-12
2.2 Case Study #1202 Results 2-15
2.2.1 6-Speed DCT Hardware Overview - Baseline Technology
Configuration 2-15
2.2.2 8-Speed DCT Hardware Overview - Baseline Technology
Configuration 2-16
2.2.3 Net Incremental Direct Manufacturing Cost Impact (DCT
Analysis)2-18
3 Glossary of Terms 3-21
-------
Report FEV 07-069-303
April 12,2013
LIST OF FIGURES
Number Page
Figure 1 -1: Cost Analysis Process Flow Steps and Document Interaction 1-4
Figure 2-1: Illustration of ZF6HP28RWD Transmission 2-10
Figure 2-2: Illustration of ZF 8HP70 RWD Transmission 2-11
Figure 2-3: ZF Automatic Transmission Weight and Torque Comparison Data 2-11
Figure 2-4: Illustration of the Volkswagen DQ250 Wet Dual Clutch Transmission 2-15
Figure 2-5: Cross-sectional illustration of the Volkswagen 6-SpeedDCT 2-16
Figure 2-6: 8-Speed Wet DCT Concept Illustration 2-17
11
-------
Report FEV 07-069-303
April 12,2013
LIST OF TABLES
Number Page
Table ES- 1 New Technology Configurations Incremental Unit Cost Impact 1-1
Table 1-1: Summary of Universal Cost Analysis Assumptions Applied to All Case Studies .... 1-6
Table 1-2: Transmission System, Subsystem and Sub-Subsystem Classification 1-8
Table 2-1: System Electronic Hardware & Controls Comparison Matrix 2-13
Table 2-2: System Cost Model Analysis Template Illustrating the Incremental Subsystem Costs
Roll Up for an 8-Speed AT compared to a 6-Speed AT 2-14
Table 2-3: System Electronic Hardware & Controls Comparison Matrix 2-19
Table 2-4: System Cost Model Analysis Template Illustrating the Incremental Subsystem Costs
Roll Up for an 8-SpeedDCT compared to a 6-SpeedDCT 2-20
111
-------
Report FEV 07-069-303
April 12,2013
Light-Duty Vehicle Technology Cost Analysis, Advanced 8-Speed
Transmissions
Executive Summary
The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) contracted with FEV, Inc. to
determine the incremental direct manufacturing costs for a set of advanced, light-duty
vehicle technologies. The technologies selected are on the leading edge for reducing
emissions of greenhouse gases in the future, primarily in the form of tailpipe carbon
dioxide (CO2).
This report, the fourth in a series of reports, addresses the direct incremental
manufacturing cost of two (2) new powertrain configurations, relative to two (2) existing
baseline configurations, with comparable driver performance metrics. The complete
costing methodology used in the analysis of these configurations, as well as the pilot case
study, is described in "Light-Duty Technology Cost Analysis Pilot Study (EPA-420-R-
09-020)."
The two (2) new powertrain technology configurations analyzed are:
• A next generation ZF 8-speed automatic transmission, compared to a ZF 6-speed,
Lepelletier concept-based, automatic transmission
• A 6-speed wet dual clutch transmission (DCT), compared to an 8-speed wet dual
clutch transmission (DCT)
The results for the two (2) case studies are shown below in Table ES-1.
Table ES-1: New Technology Configurations Incremental Unit Cost Impact
Case Study
Reference
Number
1005
1202
Technology
Definition
8-Speed AT
replacing a 6-Speed
AT
8-Speed DCT
Replacing a 6-Speed
DCT
Vehicle Class
Large Truck Passenger
or Commercial Vehicle
with Strong Towing
Capabilities
Mid to Large Size Car,
Passenger 4-6
Base
Technology
CS#B1005
6-Speed AT
CS#B1202
6-Speed Wet
DCT
New
Technology
CS#N1005
8-Speed AT
CS#N1202
8-Speed
Wet DCT
Incremental
Unit Cost
+ $74.81
+ $217.65
1-1
-------
Report FEV 07-069-303
April 12,2013
1 Introduction
1.1 Objectives
The objective of this work assignment was to determine the incremental direct
manufacturing costs for two (2) new advanced light-duty vehicle transmission technology
configurations using the costing methodology, databases, and supporting worksheets
developed in the previously concluded pilot study (Light-Duty Technology Cost Analysis
Pilot Study [EPA-420-R-09-020]).
1.2 Study Methodology
The first report published, "Light-Duty Technology Cost Analysis Pilot Study (EPA-420-
R-09-020)," covers in great detail the overall costing methodology used to calculate an
incremental cost delta between various technology configurations. In summary, the
costing methodology is heavily based on teardowns of both new and baseline technology
configurations having similar driver performance metrics. Only components identified as
being different, within the selected new and baseline technology configurations, as a
result of the new technology adaptation are evaluated for cost. Component costs are
calculated using a ground-up costing methodology analogous to that employed in the
automotive industry. All incremental costs for the new technology are calculated and
presented using transparent cost models consisting of eight (8) core cost elements:
material, labor, manufacturing overhead/burden, end item scrap, SG&A (selling general
and administrative), profit, ED&T (engineering, design, and testing), and packaging.
Information on how additional associated manufacturing fixed and variable cost elements
(e.g., shipping, tooling, OEM indirect costs) are accounted for within the cost analysis are
also discussed in the initial report (EPA-420-R-09-020).
Listed below, with the aid of Figure 1-1, is a high level summary of the ten (10) major
steps taken during the cost analysis process. For additional information concerning the
terminology used within the ten (10) steps, please reference the glossary of terms found
at the end of this report.
Step 1; Using the Powertrain-Vehicle Class Summary Matrix (P-VCSM), a technology
is selected for cost analysis.
Step 2; Existing vehicle models are identified for teardown to provide the basis for
detailed incremental cost calculations.
Step 3; Pre-teardown Comparison Bills of Materials (CBOM) are developed, covering
hardware that exists in the new and base technology configurations. These high level
CBOM's are informed by the team's understanding of the new and base technologies and
serve to identify the major systems and components targeted for teardown.
Step 4; Phase 1 (high level) teardown is conducted for all subsystems identified in Step
3 and the assemblies that comprise them. Using Design Profit® software, all high level
1-2
-------
Report FEV 07-069-303
April 12,2013
processes (e.g., assembly process of the high pressure fuel pump onto the cylinder head
assembly) are mapped during the disassembly.
Step 5; A cross functional team (CFT) reviews all the data generated from the high level
teardown and identifies which components and assumptions should be carried forward
into the cost analysis. The CBOMs are updated to reflect the CFT input.
Step 6; Phase 2 (component/assembly level) teardowns are initiated, based on the
updated CBOM's. Components and assemblies are disassembled, and processes and
operations are mapped in full detail. The process mapping generates key process
information for the quote worksheets. Several databases containing critical costing
information provide support to the mapping process.
Step 7; Manufacturing Assumption and Quote Summary (MAQS) worksheets are
generated for all parts undergoing the cost analysis. The MAQS details all cost elements
making up the final unit costs: material, labor, burden, end item scrap, SG&A, profit,
ED&T, and packaging.
Step 8; Parts with high or unexpected cost results are subjected to a marketplace cross-
check, such as comparison with supplier price quotes or wider consultation with
company and industry resources (i.e., subject matter experts) beyond the CFT.
Step 9; All costs calculated in the MAQS worksheets are automatically inputted into the
Subsystem Cost Model Analysis Templates (CMAT). The Subsystem CMAT is used to
display and roll up all the differential costs associated with a subsystem. All parts in a
subsystem that are identified for costing in the CBOM are entered into the Subsystem
CMAT. Also both the base and new technology configurations are included in the same
CMAT to facilitate differential cost analysis.
Step 10; The final step in the process is creating the System CMAT which rolls up all the
subsystem differential costs to establish a final system unit cost. The System CMAT,
similar in function to the subsystem CMAT, is the document used to display and roll-up
all the subsystem costs associated within a system as defined by the CBOM. Within the
scope of this cost analysis, the System CMAT provides the bottom line incremental unit
cost between the base and new technology configurations under evaluation
1-2
-------
Report FEV 07-069-303
April 12,2013
1. Technology
Selection
Powertrain Vehicle
Class Summary Matrix
(P-VCSM)
2. Hardware
Selection
Powertrain Package
Proforma
3A. Generate Bill of
Materials - Phase 1
Comparison Bill of
Materials (C-BOM)
4. System/Subsystem
Disassembly and
Process Mapping -
Phase 1
(Design Profit®)
I
5. Cross Functional
Team (CFT)
Reviews
Databases (Material, Labor, Manufacturing
Overhead, Mark-up, & Packaging)
6. Component/
Assembly
Disassembly &
Process Mapping -
Phase 2
(Design Profit®)
3B. Update Bill of Materials - Phase 2
Comparison Bill of Materials (C-BOM)
Process Flow
Manual & Automated
Document Links
7. Generate
Manufacturing
Assumption and
Quote Summary
(MAQS)
Worksheets
I
8. Market Place
Cross-check
I
9. Subsystem Cost
Roll Up
Subsystem Cost Model
Analysis Template
(Subsystem CMAT)
I
10. System Cost
Roll Up
System Cost Model
Analysis Template
(System CMAT)
Figure 1-1: Cost Analysis Process Flow Steps and Document Interaction
1-4
-------
Report FEV 07-069-303
April 12,2013
1.3 Manufacturing Assumptions
When conducting the cost analysis for the various technology configurations, a number
of assumptions are made in order to establish a consistent framework for all costing. The
assumptions can be broken into universal and specific case study assumptions.
The universal assumptions apply to all technology configurations under analysis. Listed
in Table 1-1 are the fundamental assumptions.
The specific case study assumptions are those unique to a given technology
configuration. These include volume assumptions, weekly operation assumptions (days,
shifts, hours, etc.), packaging assumptions, and Tier 1 in-house manufacturing versus
Tier 2/3 purchase part assumptions. Details on the case study specific assumptions can
be found in the individual MAQS worksheets.
1-5
-------
Report FEV 07-069-303
April 12,2013
Table 1-1: Summary of Universal Cost Analysis Assumptions Applied to All Case
Studies
Item
Description
Universal Case Study Assumptions
Incremental Direct Manufacturing Costs
A. Incremental Direct manufacturing cost is the incremental
difference in cost of components and assembly, to the OEM, between
the new technology configuration and the baseline technology
configuration.
B. This value does not include Indirect OEM costs associated with
adopting the new technology configuration (e.g. tooling, corporate
overhead, corporate R&D, etc).
Incremental Indirect OEM Costs are not
handled within the scope of this cost
analysis
A. Indirect Costs are handled through the application of "Indirect
Cost Multipliers" (ICMs) which are not included as part of this
analysis. The ICM covers items such as
a. OEM corporate overhead (sales, marketing, warranty, etc)
b. OEM engineering, design and testing costs (internal & external)
c. OEM owned tooling
B. Reference EPA report EPA-420-R-09-003, February 2009,
"Automobile Industry Retail Price Equivalent and Indirect Cost
Multiplier" for additional details on the develop and application of
ICM factors.
Product/Technology Maturity Level
A. Mature technology assumption, as defined within this analysis,
includes the following:
a. Well developed product design
b. High production volume
c. Products in service for several years at high volumes
c. Significant market place competition
B. Mature Technology assumption establishes a consistent framework
for costing. For example, a defined range of acceptable mark-up
rates.
a. End-item-scrap 0.3-0.7%
b. SG&A/Corporate Overhead 6-7%
c. Profit 4-8%
d. ED&T (Engineering, Design and Testing) 0-6%
C. The technology maturity assumption does not include allowances
for product learning. Application of a learning curve to the
calculated incremental direct manufacturing cost is handled outside
the scope of this analysis.
1-6
-------
Report FEV 07-069-303
April 12,2013
Item
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
Description
Selected Manufacturing Processes and
Operations
Annual Capacity Planning Volume
Supplier Manufacturing Location
OEM Manufacturing Location
Manufacturing Cost Structure Timeframe
( e.g. Material Costs, Labor Rates,
Manufacturing Overhead Rates)
Packaging Costs
Shipping and Handling
Intellectual Property (IP) Cost
Considerations
Material Cost Reductions (MCRs) on
analyzed hardware
Operating and End-of Life Costs
Stranded Capital or ED&T expenses
Universal Case Study Assumptions
A. All operations and processes are based on existing
standard/mainstream Industrial practices.
B. No additional allowance is included in the incremental direct
manufacturing cost for manufacturing learning. Application of a
learning curve to the developed incremental direct manufacturing cost
is handled outside the scope of this analysis.
450,000 Units
North America (USA or Canada)
North America (USA or Canada)
2009/2010 Production Year Rates
A. Calculated on all Tier One (Tl) supplier level components.
B. For Tier 2/3 (T2/T3) supplier level components, packaging costs
are included in T 1 mark-up of incoming T2/T3 incoming goods.
A. T 1 supplier shipping costs covered through application of the
Indirect Cost Multiplier (I CM) discussed above.
B. T2/T3 to Tl supplier shipping costs are accounted for via Tl mark-
up on incoming T2/T3 goods.
Where applicable IP costs are included in the analysis. Based on the
assumption that the technology has reached maturity, sufficient
competition would exist suggesting alternative design paths to achieve
similar function and performance metrics would be available
minimizing any IP cost penalty.
Only incorporated on those components where it was evident that the
component design and/or selected manufacturing process was chosen
due to actual low production volumes (e.g. design choice made to
accept high piece price to minimize tooling expense). Under this
scenario, assumptions where made, and cost analyzed assuming high
production volumes.
No new, or modified, maintenance or end-of-life costs, were identified
in the analysis.
No stranded capital or non-recovered ED&T expenses were
considered within the scope of this analysis. It was assumed the
integration of new technology would be planned and phased in
minimizing non-recoverable expenses.
1-7
-------
Report FEV 07-069-303
April 12,2013
1.4 Subsystem Categorization
As with the first case study analysis, a design based classification system was used to
group the various components and assemblies making up the technology configurations.
In general, every vehicle system (e.g., engine system, transmission system, etc) is made
up of several subsystems levels (e.g., the transmission system includes a case subsystem,
geartrain subsystem, internal clutch subsystem, launch clutch subsystem, oil pump and
filter subsystem, etc.), which, in turn, is made up of several sub-subsystem levels (e.g.,
the geartrain subsystem includes the following sub-subsystems: input shaft, output shaft,
transfer shaft, planetary gear, etc). The sub-subsystem is the smallest classification level
in which all components and assemblies are binned.
Table 1-2 provides an overview of the major subsystems and sub-subsystems included for
each system evaluated within this analysis. In Section 2, Case Study Results, costs are
presented for both transmission evaluations using these design subsystem categorizations.
Table 1-2: Transmission System, Subsystem and Sub-Subsystem Classification
Subsystem
Externally Mounted Component
Case(s)
Gear Train
Internal Clutch
Launch Clutch
Oil Pump and Filter
Mechanical Control
Electrical Control
Park Mechanism
Sub-Subsystem
Lift Eye, Vent Cap, Bracket, Bolting
Transaxle Case, Transaxle Housing, Covers, Bearing Race,
Plug, Actuator
Input Shaft, Output Shaft, Transfer Shaft, Sun Gear,
Planetary Gear, Ring Gear, Counter Gear, Differential
Gear, Bearing (Roller, Needle)
Sprag Clutch, Clutch & Brake Hub, Disc and Plate, Piston,
Snap Ring, Bearing (Roller, Needle), Synchronizer
Torque Converter, Clutch Assembly, Flexplate, Flywheel
Oil pump, Cover, Oil Filter, Oil Cooler, Oil Squirter,
Pipes/Tubes
Valve Body Assembly, Mechanical Controls (e.g., Shift
Forks), Sealing Elements, Bearing Elements, Plugs & Cups
Controller, Solenoid, Sensor, Switches, Wiring Harness
Rod/Shaft/Pin, Spring, Pawl, Bracket, Bolt
1-8
-------
Report FEV 07-069-303
April 12,2013
2 Case Study Results
The incremental direct manufacturing cost impact for the 6-speed to 8-speed automatic
transmission (AT) comparison and the 6-speed to 8-speed wet dual clutch transmission
(DCT) are shown above in Table ES-1.
Within Section 2.0, for each case study, a brief description of the performance attributes
of both the baseline and new technology configurations are provided. In addition a high
level overview of key hardware content is included for each technology evaluated.
In the 6-speed DCT to 8-speed DCT analysis, no 8-speed DCT hardware was available at
the time of the analysis. Using the 6-speed DCT as the foundation, the FEV team made
some basic assumptions on how the 6-speed DCT could be modified to produce an 8-
speed variant. The assumptions can be found in the respective section.
Following the system performance and hardware overviews for each case study, the
increment direct manufacturing cost impact is summarized at a subsystem level in a
system Cost Model Analysis Template (CMAT).
Because each case study consists of a large quantity of component and assembly
Manufacturing and Assumption Quote Summary (MAQS) worksheets, hard copies were
not included as part of this report. However, electronic copies of the MAQS worksheets,
as well as all other supporting case study documents (e.g., Subsystem CMATs, System
CMATs), can be accessed at http;//www.epa.gov/otaq/climate/publications.htm
2-9
-------
Report FEV 07-069-303
April 12,2013
2.1 Case Study #1005 Results
Case Study #1005 analyzed the direct incremental manufacturing cost for updating from
a ZF 6-speed, Lepelletier concept, automatic transmission to a next generation 8-speed
automatic transmission.
2.1.1 6-Speed AT Hardware Overview - Baseline Technology Configuration
*3>
Figure 2-1: Illustration of ZF 6HP28 RWD Transmission
The 6-speed automatic transmission selected for the baseline analysis was the ZF 6HP28
RWD transmission (second generation of ZF 6HP26). This transmission is/has been used
in various applications including the BMW Series 3 Coupe and the X5 SUV in the 2007-
2012 timeframe. The ZF 6-Speed transmission incorporates a Lepelletier AT gearing
configuration which utilizes a single planetary gear set along with a Ravigneaux gear set.
The use of a Lepelletier configuration allowed ZF to add an additional gear without
sacrificing size, weight and part content over the existing 5-speed AT. In fact the 6-speed
AT weighs approximately 12% less, and has 29% fewer parts, than its predecessor.
(Source: SAE Technical Paper 2003-01-0596). Listed below are a few design parameters
for the 6-speed AT.
• Total of five (5) shift elements, two (2) open shift elements per gear
• Three (3) clutches and two (2) brakes
• Full planetary gear set and a Ravigneaux gear set
• The total weight of the transmission, including Automatic Transmission Fluid
(ATF), is approximately 92.5kg. The maximum output torque rating is 650
Nm.
2-10
-------
Report FEV 07-069-303
April 12,2013
2.1.2 8-Speed AT Hardware Overview - New Technology Configuration
Figure 2-2: Illustration of ZF 8HP70 RWD Transmission
The ZF 8-speed automatic transmission (AT), the successor to the ZF 6-speed AT, was
selected for the analysis representing the new advance technology configuration. The ZF
8-speed RWD transmission (8HP70) (Figure 2-2) was a complete redesign of the
existing Lepelletier-based 6-speed transmission family, which originally launched in the
2001 timeframe. The implementation of a revolutionary gearing system, consisting of 4
planetary gear sets, controlled by an equivalent number of shift elements as compared to
the ZF 6-speed AT, supports a net 6% overall fuel economy improvement relative to its
predecessor. In addition to maintaining the same overall installation dimensions, the new
8-speed transmission has a higher torque to weight ratio as shown below in Figure 2-3.
if- Automatic Transmissions • Weight Comparison
Weight [kg]
0
•
6HP2S
(2MCianBrjition)
8HP
6HP26
(1« Gener tion)
Torque [Mm] 300 4-00 500 BOO 700 800 900
(Source: ZF Published Document "The Freedom to Exceed Limits",
http://www.zf.com/media/media/en/document/corporate_2/products_3/innovation_l/8hp_l/8HP_de_2007s.pdf)
Figure 2-3: ZF Automatic Transmission Weight and Torque Comparison Data
2-11
-------
Report FEV 07-069-303
April 12,2013
Design parameters for the 8-speed AT, for comparison to the ZF 6-speed AT, are
presented below.
• Five (5) shift elements, two (2) open shift elements per gear.
• Three (3) disk clutches and two (2) brakes
• Four (4) planetary gear sets.
• Lost torque is reduced by 33% compared to a 6-speed.
• Gear set efficiency exceeds 98%
• The total weight of the transmission (as measured), including ATF, is 89kg.
The maximum output torque rating is 700 N*m
2.1.3 Net Incremental Direct Manufacturing Cost Impact (AT Analysis)
As discussed in the initial report (EPA-420-R-09-020), the costing methodology employs
an exclusion approach to costing. Following completion of the comparison bill of
materials (CBOMs), the cross functional team began the process of analyzing the
differences between hardware on the six (6) and eight (8) speed automatic transmissions.
A component function and design analysis was performed, eliminating many parts and
components from further costing analysis. A baseline cost from which an incremental
cost for the 8-speed was established. The majority of incremental cost increase of the 8-
speed over the 6-speed was associated with the additional gearing.
It was obvious from the transmission teardown assessment that in addition to ZF's goal
for improving overall performance with their new 8-speed automatic transmission
relative to the 6-speed predecessor, ZF also focused on optimizing cost and weight, hi
regard to the 6-speed automatic transmission, many of innovative ideas implemented into
the 8-speed automatic could have been incorporated into a new 6-speed if it were to be
redesigned. The most obvious new technology advance (NTA) would be adopting a
similar drum and carrier system, which would conceivably have the same benefits
(compact packaging, streamlined and less costly to assemble) recognized by the 8-speed
automatic. As part of this analysis, no additional work was conducted to determine what
the financial impact would be on the 6-speed automatic by employing some of these new
technology advances and material cost reduction concepts. The net incremental direct
manufacturing cost shown below is solely based on the physical hardware evaluated.
Table 2-22 shows the net incremental direct manufacturing cost between the 8- and 6-
speed automatic transmissions. In evaluating the physical hardware, the 6-speed
automatic was analyzed to be less expensive to manufacture by approximately $75. Note
that when the 8-speed transmission was redesigned, several other functional and
performance updates not driven by the added gear ratios were incorporated (e.g.,
modified hydraulic control strategy, spool valve material, friction discs, as well as a
2-12
-------
Report FEV 07-069-303
April 12,2013
newly-developed torque converter). These modifications were not estimated in the
analysis since they are independent of the gear ratio addition and modifications.
As shown in Table 2-22 many of the transmission subsystems where deemed cost
neutral. Much of the cost analysis work was focused on the cost difference in the gear
train and internal clutch subsystems. An internal clutch subsystem cost save of $12.56
was calculated for the 8-speed AT. However the 8-speed AT gear train subsystem
increased in cost by $74.40 resulting in a net incremental direct manufacturing cost of
$+74.81.
Also shown in Table 2-2, a differential exist between the electronic hardware and
controls in the two transmission systems. Differences including Gear Selecting Solenoids
and Sensors as well as wiring harnesses and communication drivers can be clearly
identified in Table 2-1 below. These components and controls account for an additional
cost differential of $12.97 contributing to the net incremental direct manufacturing cost
of $+74.81.
Table 2-1: System Electronic Hardware & Controls Comparison Matrix
6-Speed AT
Device Description
Transmission Input Shaft Speed Sensor
Output Shaft Speed Sensor
Shift Solenoid Valve MV-1
Shift Solenoid Valve EDS-1 Pressure Reg.
Shift Solenoid Valve EDS-2 Pressure Reg.
Shift Solenoid Valve EDS-3 Pressure Reg.
Shift Solenoid Valve EDS-4 Pressure Reg.
Shift Solenoid Valve EDS-5 Pressure Reg.
Shift Solenoid Valve EDS-6 Pressure Reg.
AFT Temperature Sensor
Gearshift Selector Position Sensor
Hall Sensor
Transmission Control Unit Distribution
Device
Captured In
MAQS
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
8-Speed AT
Device Description
Transmission Input Shaft Speed Sensor
Output Shaft Speed Sensor
Solenoid Valve On/Off
Solenoid Valve 1 Pressure Reg.
Solenoid Valve 2 Pressure Reg.
Solenoid Valve 3 Pressure Reg.
Solenoid Valve 4 Pressure Reg.
Solenoid Valve 5 Pressure Reg.
Solenoid Valve 6 Pressure Reg.
Solenoid Valve 7 Pressure Reg.
AFT Temperature Sensor
Gearshift Selector Position Sensor
Hall Sensor
Transmission Control Unit Distribution
Device
Captured In
MAQS
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost
2-13
-------
Report FEV 07-069-303
April 12,2013
Table 2-2: System Cost Model Analysis Template Illustrating the Incremental Subsystem
Costs Roll Up for an 8-Speed AT compared to a 6-Speed AT
SYSTEM & SUBSYSTEM DESCRIPTION
I
1
2
3
4
5
7
8
9
1
g- Sub-Subsystem Description
02 TRANSMISSION SYSTEM
foi EXTERNAL COMPONENTS:
| 02 CASE(S):
T 03 GEAR TRAIN:
T04 INTERNAL CLUTCHES:
f05 LAUNCH CLUTCHES:
foe OIL PUMP & FILTER:
fo? MECHANICAL CONTROLS:
fo8 ELECTRICAL CONTROLS:
J09 PARK MECHANISM:
[ 10 MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS.
SUBSYSTEM ROLL-UP
SYSTEM & SUBSYSTEM DESCRIPTION
i
1
?
3
4
5
7
8
9
10
% Sub-Subsystem Description
02 TRANSMISSION SYSTEM
| 01 EXTERNAL COMPONENTS:
I 02 CASE(S):
I 03 GEAR TRAIN:
I 04 INTERNAL CLUTCHES:
| 05 LAUNCH CLUTCHES:
| 06 OIL PUMP & FILTER:
| 07 MECHANICAL CONTROLS:
| 08 ELECTRICAL CONTROLS:
I 09 PARK MECHANISM:
| 10 MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS:
SUBSYSTEM ROLL-UP
SYSTEM & SUBSYSTEM DESCRIPTION
I
1
2
3
4
5
7
8
9
10
|
g. Sub-Subsystem Description
02 TRANSMISSION SYSTEM
| 01 EXTERNAL COMPONENTS:
| 02 CASE(S):
| 03 GEAR TRAIN:
| 04 INTERNAL CLUTCHES:
| 05 LAUNCH CLUTCHES:
| 06 OIL PUMP & FILTER:
| 07 MECHANICAL CONTROLS:
| 08 ELECTRICAL CONTROLS:
I 09 PARK MECHANISM:
| 10 MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS:
SUBSYSTEM ROLL-UP
NEW TECHNOLOGY PACKAGE COST INFORMATION
8 Speed ZF Automatic Transmission
Manufacture
Matena,
$
$
$
$ 9.37
S 134.74
Labor
$
$
$
« 0.04
S 67.98
Burten
$
$
$
S 171.63
Total
Cost
Assembly)
$
$
S 374.35
Markup
"err
$
$
$
S 2.37
SGSA
$
$
$
S 26.13
Profit
$
$
$
S 23.88
EDST-
RSD
$
$
$
S 9.69
Cost
Assembly)
$
S 62.06
Packaging
Assembly)
$
$
$
s
Assembly
OEM
$
S 211.94
S 211.50
S 12.97
S 436.41
BASE TECHNOLOGY PACKAGE COST INFORMATION
6 Speed ZF Automatic Transmission
Manufacturing
Ma,ena,
$
S 81.76
S 116.88
Labbr
$
S 52.84
Burten
$
S 143.11
Total
Cost
Assembly)
S
MarKup
Esr
SGSA
Profit
EDST-
RSD
Cost
Assembly)
Packaging
Assembly)
$
s
Assembly
OEM
S 137.53
S 224.07
S 361.60
INCREMENTAL COST TO UPGRADE TO NEW TECHNOLOGY PACKAGE
Manufacture
Matena,
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
Lab.r
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
Burten
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
Total
Cost
(Component/
Assembly)
$
$
$
$
$
$
Markup
Scrap
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
1.86
Total Markup
$
$
$
$
$
$
S 13.29
Total
Packaging
Cost
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
s
Assembly
$
S 74.40
S (12.56)
$
$
$
S 12.97
$
$
S 74.81
2-14
-------
Report FEV 07-069-303
April 12,2013
2.2 Case Study #1202 Results
Case Study #1202 analyzed the direct incremental manufacturing cost for updating from
a 6-speed, wet dual clutch transmission (DCT) to an 8-speed, wet DCT.
2.2.1 6-Speed DCT Hardware Overview - Baseline Technology Configuration
Oil cleaner
Oil cooler
Selector lever cable
Manual gearbox
Parking lock
Bevel box Iquattrol
386_003
Mechatronics
Reverse shaft
Figure 2-4: Illustration of the Volkswagen DQ250 Wet Dual Clutch Transmission
The baseline technology configuration selected for the analysis was the Volkswagen
(VW) 6-speed, wet, dual clutch transmission (DCT); model number DQ250. Other
industry naming conventions for this technology configuration include twin-clutch
gearbox or dual shift gearbox (DSG). The basic components of the DCT include a twin
clutch pack assembly driving two (2) coaxial input shafts. Power from the engine is
transmitted to the input shafts through a dual-mass flywheel which is connected in series
to the twin-clutch pack. Each input shaft, dependent on the selected gear, is designed to
mesh with one (1) of two (2) output shafts. Upon reverse gear selection, there is an
intermediate shaft which engages with both input shaft one (1) and output shaft two (2).
There are four (4) shift forks, two (2) on each output shaft, hydraulically activated into
2-15
-------
Report FEV 07-069-303
April 12,2013
one of two positions from their neutral home position. The controls for the DCT, which
include the hydraulic controls, electronic controls, and various sensors and actuators, are
integrated into a single module VW refers to as a Mechatronic unit. The total weight of
the transmission module, including the dual-mass flywheel, is approximately 94 kg. The
maximum output torque rating for the DQ250 transmission is 350Nm.
2.2.2 8-Speed DCT Hardware Overview - Baseline Technology Configuration
At the time of the study, there were no 8-speed DCTs available in the market to support
the cost analysis. Therefore a modified approach was taken for this case study. Using
the 6-speed wet DCT as the foundation, the FEV team developed some basic assumptions
on how the 6-speed DCT could be modified to produce an 8-speed variant. Using the 6-
speed parts and some concept sketches, the team created a bill of material for the 8-speed
DCT. The 8-speed DCT is only a simple concept of what an 8-speed DCT may look like
at a high level; providing sufficient information to develop an incremental direct
manufacturing cost.
Figure 2-5 provides a cross-section view of the baseline 6-speed wet DCT.
Outpu.sh.h1
(Source: Audi Service Training Manual, 6-speed twin-clutch gearbox 02E S tronic)
Figure 2-5: Cross-sectional illustration of the Volkswagen 6-Speed DCT
2-16
-------
Report FEV 07-069-303
April 12,2013
For the 8-speed DCT concept, the input, output and reverse drive shafts were extended
between the 3rd and 4th gear such that a 7th and 8th synchronized gear set could be added
in (ReferenceError! Reference source not found.). In addition to the added synchronized
gear sets, associated components such as shift forks, hydraulic cylinders and pistons, fork
detents, solenoids and hydraulic control valves were added to the BOM. These
components are not shown in Error! Reference source not found, below. Further,
additional considerations for modifying the front and rear cases, valve body, channel
plate, input shafts, output shafts and pump shaft were included in the assumptions.
Output. 'i •. n 1
Figure 2-6: 8-Speed Wet DCT Concept Illustration
Additional assumptions made by the DCT evaluation team while developing the 8-speed
DCT concept included the following:
• The addition of the 7th an 8th gear to the 6-speed DCT does provide fuel efficiency
savings
• Engine torque and transmission capacity are matched
• The target vehicle(s) can accommodate the additional length of the transmission
2-17
-------
Report FEV 07-069-303
April 12,2013
• Additional length of output shafts do not cause shaft bending issues which lead to
NVH problems
• Additional length of the reverse shaft does not cause shaft bending issues
• Center distances of the output shafts within the transmission cases will not be the
same for six and eight speed DCT transmissions
• Output shaft diameters and splines configurations will change to accommodate the
seventh and eighth gears
• Change gear internal diameters and splines will all change to accommodate the
seventh and eighth gears
• Bearing supports for the output shafts ends will need to be adequately sized to
support the torques and loads
• All input and output change gear outside diameters will change and the resulting
ratios and number of teeth will fit into the launch through overdrive ratio
requirements
• Final drive ratios for the output driven gear and the two drive gears will change to
accommodate the eight forward and one reverse gear ratios
• The schematics show a separate synchronizer assembly for both the 7th and 8th
change gears
• The schematics shown with this report are only intended to represent the
additional and modified components required to go from a six-speed to an eight-
speed DCT.
• These transmission schematics do not represent a fully functional design of an
eight-speed DCT
2.2.3 Net Incremental Direct Manufacturing Cost Impact (DCT Analysis)
Table 2-44 shows the net incremental, direct manufacturing cost between the 6-speed
wet DCT and 8-speed wet DCT. In the evaluation, the 8-speed wet DCT was analyzed to
be more expensive to manufacture by approximately $217. The major cost increment of
the 8-speed DCT was the additional content in the mechanical controls subsystem at
$106.15 Included in this add cost are the 7th and 8th gear synchronizers, hubs, shift fork
assemblies, spool valves and solenoids. Modifications to the valve body to accommodate
the additional function and hardware for the 7th and 8th gear set addition was also
included in this subsystem.
The next largest contributor to the added cost was the gear train subsystem at $64.04.
Included in this subsystem were the additional 7th and 8th input and output gears plus the
additional modification to both input and output shafts and the reverse shaft.
Modifications to the case accounted for the majority of remaining costs contributing
$20.85 to the net incremental direct manufacturing cost.
2-18
-------
Report FEV 07-069-303
April 12,2013
Also shown in Table 2-4, a differential exists between the electronic hardware and
controls in the two transmission systems. Differences including Gear Selecting Solenoids
and Sensors as well as wiring harnesses and communication drivers can be clearly
identified in Table 2-3. These components and controls account for an additional cost
differential of $19.50 contributing to the net incremental direct manufacturing cost of
$+217.65.
Table 2-3: System Electronic Hardware & Controls Comparison Matrix
6-Speed DCT
Device Description
Gearbox Input Speed Sensor (G1 82)
Multi Plate Clutch Oil Temperature Sender (G509)
Drive Shaft 1 Speed Sensor (G501)
Drive Shaft 2 Speed Sensor (G502)
Gearbox Output Speed Sensor (G1 95)
Gearbox Output Direction Sensor (G1 96)
Automatic Gearbox Hydraulic Pressure Sender -1-
(G193)
Automatic Gearbox Hydraulic Pressure Sender -2-
(G194)
Gear Selector Solenoid Valve 1 (N88)
Gear Selector Solenoid Valve 2 (N89)
Gear Selector Solenoid Valve 3 (N90)
Gear Selector Solenoid Valve 4 (N91 )
Multiplexer Solenoid Valve (N92)
Electrical Pressure Control Valve 1 (N215)
Electrical Pressure Control Valve 2 (N216)
Electrical Pressure Control Valve 3 (N217)
Electrical Pressure Control Valve 4 (N218)
Electrical Pressure Control Valve 5 (N233)
Electrical Pressure Control Valve 6 (N371 )
Gear Selector Travel Sensor -1 - (G487)
Gear Selector Travel Sensor -2- (G488)
Gear Selector Travel Sensor -3- (G489)
Gear Selector Travel Sensor -4- (G490)
Mechatronic Control Unit
Mechatronic Control Unit- Wiring Harness
Device
Captured In
MAQS
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
8-Speed DCT
Device Description
Gearbox Input Speed Sensor (G1 82)
Multi Plate Clutch Oil Temperature Sender (G5
Drive Shaft 1 Speed Sensor (G501)
Drive Shaft 2 Speed Sensor (G502)
Gearbox Output Speed Sensor (G1 95)
Gearbox Output Direction Sensor (G1 96)
Automatic Gearbox Hydraulic Pressure
Sender-1-(G193)
Automatic Gearbox Hydraulic Pressure
Sender -2- (G1 94)
Gear Selector Solenoid Valve 1 (N88)
Gear Selector Solenoid Valve 2 (N89)
Gear Selector Solenoid Valve 3 (N90)
Gear Selector Solenoid Valve 4 (N91 )
Multiplexer Solenoid Valve (N92)
Gear Selector Solenoid Valve 5 (7,8 Gear)
Gear Selector Solenoid Valve 6 (7,8 Gear)
Electrical Pressure Control Valve 1 (N215)
Electrical Pressure Control Valve 2 (N216)
Electrical Pressure Control Valve 3 (N217)
Electrical Pressure Control Valve 4 (N218)
Electrical Pressure Control Valve 5 (N233)
Electrical Pressure Control Valve 6 (N371)
Gear Selector Travel Sensor -1 - (G487)
Gear Selector Travel Sensor -2- (G488)
Gear Selector Travel Sensor -3- (G489)
Gear Selector Travel Sensor -4- (G490)
Gear Selector Travel Sensor -5- (7,8 Gear)
Mechatronic Control Unit
Mechatronic Control Unit -Wiring Harness
Device
Captured In
MAQS
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost
Cost
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost Neutral
Cost
Cost
Cost
2-19
-------
Report FEV 07-069-303
April 12,2013
Table 2-4: System Cost Model Analysis Template Illustrating the Incremental Subsystem
Costs Roll Up for an 8-Speed DCT compared to a 6-Speed DCT
SYSTEM & SUBSYSTEM DESCRIPTION
6
1
2
3
5
6
7
8
9
10
1
f- Sub-Subsystem Description
02 TRANSMISSION SYSTEM
01 EXTERNAL COMPONENTS:
02 CASE(S):
03 GEAR TRAIN:
04 INTERNAL CLUTCHES:
05 LAUNCH CLUTCHES:
06 OIL PUMP S FILTER:
07 MECHANICAL CONTROLS:
08 ELECTRICAL CONTROLS: (Combined w/ Mechnical Controls)
09 PARK MECHANISM:
10 MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS:
SUBSYSTEM ROLL-UP
SYSTEM & SUBSYSTEM DESCRIPTION
6
1
2
3
5
6
7
8
9
10
1
£ Sub-Subsystem Description
02 TRANSMISSION SYSTEM
| 01 EXTERNAL COMPONENTS:
| 02 CASE(S):
| 03 GEAR TRAIN:
| 04 INTERNAL CLUTCHES:
| 05 LAUNCH CLUTCHES:
I 06 OIL PUMP S FILTER:
| 08 ELECTRICAL CONTROLS: (Combined w/ Mechnical Controls)
I 09 PARK MECHANISM:
| 10 MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS.
SUBSYSTEM ROLL-UP
SYSTEM & SUBSYSTEM DESCRIPTION
1
1
2
3
5
6
7
8
9
10
E
•* Sub-Subsystem Description
02 TRANSMISSION SYSTEM
I 01 EXTERNAL COMPONENTS:
| 02 CASE(S):
| 03 GEAR TRAIN:
| 04 INTERNAL CLUTCHES:
| 05 LAUNCH CLUTCHES:
| 06 OIL PUMP S FILTER:
I 07 MECHANICAL CONTROLS:
I 08 ELECTRICAL CONTROLS: (Combined w/ Mechnical Controls)
I 09 PARK MECHANISM:
| 10 MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS:
SUBSYSTEM ROLL-UP
NEW TECHNOLOGY PACKAGE COST INFORMATION
8-Speed Wet DCT
Manufacture
Material
S 20.23
$
S 15.91
S 1.82
Labor
S 5.58
$
S 0.10
S 2.78
Burden
S 38.23
$
S 0.88
S 2.50
Total
(Component/
Assembly)
S 64.04
$
S 16.89
S 7.10
Markup
End Item
$
$
S 0.08
$
$
$
$
S 1.10
$
$
$
$
S 1.01
$
$
$
$
S 0.42
$
$
$
S 2.62
$
Total
Cost
$
$
$
$
$
N,,
Assembly
Cost Impact to
OEM
S 20.85
S 64.04
S 106.15
S 19.50
S 7.10
BASE TECHNOLOGY PACKAGE COST INFORMATION
6 Speed Wet DCT
Manufacture
Material
$
Labor
$
Burden
$
Total
Manufacturing
(Component/
Assembly)
$
Markup
End Item
$
$
$
$
Cost
$
Total
Packaging
Cost
$
Component/
Assembly
Cost Impact to
OEM
$
INCREMENTAL COST TO UPGRADE TO NEW TECHNOLOGY PACKAGE
Manufacturing
Material
S 5.50
S 20.23
$
$
$
$
S 1.82
Labor
S 1.19
S 5.58
$
$
$
$
S 2.78
Burden
S 14.17
S 38.23
$
$
$
$
S 2.50
Total
Assembly)
S 20.85
S 64.04
$
$
$
$
S 7.10
Markup
End Item
Scrap
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
SGSA
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
Pro,,
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
EDST-
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
Cost
(Component/
Assembly)
$
$
$
$
$
S 2.62
$
$
Total
Packaging
Cost
Assembly)
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
Assembly
OEM
S 20.85
S 64.04
$
$
$
S 19.50
$
S 7.10
S 217.65
2-20
-------
Report FEV 07-069-303
April 12,2013
3 Glossary of Terms
Assembly: generally refers to a group of interdependent components joined together to
perform a defined function (e.g., turbocharger assembly, high pressure fuel pump
assembly, high pressure fuel injector assembly).
Buy: is the terminology used to identify those components or assemblies as ones in
which a manufacturer would purchase versus manufacture. All parts designated as a
"buy" part, within the analysis, only have a net component cost presented. Typically
these types of parts are considered commodity purchase parts having industry established
pricing.
CBOM (Comparison Bill of Materials): is a system bill of materials, identifying all the
subsystems, assemblies, and components associated with the technology configurations
under evaluation. The CBOM records all the high level details of the technology
configurations under study, identifies those items which have cost implications as a result
of the new versus base technology differences, documents the study assumptions, and is
the primary document for capturing input from the cross functional team.
Component: is the lowest level part within the cost analysis. An assembly is typically
made up of several components acting together to perform a function (e.g., the turbine
wheel in a turbocharger assembly). However, in some cases a component can act
independently performing a function within a sub-subsystem or subsystem (e.g., exhaust
manifold within the exhaust subsystem).
Cost Estimating Models: are cost estimating tools, external to the Design Profit®
software, used to calculate operation and process parameters for primary manufacturing
processes (e.g., injection molding, die casting, metal stamping, forging). Key
information calculated from the costing estimating tools (e.g., cycle times, raw material
usage, equipment size) is inputted into the Lean Design® process maps supporting the
cost analysis. The Excel base cost estimating models are developed and validated by
Munro & Associates.
Costing Databases: refer to the five (5) core databases which contain all the cost rates
for the analysis. The material database lists all the materials used throughout the analysis
along with the estimated price/pound for each. The labor database captures various
automotive, direct labor, manufacturing jobs (supplier and OEM), along with the
associated mean hourly labor rates. The manufacturing overhead rate database contains
the cost/hour for the various pieces of manufacturing equipment assumed in the analysis.
A mark-up database assigns a percentage of mark-up for each of the four (4) main mark-
up categories (i.e., end-item scrap, SG&A, profit, and ED&T), based on the industry,
supplier size, and complexity classification. The fifth database, the packaging database,
contains packaging options and costs for each case.
Lean Design® (a module within the Design Profit® software): is used to create
detailed process flow charts/process maps. Lean Design® uses a series of standardized
symbols, each base symbol representing a group of similar manufacturing procedures
3-21
-------
Report FEV 07-069-303
April 12,2013
(e.g., fastening, material modifications, inspection). For each group, a Lean Design®
library/database exists containing standardized operations along with the associated
manufacturing information and specifications for each operation. The information and
specifications are used to generate a net operation cycle time. Each operation on a
process flow chart is represented by a base symbol, operation description, and operation
time, all linked to a Lean Design® library/database.
Make: is the terminology used to identify those components or assemblies as ones in
which a manufacturer would produce internally versus purchase. All parts designated as
a "make" part, within the analysis, are costed in full detail.
MAQS (Manufacturing Assumption and Quote Summary) Worksheet: is the
standardized template used in the analysis to calculate the mass production
manufacturing cost, including supplier mark-up, for each system, subsystem and
assembly quoted in the analysis. Every component and assembly costed in the analysis
will have a MAQS worksheet. The worksheet is based on a standard OEM (original
equipment manufacturer) quote sheet modified for improved costing transparency and
flexibility in sensitivity studies. The main feeder documents to the MAQS worksheets
are process maps and the costing databases.
MCRs (Material Cost Reductions): is a process employed to identify and capture
potential design and/or manufacturing optimization ideas with the hardware under
evaluation. These savings could potentially reduce or increase the differential costs
between the new and base technology configurations, depending on whether an MCR
idea is for the new or the base technology.
Net Component/Assembly Cost Impact to OEM: is defined as the net manufacturing
cost impact per unit, to the OEM, for a defined component, assembly, subsystem or
system. For components produced by the supplier base, the net manufacturing cost
impact to the OEM includes total manufacturing costs (material, labor, and
manufacturing overhead), mark-up (end-item scrap costs, selling, general and
administrative costs, profit, and engineering design and testing costs) and packaging
costs. For OEM internally manufactured components, the net manufacturing cost impact
to the OEM includes total manufacturing costs and packaging costs; mark-up costs are
addressed through the application of an indirect cost multiplier.
NTAs (New Technology Advances): is a process employed to identify and capture
alternative advance technology ideas which could be substituted for some of the existing
hardware under evaluation. These advanced technologies, through improved function
and performance, and/or cost reductions, could help increase the overall value of the
technology configuration.
Powertrain Package Proforma: is a summary worksheet comparing the key physical
and performance attributes of the technology under study with those of the corresponding
base configuration.
3-22
-------
Report FEV 07-069-303
April 12,2013
Process Maps: are detailed process flow charts used to capture the operations and
processes, and associated key manufacturing variables, involved in manufacturing
products at any level (e.g., vehicle, system, subsystem, assembly, component).
P-VCSM (Powertrain-Vehicle Class Summary Matrix): records the technologies
being evaluated, the applicable vehicle classes for each technology, and key parameters
for vehicles or vehicle systems that have been selected to represent the new technology
and baseline configurations in each vehicle class to be costed.
Quote: refers to the analytical process of establishing a cost for a component or
assembly.
Sub-subsystem: refers to a group of interdependent assemblies and/or components,
required to create a functioning sub-subsystem. For example, the air induction subsystem
contains several sub-subsystems including the following: turbocharging, heat exchangers,
and pipes, hoses and ducting.
Subsystem: refers to a group of interdependent sub-subsystems, assemblies and/or
components, required to create a functioning subsystem. For example, the engine system
contains several subsystems including the following: crank drive subsystem, cylinder
block subsystem, cylinder head subsystem, fuel induction subsystem, and air induction
subsystem.
Subsystem CMAT (Cost Model Analysis Templates): is the document used to display
and roll up all the sub-subsystem, assembly and component incremental costs associated
with a subsystem (e.g., fuel induction, air induction, exhaust), as defined by the
Comparison Bill of Material (CBOM).
Surrogate part: refers to a part similar in fit, form and function as the part required for
the cost analysis. Surrogate parts are sometimes used in the cost analysis when actual
parts are unavailable. The cost of a surrogate part is considered equivalent to the cost of
the actual part.
System: refers to a group of interdependent subsystems, sub-subsystems, assemblies
and/or components, working together to create a vehicle primary function (e.g., engine
system, transmission system, brake system, fuel system, suspension system).
System CMAT (Cost Model Analysis Template): is the document used to display and
roll up all the subsystem incremental costs associated with a system (e.g., engine,
transmission, steering), as defined by the CBOMs.
3-23
------- |